Whisper to the Brain

Neurology is now being applied to persuading others through communication.  The NYT article, “Ads that Whisper to the Brain” reveals techniques used to discover what activates the human brain when somebody watches a commercial.

Researches use electroencephalographs (EEGs) to measure brain waves that become more active when people have heightened attention to determine if they are engaged by the commercial.

According to the article, “Neuromarketing’s raison d’être derives from the fact that the brain expends only 2 percent of its energy on conscious activity, with the rest devoted largely to unconscious processing. Thus, neuromarketers believe, traditional market research methods — like consumer surveys and focus groups — are inherently inaccurate because the participants can never articulate the unconscious impressions that whet their appetites for certain products.

If pitches are to succeed, they need to reach the subconscious level of the brain, the place where consumers develop initial interest in products, inclinations to buy them and brand loyalty, says A. K. Pradeep, the founder and chief executive of NeuroFocus, a neuromarketing firm based in Berkeley, Calif.”

What does this mean for consumers?  Well, first off researchers haven’t made the connection between brain wave activation and the purchasing  of products, so it may be a mute point.  But, the effort to influence consumers through communication is as old as time.

What is helpful is to be aware of the power of communication, both as a broadcaster and a consumer.  What you say and how you say it influences others.  And what you see and hear influences you.  Being aware is the key.  Being aware, you can acknowledge the sudden hunger that arises after watching an Oreo ad, or the desire to become involved after hearing a compelling political message. Being aware, you can acknowledge the influence of persuasive communication on yourself.  As for the subconscious thoughts, well, you still have the power to choose your actions.

Virtual Reality Transforming Social Interactions

If you watch yourself in a virtual mirror as an attractive avatar for 90 seconds, you will stand closer to other virtual beings and be more confident about your own looks in filling out an online data application. What happens in virtual reality, effects reality.

This I learned from a very interesting lecture video by Jeremy Bailenson of Stanford’s Virtual Human Interaction Lab (VHIL).

With my communication scholar bias, I was particularly interested in learning how non-verbal communication in virtual reality can be incredibly powerful.  In an experiment called “Augmented Gaze” virtual students are more attentive when the virtual teacher is looking at them.  In another experiment called “Digital Chameleon” if an avatar mimics your head movements with a 4-second delay you find them more engaging and are more likely to be persuaded by them.

Of course, we know of the power of non-verbal communication in reality, but it’s power in virtual reality is a bit of a surprise for me.  I believe, as Bailenson states, this will transform social interactions.

Words Can Get You Fired

“I mean, look, Bill, I’m not a bigot. You know the kind of books I’ve written about the civil rights movement in this country,” he said. “But when I get on a plane, I got to tell you, if I see people who are in Muslim garb and I think, you know, they’re identifying themselves first and foremost as Muslims, I get worried. I get nervous.”

These words got veteran NPR journalist Juan Williams fired.  You can read the full story “NPR fires Juan Williams over anti-Muslim remarks” from The Washington Post. You can also read William’s perspective.

I am not passing judgement on Mr. Williams for I know too little about the case.  I am however pointing out the power of words.  Words can get you fired.

As a journalist, you make a living off your words.  Your words tell stories and share information.  When your words don’t match with the the standards of your organization — they can get you fired.

According to The Washington Post, NPR found that Williams words, “were inconsistent with our editorial standards and practices, and undermined his credibility as a news analyst with NPR.”

On NPR.org, Williams rebutts that NPR, “Used an honest statement of feeling as the basis for a charge of bigotry to create a basis for firing me. Well, now that I no longer work for NPR let me give you my opinion. This is an outrageous violation of journalistic standards and ethics by management that has no use for a diversity of opinion, ideas or a diversity of staff (I was the only black male on the air). This is evidence of one-party rule and one sided thinking at NPR that leads to enforced ideology, speech and writing. It leads to people, especially journalists, being sent to the gulag for raising the wrong questions and displaying independence of thought.”

Strong, or should I say, Powerful, words on both sides.