“Communication as a process is cyclic. It begins with the sender and, through encoding of the intended information, its transmission and decoding at the recipient’s stage, it is completed only through meaningful feedback, which originates from the recipient and is directed to the sender and which comes from the interpretation of the message.”
From what I have observed, I think I have the answer to a question that appears out of topic. I have seen many people wonder why ‘good’ and ‘regular’ people of this website are no longer active. The answer lies in the defective communication process of this website. Communication is “initiated” when someone has an idea or information that he wants to share. It is put down (or expressed) in words and/or visual/audio signals and transmitted. The recipient then “decodes” this message and interprets it. The process does not end here. It truly ends when the recipient then conveys “feedback” to the message. This feedback may be mere acknowledgment of receipt. It can also be commentary on the message, praise, agreement, disagreement, criticism or query.
In case of the “good regular” members, the first half of the communication process is flawless. Their message is encrypted and then decoded and understood by the recipient very well. But what is lacking is effective feedback. There are a number of reasons for this. First let me explain what I mean by ineffective feedback. In that process, I will also explain why those comments are ineffective or detrimental to the reviewer.
1 I call this the “blank” comment. The blank comment is not written with any particular intention of giving any feedback. It is written only to provide a blank or dispassionate acknowledgement. These comments are boring and go like—“I liked your style, keep it up, cheers XYZ”. During the initial few reviews of every member, one will find fewer blank comments. But once the member has written 20 or more reviews, a majority of the comments received are “blank” comments. These are boring and even frustrating. They de-motivate the reviewer. Each individual comment seems harmless but when five or six out of fifteen comments are blank, it discourages the reviewer.
2 I call the second kind of comment, the “butter” comment. The butter comment is an exaggerated version of the blank comment. The central flaw of both comments is to offer praise for the review without making any specific remark about its content. In the butter comment, praise is often offered in poetic language with an extravagant show of admiration. They sound somewhat like the following: “Your reviews are just amazing! How do you do it? Will you please teach me your secret?” In the case of very popular members, like A-frank, such comments form another major proportion. Unconventional reviewers like Juggernaut face this problem as well. These comments do not directly harm the feedback process but they only occupy space without making any contribution.
3 The third kind of comment is the “assault”. Here, the person writing the comment criticizes the review for the sake of criticizing. I do not want to involve myself with analyzing the reason behind this attitude. Assaults are generally offered by those who “distrust” the reviewer. The criticism offered here is not sincere and it does not contribute to making any specific contribution to the process of communication initiated by the reviewer. The intention of assaults is to offer personal disagreements/resentment through the comment. An illustration would be: “Reviews on this topic are not your cup of tea. You never write anything worthwhile.” Once again, the popular and oft-spoken about members face this the most. It serves no purpose because assaults also become monotonous. Although blank comments are still worse because it makes the reviewer feel that the review failed to provoke any thought in the reader, assaults can be equally damaging because they discourage the reviewer or frustrate him/her.
4 The fourth kind of comment I have seen can be described as “provocation”. This does not necessarily happen through comments only. Some times it is done through e-mails. It is a result of cantankerous nature of the member writing the comment. It is a provocation to enter into an argument or fight because the commentator has some cheap fun in doing that. “Provocations” are very similar to assaults but less damaging in the short run. Over a long period of time, constant provocation can become another source of irritation and discouragement. For example: “This website is a consumers’ forum and not a place for you to spread your propaganda. I advise you to keep on the straight and narrow path and write only in consumers’ interest.”
I have seen that an overwhelming majority of comments are “blank” comments. Another very large and exasperating majority is of assaults and provocations. These comments are written for the heck of it. Criticism can be constructive when it is made to correct/amend/improve on certain aspects of the concerned review. Here, a specific intention to contribute is seen. This is absent in the case of assaults and provocation as is obvious in the instances provided above. The comments appear deceptively polite and even harmless at times. But they are quite harmful.
While writing a comment, the following tips should help:
1 A review is not a piece of literature. Therefore, the requirement of literary tools is very little. Beyond basic grammar and contextual consistency, there is little genius needed to write a good review. Do not dissect the review from this angle.
2 You should be frank. But being asked to be frank is not your ticket to hurting people. Criticism must be directed towards specific points or (in the case of general criticism) must refer to the areas where it is being made. It must be for contributing to/ amending or improving on those concerned aspects of the review(s).
3 There is nothing wrong in offering praise. But it is wise not to make it sound like flirting. It is always a good idea to praise specific points. For example: “You rock! Your words are sexy!” is not very good. But: “ makes a lot of sense. I’m impressed” is an intelligent way to praise.
4 The review is the reviewer’s perspective. Therefore, he/she is entitled to having contrary opinions as yours. That cannot be a point of criticism.
Now, I must stress on the central theme of the review. Comments are the “feedback” part of the communication cycle initiated by the review. Therefore, comments must be written with as much attention as the review itself. The consumers’ forum is a place for consumers to interact and communicate about products/services in the market. Therefore, I stress on the importance of commenting wisely.
Having said that, I still do not expect all of my readers to leave a good comment. Those who do leave a comment are not all likely to write anything more than “Hey, that was good” or “Shut up, you’re dumb”. The principal reason for that can only be one thing: lack of initiative at the interpretation level of the process of communication.
----|||| THE RUSTIC HAS SPOKEN ||||----