The Julie and David Eisenhower Interview on CBS "Sunday Morning": A Lesson in the Obligations of Those Who Are Voluble, Expressive, or Outspoken

I’ve long been an admirer of Julie and David Eisenhower, and not for any ideological reasons. And because the famous couple rarely appears in the media, I eagerly consumed every moment of their interview broadcast last month on CBS “Sunday Morning,” one of my favorite television shows. [For the uninitiated: Julie Eisenhower is the daughter of President Nixon and David is the grandson of President Eisenhower.]

But one aspect of the interview was painful watching: Each time interviewer Mo Rocca threw a question at the seated couple jointly, the voluble and assertive Julie would instantly launch into a reply, with David sometimes vainly gesturing and trying to add a comment (once, even flailing his arms) and then abandoning his response mid-sentence upon realizing that he was not getting anywhere (because of his relative inaudibility, he was unable to seize Mo Rocca’s attention), as Julie continued with her detailed and enthusiastic response.

I believe there is a powerful lesson to be drawn from the above. Whenever two or more people are being interviewed jointly, it behooves the person who is decidedly more vocal, expressive, or vehement to make a conscious effort, such as occasionally pausing and looking at the other person, to encourage and even coax a response from him or her. A must if the latter happens to be a relatively shy or reticent type.

To watch that fascinating segment on CBS: http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/10/24/sunday/main6987169.shtml

© Copyright 2010 V.J. Singal

Injecting Humor in a Presentation on a Dry Topic; Eric Schurenberg Shines

Clients often tell me that one of their biggest challenges is inserting a bit of humor into their presentations, especially if they are speaking on something “dry” or very technical. In response, and somewhat reflexively, I remind them about the power of metaphorical language. Of course, there are other ways to enliven a dull topic.

This morning, while reviewing the Oct. 13 edition of PBS’s highly-regarded “Nightly Business Report,” recorded during my recent four weeks of travel, I burst out with laughter when I heard Eric Schurenberg, editor-in-chief of BNET.com, utter the words shown below in Italics while speaking about an unusual estate-tax avoidance opportunity that exists this year:

"2010 offers a tax-avoidance opportunity that is to die for, literally. This year, for the first time since 1916, the families of people who die will face not a penny in estate taxes. Draw a breath in 2011, however, and under current law your heirs will owe the government 55% of your taxable estate of above $1 million. Out of that ..."

It’s a fantastic example of how a bit of imaginative wording can animate something dry and desiccated.

Continued Reverberation of Obama’s Use of “Shellacking”—An Illustration of the Power of the Spoken Word

It’s nearly three weeks since the Nov. 2 mid-term election. Yet, Obama’s word “shellacking,” which he used during a press conference the following day to describe the reverses he and the Democratic Party suffered, continues to resound. There is not a day when I don’t hear or see that word quoted in a news report, magazine article, or a current affairs discussion in the media. It proves something that I have been telling my audiences and clients for over two decades: A single word that is out-of-the-ordinary and vivid can help make a presentation indelible.

Perhaps the finest example of a fresh, strong, evocative word giving immortality to a speech or other communication is FDR’s “infamy” speech. Here is what I say about that iconic speech in the opening paragraph of my essay “Building a Wide and Vivid Vocabulary—Why Bother?” in my book "The Articulate Professional": On each anniversary of the bombing of Pearl Harbor, we Americans get to hear, in the voice of President Franklin D. Roosevelt, the opening words from a speech he delivered to Congress one day after the Japanese attack: “Yesterday, December 7, 1941--a date which will live in infamy--the United States was . . .” Clearly, it is the word “infamy” that endows that line with so much impact and firmness. What if FDR had stuck with his original draft, worded “…a date which will live in world history…” Would the opening line of that speech still be so resonant and a fixture of American history, replayed in news programs and documentaries year after year, more than six decades later? Hardly!

