Good One.

[awhig]

TOPIC : The way a message is delivered is often more important than the message itself.

 

 

ESSAY: Consider an example, "I am with out pass" and "I am without pass". The above sentences have same words but different arrangements.What effect does it have on a listener? The answer is that first sentence means that a person does not have an out-pass to exit from some place,while second sentence means that a person is having a pass,called out-pass, for exit.The example above clearly deems the topic as correct and is supported by various illustrations underneath.

 

Delivery of a message depends on three things, firstly on the make of a message,secondly on the tone associated with its delivery and lastly on action with which a message is communicated.A good communication is characterised by just mentioned three factors.Taking the first factor,that is semantics, the effect that a message has on reader depends on the semantics of the message.That is why all languages have some form of semantics assoicated.For instance, English language has punctuation marks like delimiters, pause, exclaimatory marks and terminators.Likewise it has vocabulary where shades of one meaning are present.Why are there so many restrictions in a language?It is because to have the right effect on the reciever of a message.Looking at another example, every action has some word associated to describe it.Now, it depends on how the communicator want to express his emotions using grammar rules.He may choose strong words to express his elation or apathy.He can use structural elements in graamar to give similar effect as illustrated in the beginning.

 

The second important factor is the tone in which a message is conveyed by a speaker to a listener.The effect of tone is drastic and is determinant to everlasting impression.For example a dolorous message will not be deleivered in a happy note.Messages that are secret are characterised by wispers and low voice indicating their secretive nature.A high picthed voice is an indicator of an order or revenge.A gentle voice in the case of a subordinate communicating with a superior tells about formal conversation.Talks and exchange of messages between peers and deers show informal communication.From these, it can be concluded that tone is responsible for either making or breaking the effectiveness of a message.For example a joke shared in somber voice is a spoilsport and listener looses interest while on the otherhand a joke shared in jocular mood is far effective even if the joke is not so good.

 

The last factor that concurs with the above topic, is an action assoicated with communication.Movement of hands during presentation is given weightage.For example, while explaining it is advisable not to use fingers but hands instead.The effect in latter case is negative.Fingers indicate authority and it has bad effects especially if message is conveyed to a superior.Moreover,contact of eyes during communication is important.Excitement visible through cheerfulness show affection, care and interest while random looks and folded arms show disinterests. To sum up the idea, body language plays pivotal role in the effectiveness of a message.

 

From above points it can be concluded that the way a message is conveyed has phsycological effects.It shows one's personality and ability to handle difficult situation.All companies delibrately conduct interviews for this purpose since communication is important.Therefore while communicating the above discussed factor should be kept in mind as they can make an unimportant message effective and acceptable.

[Shalom Ichthys]

This is an erudite prose, differentiating the different facets of a message and arguing for the importance of the former over the latter.

I am less than eloquent in this, probably I am unfamiliar to semantics. I am too predisposed to mathematical derivation, adopting the same mentality by (1) proving the importance of message itself (2) supporting the importance of delivery (3) arguing for the overarching importance of delivery over content for "emotional" messages (4) qualifying the topic for equivalence of delivery vis-a-vis content for "logical" messages

 

The last factor that concurs with the above topic, is an action assoicated with communication.Movement of hands during presentation is given weightage.For example, while explaining it is advisable not to use fingers but hands instead.The effect in latter case is negative.Fingers indicate authority and it has bad effects especially if message is conveyed to a superior.Moreover,contact of eyes during communication is important.Excitement visible through cheerfulness show affection, care and interest while random looks and folded arms show disinterests. To sum up the idea, body language plays pivotal role in the effectiveness of a message.

I would summarize this as gestures, demeanor and composure. It's important in face-to-face conversation, but I would suggest that in online communication which is the sheer transmission of bits of data, the content may appear predominantly than the way of expression (though this seem to be a posit of the past given the richer content we can send through wires, such as voices and synchronous call via instant messaging).

 

My turn then: The way a message is delivered is more important than the message itself.

 

Not only is the way of delivery but the message in itself is important, and are absolutely complimentary to each other. The content itself embeds the information you intend the others to understand, yet the way to decipher by others is quite different, and more often than not, beyond your postulation. In a sense of synchronizing the encryption and decryption of the message by mitigating and minimizing the loss and contortion of information, it is quintessential to analyze the way in which a message is delivered would achieve its greatest impact, or in other words, minimize the misunderstandings.

 

This does not imply the message itself can be overlooked. After all, the message contains key information upon which inferences are drawn and decisions are based. The objectivity of the message in itself is indubitable, and for however appealing a message is delivered, a grandiloquent message cannot be understood by the recipient to carry out any meaningful actions as intended. In essence, we establish the backdrop for the dissemination of the message, which is the meaningfulness of the message in itself.

 

Now it comes to the consideration of the way of delivery. Assuming that the message itself is meaningful, should we also pay heed to how it is presented in front of others? Yes, there is no denying that the effectiveness of the message does vary on the ambience in which it is disseminated. The same message, through its channel of communication and the person of dissemination, can engender varying degree of adaptiveness and acceptability. To this end, it is unlikely that any sensible and pragmatic mind would undercut the way of delivery as to underscore the message itself, or else we would not wait, most of the time, for the proper timing to come to say something to a particular person or group of persons.

 

Having emphasized the importance of delivery, how to qualify its importance then? Is it everywhere more important than the message itself? Not necessarily true, but not altogether rejected. In some aspects, say emotional message of melancholy or merriment, exasperation or exhilaration, the dissipation of such sentimental demeanor and related words are better to be fine-tuned and finely-timed to make the other persons resonate with you, less vicious repercussions would be begotten. For instance, you are much infuriated by the chicaneries of the mercurial bigots, would you retaliate in an aggressive way by using insidious languages vehemently to those while sharing your disgruntlement with your acquainted ones by using cordial languages effusively to them, or the other way round? Let it be, you will be talking to the persons in the right tone and at the appropriate time. For the former, you may chide instantaneously, while for the latter, you may share asynchronously. That said, you would consider the way in which your multifaceted emotions are deluged, not mixing them up but take a step back in thinking the appropriate ways to deal with different situations and with different persons. Also, you would think about the way to paraphrase your message in order to achieve its intended efficacy.

 

Then, for the objective messages of tasks or evaluation of proposals and alike, should we also consider the way they are presented? Unless one thinks that we are senseless computers who only process information but fail to read between the lines to decipher the connotations, I suppose the content aside, we should nevertheless take account of the tone they are manifested. Is the tone of the economist overly auspicious, cautiously optimistic, or lukewarm if not ominously pessimistic? All these may go beyond the figure of economic growth itself and embedded in the more tacit use of languages. For all, be it a emotional outlay or logical derivation, the way of message delivery should nevertheless be accounted for. Yet, they should not be considered as being more important than the message itself. For emotion, it sounds true to weight the delivery more important than the message (as one may be swayed by the demeanor as to skip the prolix or the details), but for analysis, my contemplation is that both are important, neither substituting dissemination for the message nor highlighting one at the expense of the other. A balanced perception of both would, in the end of the day, perceiving the imperceptible.