Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 1 30

The   following   checklists   are   excerpts   from   my   text   “Fundamental   Trial   Advocacy”   2nd  Edition,  WEST   Publishing.     They   form   the   foundational   legal   basis   for   our   discussion   on  storytelling.    They  are  provided  as  background  information.    We  will  reference  key  elements  from  this  outline  during  our  discussion   together   today.     I  will,  of   course,  make  our  slides  available  after  the  presentation  to  those  who  are  interested  in  them.  

Enjoy!

Opening  Statement  Checklist  The following checklist summarizes the fundamental presentation elements used when presenting an opening statement. You should use it as a starting point in developing your own opening skills. This checklist is not “Holy Writ” and is merely the soil in which you should plant the seeds of your own creativity.

I. Effective Opening Statements: a. Thematic Statement

i. Grabber ii. One-Liner iii. Hook

b. Primacy and Recency i. Bookend the theme front and back ii. Most important information up front iii. Weaknesses fronted during the middle

c. Tell the Story i. Use structure ii. Present tense verbs iii. Appropriate language

d. Preview the Law i. Give them a taste ii. Identify how the law is important for this case iii. Use the instructions you know will be coming

e. Set the Hook for Closing Argument

II. Basic Legal Principles of Opening Statements a. Judge is in charge b. Do not waste time arguing, tell the story!

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 2 30

c. Do not vouch for witness credibility d. No personal opinions e. If evidence is excluded do not mention it f. Do not mention evidence if you have no good faith basis to believe it will be admitted g. Do not violate the “Golden Rule” argument

III. The Art of Opening Statements a. Structuring

i. Cohesive and complementary legal and factual themes ii. Powerful moral theme iii. Thematic statement iv. Bookending v. Focus on the story vi. Preview the Law vii. End on a reminder of what is coming in Closing (thematic bookending)

b. Delivering i. First impression ii. Beginning the Opening

1. Acknowledge the court 2. Assume the position 3. Breathe 4. Eye contact 5. Jury gives you permission to begin 6. Start strong!

iii. Body Language 1. Fill the space quietly 2. Command the room 3. Start from a still position 4. Movement follows the words 5. Podium – BAD 6. Eye contact – GOOD

iv. Verbal Keys 1. Present tense verbs 2. Clear language 3. Concise 4. Dynamic language

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 3 30

5. Positive approach 6. Tone 7. Modulation

v. Dangers of Improper Argument 1. Do not stretch the envelope 2. Persuasion comes from structure, not argument 3. Civics lesson waste time 4. No throat clearing

Closing  Argument  Checklist   The following checklist summarizes the information presented on closing arguments. You should use it as a starting point in developing your own argument skills. This checklist is not “Holy Writ” and is merely the soil in which you should plant the seeds of your own creativity.

I. Use the Rule of Threes a. Tell them what you are going to tell them. b. Tell them. c. Tell them what you told them and why it means you win.

II. Remember the Three Primary Steps of Case Analysis: a. Identify and analyze the legal issues. b. Identify and analyze the factual issues. c. Develop a moral theme and legal theory.

III. Use the Seven Steps to Superior Closing Arguments: a. Case Analysis, first, last, always (opening). b. Grabber, one-liner, hook (moral). c. Argue! Use the law and evidence to create inferences supporting your theme and theory.

i. Answer the questions in the jury’s mind. ii. Beware the burden of boredom.

d. Uses appropriate rhetorical devices. i. Primacy & recency. ii. Rule of threes. iii. Parallelism. iv. Analogies & inferences. v. Engage multiple senses.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 4 30

e. Meet the burden of common sense (facts). f. Instructions are your friend (law). g. Tell the jury what you want them to do (what the evidence demands).

IV. The Do’s of Closing Argument: a. Be confident in arguing your position. b. Maintain eye contact, but not so much to make jurors uncomfortable. c. Structure your argument—don’t simply re-hash the facts. d. Draw on the jury’s common sense. e. Use visual aids or physical evidence from the trial. f. Address the standard of proof. g. (Prosecution) Use rebuttal argument to hammer home your strongest points, how you refuted

the defense’s contentions, and remain positive in your case!

V. The Don’ts of Closing Argument: a. Misstate the evidence or the law. b. Argue facts not in evidence. c. State your personal belief in the justice of your cause. d. Personally vouch for the credibility of a witness. e. Comment on the accused’s exercise of a fundamental right (prosecution). f. Make personal attacks on opposing counsel.

VI. Legal Principles for a Proper Closing Argument: a. You are confined to the record. If evidence is not admitted you cannot argue it. b. The trial court has supervisory authority over the scope and direction of closing argument, but

should give deference to counsel unless the law is misstated. c. Prosecutors cannot argue merely to inflame or arouse passions. The courts will consider

whether a substantial right of the accused was violated when reviewing this issue. d. Advocates cannot intentionally misstate evidence or attempt to lead the jury to draw improper

inferences from admitted evidence. e. Personal beliefs and opinions of counsel are forbidden. f. Reasonable inferences are permissible and expected. g. It is improper to refer to evidence which was either successfully objected to as to admissibility,

stricken from the record, or otherwise excluded.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 5 30

Conclusion  Applying the lessons found in these two checklists will assist you greatly in persuading the jury to follow your line of reasoning. If you properly identify your legal theories, factual theories and moral themes during case analysis you will be able to answer the why question that is always present in the minds of the jury. If you do not take the time to sort it out using the tools provided here you are at the mercy of the opposing counsel who does. That is not a place anyone wants to be.