A relatively recent example of a prominent American’s imaginative words becoming airborne and thus entering the lexicon: then-Fed Chairman Alan Greenspan’s “irrational exuberance,” uttered during a speech in the 1990s, which were repeatedly quoted by talking heads, analysts, and others during the recent financial crisis.

Having made my case for why it pays to enrich one's command of the language, I hope you will be a frequent visitor to my free vocabulary enhancement feature Words of the Month which profiles words used conversationally by America’s most articulate.

Delivering a Cogent Presentation on Leadership: One Approach or Recipe

Sure, there are several approaches to developing a compelling presentation on the subject of leadership—a presentation that is a far cry from the one discussed in my previous post (Oct. 31) which was amorphous, built on an inappropriate and impractically long mnemonic, and comprised an unending fusillade of slides bearing the names and comments of/about countless famous leaders of the past. Here is one simple but highly effective way to create something that is crystalline and which the audience can easily embrace and remember:

(i) As a first step and based on your research and analysis, identify the most critical attributes of leadership that you wish to talk about. [Suggested number: 3 or more, but not exceeding six, to keep the list manageable for the audience.]

(ii) Mention the names of, say, half a dozen great leaders each of whom you believe exemplified all or most of the qualities enumerated in Step 1. And if you want to make your presentation universally applicable as well as timeless, pick leaders from different fields. For instance, a highly admired military commander such as Field Marshal Erich von Manstein (my long-time hero); a business leader such as Jack Welch or Carly Fiorina; a non-profit or environmental leader such as Dr. Steven Sanderson of the Wildlife Conservation Society of New York; a leader of a highly successful movement for civil rights and freedom, such as Mahatma Gandhi; one of the most revered American presidents such as Abraham Lincoln or Franklin Roosevelt; and so on.

(iii) The final step is obvious: Based on your research, show the audience how each of your pick of 5 or 6 leaders exemplified most if not all of the leadership attributes you mentioned in (i) above as being of paramount importance.

End of presentation, one that is convincing and thought provoking!

How NOT to Make a Presentation: Using a Mnemonic As The Foundation Can Render a Presentation Hollow!

Last week, while I was in Dehra Dun, an Indian city located in the Himalayan foothills, to celebrate the 75th anniversary of the founding of my high school, The Doon School, I listened to a one-hour presentation on leadership by a Dr. Sanjiv Chopra of Harvard Medical School. What a disappointment! The only positive comment I can make about that presentation is the speaker’s delivery: a strong voice with excellent enunciation. But the content? An overwhelming, rapid-fire barrage of slides that lasted more then twice the allotted time and created severe listener indigestion.

I believe my analysis of why the presentation was completely ineffective, and why it did not leave any long-term impact on the numerous members of the audience I have spoken to since, will give you specific ideas on how to make your next presentation really worthwhile for the listener, especially if it's going to be on some abstract issue such as leadership.

So, where did the speaker go wrong? First, he made the common mistake of bundling his content into a mnemonic—in this case the word “L E A D E R S H I P” itself. Thus, he had L stand for “listening” as a key skill, E for “empathy,” A for attitude, and so on. Invariably, when speakers try to fit a complex subject into a mnemonic, they end up oversimplifying the matter and leaving the audience with a distorted takeaway. Let me elaborate.

Take for instance “communication” and “vision”—unquestionably two of the most important ingredients of leadership. Because the letters C and V do not appear in the word LEADERSHIP, what does a speaker do, if he is trying to force fit everything into the letters L E A D…..? Either he will crudely and feebly tie these two qualities to other letters in the mnemonic or just make a passing reference to them. Result: the audience does not get a sharp, crystalline view of what it takes to be a strong and highly successful leader. And when the mnemonic happens to be a relatively long word, as is the 10-character “LEADERSHIP,” it will invariably end up exaggerating some minor qualities or aspects.

The second big mistake Dr. Chopra made was that for each quality represented by one of the characters in the word LEADERSHIP, he had a fusillade of slides, with each such slide featuring a comment by or about a famous leader. Thus, the presentation turned into an onslaught of several dozen such slides, producing severe overload and listener indigestion. At the end of the long, insufferable peroration, all that was left in our minds was a blur.

