Throughout the day, every single one of us is sending and receiving messages: our lives and society function on the ability to communicate effectively. There was a day, not so very, very long ago, when communication focused on seeking clarity between the sender and receiver of information. To communicate well meant that both parties sought to be clear about the message sent.

I have used in my leadership courses an example of misunderstanding with the sentence, “I never said you stole the money.” What exactly does that sentence mean? It turns out that it can mean six different things depending on what word is emphasized. Watch: I never said you stole the money (someone else said it). I NEVER said… (denying anything to do with the accusation). I never SAID… (I might have implied it or hinted at it). I never said YOU… (money is missing, someone took it!) I never said you STOLE… (you just borrowed it, right?). I never said you stole the MONEY. (You are a thief, not just money in this case).

The ‘truth’ of the statement should be on what the sender meant to say, one of the six options. However, here is where communication in the 21st century has changed. What matters is not what is MEANT by the messenger sender, but how the message is FELT by the one receiving it.

Through the years, I have seen this played out on a number of issues at the Lycoming County Commissioners Meetings. There have been controversies that packed the gallery over gender bias, handicap discrimination, zoning restrictions, LGBTQ (Lesbian, Gay, Bisexual, Transgender, Queer) concerns, and much, much more. In every single one of these episodes, the commissioners have always tried to explain clearly how they came to their decision on these matters.

Those who oppose their message often utilize what I call the New Rules of Rhetoric for the 21st century. Number One is “Experience Over Expertise.” In the past, a person who studied a subject or had work expertise in an area would have more validity than one who had less. What is true today is more validity is given to the person who has had some negative experience. This is why ‘triggers’ (perceived offenses that are felt) matter more than what was actually said. In other words, it does not matter what you meant; what matters is how it made me feel. If it hurts me — the message, no matter how factual, is neutralized.

Number Two is “Turn Up the Volume.” The commissioners meeting are classic illustrations of Law #2, where a particular group with a cause will fill every seat in the room, the public comment speeches will be laced with pain (see Law #1), signs and banners in bold display will highlight the media coverage and the pressure is continued with social media saturation. Communication might make right.

Law Number Three is “Meme the Message.” In advertising, the ultimate goal is to trademark the brand. For example, we use a “Kleenex” to wipe our nose, put on a “Band-Aid” on a sore, take an “Aspirin” for a headache, make a “Xerox” copy, and “Google” a subject we are researching. All of those are company brand names that become identified with their product.

The same thing is true when words can become exclusive to a cause. The word “green” used to be a color, now it is a cause for non-fossil fuel energy, “science” was a field of study, now it only applies to epidemic patterns, and so forth. Memes have inspired me to make my new normal to do the math so I can follow the science to be on the right side of history.

Finally, the Fourth Law is “If All Fails, Pull out Hitler.” This one I am borrowing from author Mike Godwin who came up with the “Godwin’s Law of Nazi Analogies” in 1990. It states that as an online discussion grows longer (regardless of topic or scope), the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Adolf Hitler becomes more likely.

Sure enough, we saw this evidenced recently in a local online news publication where a letter to the editor invoked the Nazi comparison to the commissioners’ concerns over the books displayed in the Welch Family Wing of the James V. Brown Library to celebrate Pride Month. The commissioners received a number of constituents who took offense with this, and two of the commissioners, Scott Metzger and Tony Mussare, responded, asking the library staff to reconsider their decision. Clearly an act of fascist oppression, right?

Today’s War on Words has lots of minefields in the various news and information sites and publications. Reader beware.