What do you say when you’re not saying a word? Do your eyes show that you’re lying? Does your posture indicate you are defensive? Does the pitch of your voice give away your nervousness? The nonverbal cues we send are an essential part of the messages we communicate. Public figures are not exempt and this year’s presidential debates offer up a lot of material to analyze.
Presidential candidates, like most other politicians in the limelight, invest in media coaches to help them prepare for public appearances. Understandably so, since their media blunders, which are seen, recorded, replayed and over-analyzed for decades, can gravely impact public opinion.
The effects of nonverbal messages on voters were first discussed after the first televised presidential debates. After the 1960 Nixon / Kennedy debates, many analysts claimed the candidates’ on-screen appearance tilted the scales in favor of the younger, fresher looking Kennedy. During the 2000 Gore / Bush debates, the vice president rolled his eyes and sighed while his opponent was talking. This was viewed as irreverent and undiplomatic. Many believed that may have contributed to Gore’s ultimate defeat.
McCain and Obama analysts pore over every smirk and nod. Obama is said to have connected more with viewers by looking into the camera during his opening statements. While some feel McCain missed the opportunity of reaching the millions of television viewers by looking out into the small crowd in the town hall. But then, McCain’s slower pace of speech and softer tone was interpreted as easing a nation in distress.
With a historical record of empty promises, it can be more beneficial to listen to the candidates without paying attention to the words they speak. Are they at ease with difficult questions or do they blunder and blurt out impatiently? Do they respond with tense, rehearsed melodrama or are they passionate about the issues? It may all be a matter of good coaching and natural communication skills. But it is still worth the attention.
The latest buzz on Sarah Palin’s winking fit during the vice presidential debate has her pegged as a coquettish beauty queen trying to charm her way out of answering questions. Will she be able to wink and smile her way into foreign policy negotiations? Maybe in Latin America where the wink can be interpreted as a sexual invitation. Not necessarily so in China, where some consider winking as rude.
If U.S. leaders cannot understand the implications of the messages they send, locally and inter-culturally, how will they ever learn to truly communicate the voice of the people they represent? The truth is it may not be something they can rehearse or learn. That’s why it’s important to get at their true motivations and intentions. Their track record in policy making, their history of practicing what they preach, the views of those they intend to bring to the White House with them. All of these matter. Just as important, the quick reactions, the micro-second of true feeling that slips through the veil of rehearsed performance, nonverbal cues can reveal a great deal
With so many outlets of information, there is no reason voters should go in blindly to the booths on Nov. 4. There is, of course, a lot of bias and media manipulation, but thousands of audio, video, and print sources are available for people to look at all sides. At the end of the day, it’s not the words they speak (words cleverly crafted by speech writers.) It is how they say it and how they live it that should determine the outcome of America’s future.