Since “leadership” is a particularly sexy subject for a presentation, thanks to its universal appeal, my next post offers an approach for making a cogent and indelible presentation on that topic.

Making a PowerPoint Presentation Highly Effective

I recently gathered that it is standard practice in major oil companies and engineering firms located here in Houston, and presumably everywhere else, for presenters to simply read from their slides. In other words, instead of displaying short, highly abbreviated bullet points, presentation slides are very busy, packed with complete sentences. Not a good idea at all! Here is why:

(i) As soon as a slide appears on the screen, the audience is tempted to start reading way ahead of the speaker. Result: the presenter loses control of the audience.

(ii) In the process of reading full sentences from a slide, the presenter’s delivery becomes boring, devoid of any vocal variety and relative emphasis. Result: the presentation lacks “freshness” and “spontaneity” – necessary ingredients for highly effective public speaking, especially when it comes to projecting conviction and enthusiasm, and being persuasive.

(iii) Even if a presenter were to somehow employ vocal variety, hand and facial gestures, and other elements of “animation” while reading straight from the slides, such animation would be ineffective because, as mentioned in (i) above, many in the audience would be reading material in advance of its utterance by the speaker.

Bottom line: it is imperative that each bullet point contain, at the most, just a few key words, with the speaker doing the necessary elaboration orally. Also, rather than a slide being displayed in its fullness from the get-go, each successive bullet should get displayed (such as by “flying in from the bottom”) only after the previous one has been discussed. This will prevent the audience from taking flight and it will ensure that everyone’s mind is in lockstep with that of the presenter.

In my next post on this subject, I will give specific examples of abbreviated bullet points by discussing some of the slides I presented at the Project Management Institute Global Congress 2010—North America held earlier this week in National Harbor, Md.

Building a Strong Vocabulary: New Edition of “Words of the Month”

The latest edition of “Words of the Month,” my free vocabulary enhancement feature, has been online since last weekend. Among the featured words, all of which lie within the conversational vocabulary of America’s most articulate:

1. incubus – to describe something that oppresses or burdens like a nightmare; a cause of anguished uncertainty or fear of failure.
comment: In these days of high unemployment, mounting credit card debt is a big incubus for millions of American families. And for our law enforcement agencies, an all new incubus is the threat posed by homegrown terrorists such as the “Time Square bomber.”

2. panache – a vivid word for spirited self-confidence and a dashing style.
comment: A great synonym for flamboyance and verve. Among the many singers and actors who exude (or exuded) panache: Katy Perry and Sean Connery (especially when he played James Bond).

3. fulminate – a strong word to describe the action of somebody who is shouting or hurling a loud verbal attack or condemnation.
comment: One of the ways that today’s media is different from that of, say, 25 years ago, is the advent of the Internet. Another is the prevalence of fulminating talk show hosts on radio and TV. Of course, there are plenty of fulminations when leading Democrats and Republicans attack each other on the floor of the House or the U.S. Senate.

4. incredulity – to describe the state of mind of someone who is unwilling or reluctant to believe--somebody who is skeptical.
comment: With Christmas just about two months away, this author recommends the 1947 classic film “Miracle on 34th Street” to all those who are incredulous of Santa Claus.

5. ephemeral – a term for something that lasts a noticeably short time.
comment: The nature of today’s economic news is strikingly ephemeral. Thus, one day the latest “housing starts” number is positive and the stock market soars. Two days later, retail sales look unpromising and the market plunges. Later that week, the “new jobs” numbers look robust and the Dow Jones perks up again.

Visual, Evocative Words to Emphasize Something—Some Inspiring / Humorous Examples

Here are some recent examples of people using a vivid, evocative expression to emphasize something--examples which, I hope, will inspire the rest of us into similarly imaginative use of the language, especially when we are trying to break through the clutter.

