If you desperately wanted a friend to change her assumptions or behavior, you would speak to her in terms that she can relate to, right? You would be careful not to exaggerate and choose words carefully. And getting upset and emotional is definitely to be avoided. You respect this person and know that she will at least give consideration to a solid case.
Amazing how activists, political leaders, and social change-driven organizations lose sight of this simple notion. With Amnesty International’s 308-page 2005 Report one word, “Gulag,” caused thousands, if not millions, to question the group’s credibility. The president, and conservative writers and pundits have successfully turned the spotlight away from legitimate concerns about our (waning?) role as a leader in the fight for human rights. So why did Amnesty include the word? Was it simply a mistake or are they so media savvy that they anticipated the controversy and sacrificed credibility for coverage? Continue reading…
June 6th, 2005