1. Talking about the speed with which the U.S. military is acquiring robots, “Wired for War” author P.W. Singer said during a CBS interview: “We went into Iraq with a handful of drones; we now have 7,000 in inventory. We went into Iraq with zero unmanned ground vehicles that are robotic; we now have 12,000. And these are just the Model T Fords, the Wright Brothers flyers, compared to what’s coming.”

2. Earlier this month, speaking with ABC’s Christiane Amanpour about Princess Diana’s impact on the British monarchy, former British PM Tony Blair commented: “Buckingham Palace saw her as a threat because she was such a different type of person. For a very traditional monarchy, it was like a meteor coming in what had been a fairly well disciplined, well ordered ecosystem, and that obviously had a big impact on it, a big consequence.”

3. Asked why Mexico’s President Calderon criticized Arizona’s new immigration law during his last visit to the U.S.--criticism that, not surprisingly, created a brouhaha here--Jeffrey Davidow, president of the Institute of Americas, saying: “If Calderon had come in here and not mentioned the Arizona law and made something of a big deal about it, he would on his return be put on a spit and roasted slowly by the Mexican public. This is a big issue for them.”

4. With reference to why the Democrats have yet to see a political payoff from the health-care overhaul and other big initiatives of the past 12 to18 months, David Axelrod telling The Wall Street Journal: “We didn’t have a lot of cotton candy that tastes good right away but disappears quickly. What we had was some fiber that’s going to help people in the long run, but it doesn’t provide that immediate pop.”

High-Impact Public Speaking; Eliminating Uhs and Ums, Filler Words, and Other Verbal Tics From Your Oral Communications

In a post a few weeks ago, I discussed how the unrelenting use of uhs and ums, and filler words such as actually, basically, and you know can be extremely irritating to the listener and can eviscerate your presentation or interview. As promised, here are some thoughts on how to expunge these verbal tics and other annoying mannerisms from your system.

(a) Solving the problem on your own: First you must make a conscious effort to find out what sort of tics or disfluencies you utter frequently. I say this because many who suffer from such a flaw have no idea that their speech contains a preponderance of uhs and ums, or you knows, or basically/essentially/actually, and so on. The best way to find out is to quietly ask one or two people in the audience to give you some feedback each time you make a presentation. You could also request people in the office, especially those who can hear you speak on the phone or who often attend the same meetings that you do, or family members at home. Then, having sized up the problem, stick little post-it notes or other helpful reminders on your office desk or wall, or any other place that you often stare at while on the phone. Carry a sheet of paper with such self-admonitions into each meeting.

(b) Through outside help: Join a Toastmasters club. When I first became a Toastmaster, every sentence of mine contained a spate of uhs. Yet, within just a few months, I had almost banished them from my speech! Today, even during my long workshops (1- to 2-day affairs) the audience will scarcely find me uttering more than a total of one or two uhs.

Susan Desmond-Hellmann: Communicator Extraordinaire and One of the Most Illustrious Female Execs in the Land

I first learned about Sue Desmond-Hellmann in early 2005, when she appeared on "Charlie Rose." At the time, she was a president at Genentech. I was so struck by Dr. Desmond-Hellmann's nonverbal gestures that I remarked to myself "Move over, Carly Fiorina and Ellen Futter. Make way for Susan Desmond-Hellmann," and wrote her an email complimenting her. After a while, Ms. Desmond-Hellmann fell out of my consciousness, sort of, until this past week when she appeared on the PBS News Hour.

This time, she made an even stronger impression on me. And as I watched her respond to the interviewer's questions--see video clip below--words such as the following flashed through my head: crystal clear, crisp, animated, emphatic, persuasive, engaging, well poised, utterly endearing and, ofcourse, extremely articulate.

There is no question that each one of us can advance his or her communication effectiveness by taking cues from her style--a style that is a rare and powerful blend of nonverbal techniques (especially vocal variety and facial gestures) and verbal skills, such as the use of synonymous terms and phrases, and antonyms.

My Testifying at a Public Hearing; Exhorting the Government to Adopt Tougher Public-Health Measures; Invoking the Gettysburg Address

Yesterday, I traveled to Dallas to speak at an EPA (Environmental Protection Agency) public hearing. The issue: should the federal government tighten the regulation of coal ash disposal by coal-burning power plants.

Here is my approx. 2-minute presentation. Most of the words that I emphasized (by using vocal variety, hand gestures, and other body language) are in bold. Also note my liberal use of fresh words and synonyms.

“Good Afternoon!

I am a resident of West Houston. My name is V.J. Singal, and I am testifying as a member of the general public—I should say, a member of the concerned public.

Whenever I get a chance to appear before a highly consequential government body, as yours surely is, I like to invoke a key phrase from Abraham Lincoln’s Gettysburg Address—the phrase “a government for the people” which, when translated into today’s issue, would mean putting the clamps on any industrial activity that is detrimental to the public’s health, any activity that is endangering the public.

Gentlemen, you have in your possession incontrovertible evidence that coal ash is highly toxic, that it is unquestionably deleterious to the public’s health. And you have similarly irrefutable evidence that the TCEQ has been utterly lax in monitoring and implementing the Clean Air Act and other environmental regulations.

A case in point: The Fayette plant outside Austin, where coal ash has so badly contaminated the water that it has been rendered undrinkable—a perfect testimony to the TCEQ’s apathy in matters environmental.

And so, if we are to adhere to that maxim of “a government for the people,” then it is imperative, and mandatory, that the EPA, which is, after all, a protector of last resort when it comes to the environment, takes firm and speedy steps to issue new regulation—regulation that is (i) tough, (ii) unambiguous, and (iii) enforceable.

And if you do that, you will have every reason to feel truly ennobled!

Thank you for giving me this opportunity to share my thoughts on the subject."

Difficult Negotiations, Such As With Someone You Don’t Trust or Who is Adversarial

People with a relatively capacious view of what effective communication is all about include negotiating strategies and tactics within its fold, hence this post.

This past Thursday, August 26, “PBS Newshour” featured a remarkable segment on difficult negotiations—negotiations that are particularly challenging because, say, you are dealing with somebody you don’t trust or who is a tough adversary, an SOB!

During the short feature—less than 6 minutes—which you can either listen to or read, “negotiating guru” Prof. Robert Mnookin of Harvard, author of “Bargaining With the Devil,” suggests that the person in the weaker position (in other words, the poor supplicant) stands a much better chance of success if he or she uses the “economic approach.” And in explaining that approach, Mnookin uses a cogent and evocative metaphor: “the carnivore is eager to trade his broccoli for a lamb chop owned by the vegetarian.” The professor also points out that “the words you use, the tone you use, your language…” (in other words, some of the very verbal and nonverbal techniques that have been the subject of my previous posts) play a big role in one’s negotiating success.

Well worth a listen or read.

© Copyright 2010 V. J. Singal

Body Language for Creating a Favorable First Impression: Go for the “Three-Pump Handshake”

I've substantially improved upon my previous post on the subject (July 28) by mentioning, among other things, the top three "ingredients" or components of a perfect handshake. I also point out why an unimpressive handshake can be so very consequential!

Creating a Favorable First Impression: Egregious Grammar Can Undo You

The display of unacceptably bad grammar even by well educated Americans occupying high positions is not uncommon. A couple of examples that readily come to mind: A few years ago, the then-police commissioner of New York City telling Charlie Rose: “….he gave a copy of the report to the mayor and I.” A similarly horrifying mix up of the subjective and objective pronouns from another PBS interview, this one involving a state governor as the guest: “She is excited that her and her family will be moving back north to be closer to her parents….” But here is something that really takes the cake. It’s an excerpt from baseball star Roger Clemens’s statement during a congressional hearing last year which was rebroadcast on NPR’s All Things Considered last week:

“Once again Mr. Congressman, I think he misremembers the conversation that we had. Andy and I’s relationship was close enough to know that if I would have known that he had done HGH which I now know, if he was knowingly knowing that I had taken HGH, we would have talked about the subject. He would have come to me to ask me about the effects of it.”

The above “murder” of the English language is so “criminal” that I doubt if I will ever be able to disassociate Roger Clemens the person from his language skills, and Clemens’s above “tour de force” will become Exhibit A in my module on “destructive grammar” when presenting the topic of “Some verbal and nonverbal skills for creating a highly favorable first impression.”

Why I am writing this particular post is to warn you that egregious grammar a la Clemens will, in all probability, completely dissolve your chances of success in a job interview or at an important networking event.

Nonverbal Communication Skills: Purposeful and Exemplary Hand Gestures That Will Knock Your Socks Off

As promised in my previous post (July 31), below is a video clip of an executive using his hands in perhaps the most estimable manner I’ve seen in a very long time. In this 2-year old clip which I pulled from my archives, you see Nasdaq OMX group CEO Robert Greifeld using a variety of hand gestures each of which is extremely effective because it sharply accentuates his words. I am proud to write that most of the gestures he employs--hands folded in a streamlined shape and pointing toward the audience; the two hands, each semi-open, closing in to portray action and dynamism; formation of two fists… are among the range of hand movements I implanted in the acting CEO of a Waste Management subsidiary whom I coached about six years ago and who is the subject of the first “success story” on my website.

Also note that the video clip below is a testimonial to the enormous value that PBS’s Nightly Business Report (NBR) brings to the table. I recommend to all of my coaching clients and workshop participants to make NBR a part of their regular TV watching because, in addition to providing insight behind top business developments, you get to see some of America’s sharpest communicators in action—people like Larry Ellison, Ford Executive Vice President Mark Fields, and, of course, Bob Greifeld.

In a forthcoming post, I will get into the granularity of Mr. Greifeld’s hand gestures. In other words, what is it about his hand movements that make him a standout and add to his gravitas immeasurably.

Video clip illustrating exemplary hand gestures, worthy of emulation by top execs, managers, and other high achieving professionals:

Nonverbal Communication Skills: Hand Gestures That Are Valueless and Diminish One's Presentation & Stature

It is common to see a communicator using hand gestures that do absolutely nothing to emphasize or accentuate his or her points and instead, as is often the case, even weaken or diminish that person’s stature. A case in point: in the video clip below, you’ll see Ed Rollins, one of America’s most respected political analysts and consultants, using his hands in a sort of robotic, automaton-like manner--he clasps and unclasps them more than 10 times within just 28 seconds. Such hand gestures, which I call "reflexive" and "knee-jerk" (because they result when a speaker loses control of his or her hands and which come about as a natural reaction to the stresses produced within the body when a person is trying to articulate something at a key moment) do nothing to strengthen one's utterance or enhance one's personality. In fact, they can be very distracting, even ludicrous!

Video clip of Ed Rollins


My next post will feature a video clip of a top executive displaying exemplary use of the hands--a style that every professional (male or female) should strive to emulate.

Enhancing Your Vocabulary: New Edition of “Words of the Month”

The latest edition of “Words of the Month,” my free vocabulary enhancement feature, has been online since the end of last month. Among the featured words, all of which lie within the conversational vocabulary of America’s most articulate:

1. recondite – to describe something that is extremely difficult to fathom or understand, and therefore beyond the comprehension of someone with an ordinary mind.
comment: This word is a perfect synonym for abstruse. A good example of something that is recondite and frequently in the news: derivatives, the financial instruments many blame for accentuating the global financial crisis.

2. moribund – a term for something that is nearing death--something that is showing no activity or progress, or is devoid of vitality.
comment: The housing market in some regions of the nation continues to be moribund, as is the Middle East peace process.

3. aphorism – a term for a concise and often profound statement of a principle--a terse and cogent formulation of a general truth or shrewd observation.
comment: A good synonym for adage. One of the reasons why Benjamin Franklin continues to be remembered fondly is the many simple aphorisms he handed down to us, such as “Early to bed and early to rise makes a man healthy, wealthy, and wise.”

4. Svengali – a strong word to describe someone who manipulates or completely dominates another, especially for an evil or wicked purpose.
comment: It’s now more than three years since Dmitry Medvedev became president of Russia, but some Russia watchers continue to insist that the real political power in that nation is in the hands of Prime Minister Vladimir Putin and that Putin is Medvedev’s Svengali.

The Handshake: According to Recent Survey, Two Thirds of Us Display Diffidence, or a Lack of Confidence, When Shaking Hands

Reportedly, General Motors recently researched the handshake -- yes, researched it! -- to teach Chevrolet dealers how to do it correctly.

What a waste of time and effort, you might exclaim, considering that shaking hands is an activity all of us professionals engage in all the time. It is something we do quite naturally and reflexively, and so take for granted.

It turns out that nearly two-thirds of us display a lack of confidence when shaking hands, as per a recent survey cited on American Public Media’s “Marketplace” this morning. And why is that important for you and me? Because, as the “Marketplace” report points out, when you are meeting someone for the first time--say, during a job interview or sales call--the potential hirer, customer, or client is making instantaneous or snap judgments about your trustworthiness, your personality, your nervousness, and so on. In other words, the consequences of having an “unconfident” handshake and thus displaying diffidence when you meet someone for the first time can turn out to be very negative for you because they can affect the outcome of that interview or sales call.

Solution: The “Marketplace” piece goes on to make several suggestions and lists the various “ingredients” or components for the perfect handshake, but here are their three most significant and worthwhile tips:
(i) go for a complete and full grip, not the limp and almost half-hearted handshake I myself have often engaged in until now
(ii) shake or “pump” three times, which is why I now refer to the perfect handshake with the moniker “The 3-Pump Handshake”
(iii) smile with both your eyes and mouth and “let that smile fade slowly.”

Click here to listen/ read the report:

http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2010/07/28/study-lack-of-confidence-has-impact-on-handshake/

Men's Attire: Wearing an Exactly Matching Tie and Pocket Handkerchief Is Not a Good Idea!

Click on the short video clip below. Because Mr. Tim Tebeila--a highly successful South African industrialist featured earlier this year on PBS--is donning a tie and pocket square (or pocket hanky) that match exactly, the “center of gravity” of his visage falls sharply--to some level below the neck! In other words, the subject’s tie-pocket hanky combination is so conspicuous that it has become the dominant element in his overall appearance, and his face--which is what ultimately should attract the observer's eye--retreats into the background, almost falling off the canvas. Bottom line: If the tie and pocket hanky are of identical color(s), the combination will almost always outshine and overwhelm the wearer’s face and should be verboten. In his latest book, Alan Flusser, one of America’s foremost designers of men’s clothing, writes: “Wearing a matching handkerchief and necktie is a sure sign of an unsophisticated dresser.” Yet, in their show windows, several (misguided) retailers of men’s clothes in many a downtown, including Manhattan, continue to deck the suits with exactly matching ties and pocket squares. When will they learn?

Video clip illustrating a matching tie and pocket hanky

The Contagion of Two Adjectives—“Narcissistic” and “Self-Aggrandizing”—Triggered by LeBron James’s Media Event on Thursday Night

In the brouhaha following LeBron James’s decision and the way he let that decision be known to Cleveland and the rest of the world, two words have been on every critic’s lips: “narcissistic” and, to a lesser extent, “self-aggrandizing.” In fact, since the Thursday night sensation, I’ve seen many a media interview during which the guest--some noted sportscaster or the other--has used narcissistic as his only term of opprobrium and that too several times within just a few minutes. So, for talking heads and others who want to vent strong criticism of the way James handled his highly anticipated announcement, here are about a dozen other terms--in the order of mildest to the harshest--that could help break the annoying monotony of “narcissistic” and “self-aggrandizing” and thus quash this verbal contagion:

self-glorifying; self-centered; vain; egocentric; distasteful; tawdry;
egotistical; odious; conceited; egomaniacal; megalomaniacal; ignoble.