The following articles and outlined information are provided as background information for my talk on storytelling. I offer them to you as a starting point in your own exploration of this topic.

I. 5 Elements Found in Powerful Stories

A. Powerful stories resonate within us. We identify with the heroes and the villains, because we all have those tendencies inside of us. Look for ways where your story shares a common thread with the story of humanity.

B. Powerful stories show the light and the dark. In most cases, people will forgive the mistakes they are made aware of but are furious when even little things are covered up or ignored.

C. Powerful stories point to a greater cause. What purpose do you live and work for, despite it only being a whisper in your soul? Our lives must point to a purpose greater than our own well-being. People will rarely align with your self-interest, but they will align for a common goal.

D. Powerful stories teach—but in a differCent way. The truth should be used to support stories so that they are powerful. Authenticity creates believability.

E. Powerful stories leave room for interpretation. We don’t have to explain everything! When you explain your interpretation becomes a part of the listener’s interpretation. We must leave room for the listener to form their own ideas based upon the story we have provided.

II. The Phrase That Pays:

A. A concept from Doug Stevenson, called “the phrase that pays.” He teaches organizations to look for a phrase that can be used to make the ask when fundraising.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 6 30

B. For example, one of the stories was about a man how worked construction but decided he wanted to become a doctor. The president talked about the man walking into the construction supervisors’ office to give notice. He could’ve easily added a detail like, “Juan went into the office, put down his hammer, and gave notice.”

C. Then when he was done the story, he could turn the to the person he was addressing and say, “Now will you help other Juan’s put down their hammer too? What would you give to make that happen?

D. Using a “phrase that pays” reinforces the story and invites the listener to become an active participant in the story. And it doesn’t feel like you’re changing gears. It doesn’t feel like a bait-and-switch. The ask naturally flows from the story - the ask is a key component of civil trial work, and has its place in criminal practice as well.

III. Key Elements to Successful Storytelling: Storytelling gives meaning, context, and understanding in a world often filled with chaos and disorder. Using stories to reach others creates an emotional window into a cognitive process - it crosses the chasm between knowledge and belief. Folks acquire the first, but are willing to die for the latter. Stories bring information, knowledge, and truth to life. When you can apply the following examples

1. Every Part is Essential: Anything that does not affect the outcome in some way (directly or indirectly) can be hacked off the story. Keep the main thing, making it the only thing. You should be able to reduce your entire story to one sentence - a sentence that captures the essence of your story. In order to keep your story simple and focused on what’s important you must narrow it down to one sentence. Start with the beginning, and then add the middle, and the end. In the sentence, you should get the main purpose of the story, as well as the competing concept that threatens the story’s goal. Some people might think, “I can’t narrow down my story to one sentence!” Yes you can. It will force you to iron out the most crucial points. Once you do this, expand the sentence into a paragraph. Then expand each sentence in the paragraph to its own paragraph. Continue onward until your story is complete.

2. Hook: Hook the listener in by presenting a problem that forces them to keep listening. For example, creating a world in which something is taken away can reveal the ultimate importance of what has been taken or lost.

3. Theme: Themes give stories their depth of meaning. If you cannot initially identify the theme of the story simply tell it and then step back - when you get far enough away you will see it woven through out the fabric of your tale. Themes connect the past with the

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 7 30

present, and ultimately the future. Normally discovering the theme requires some reworking and rewriting of the story - do not be discouraged, for it is a common issue.

4. Keep It Simple: True storytelling excellence is found when a complex idea is reduced to a nugget that can be remembered, accepted, and applied. Simplify, simplify, simplify. Cut out characters, scenes, and information that do not somehow work towards the goal of the story. If you aren’t sure if something is crucial or not, tell it to another and see what they hear.

5. Language, Movement & Inflection: Words have power. You want to use the right words, which may mean first having to explain them so the listener can follow along. Use the narrative to explain the words that are unique to your story. Movement can be used in multiple ways. As the storyteller, you can paint pictures with your body- using your hands, feet, legs, and head. Similarly, you can ask the others to perform movements during certain parts of the story. People often talk more quickly than the brain can process. If you pause at crucial moments in the story, you give your listeners the chance to think critically about the piece of information you have just given. Don’t be afraid to pause, especially at a tense moment. Pauses bring the listener back into the story. When it seems that the problem is unsolvable, it is the right moment to pause, giving your audience a chance to think up the solution themselves (particularly if you have artfully suggested possible solutions in your story). It helps to make characters more memorable when you give them personalities. Part of that includes changing your voice with each character.

6. End Strong: The ending is the last thing your listeners hear. Whatever points and/or principles you think are most important, put them at the end. If it doesn’t make sense to wait until the end, simply add them AGAIN at the end- to drive the point home (think primacy and recency and backwards planning). If you can make the ending one sentence, this is even better. Use alliteration, repetitive words, or a singsong cadence to help make it memorable. Repetition is your friend.

7. The Story Solves a Problem: Every story has theme or meaning. When you can tell a tale that provides a solution to a problem, there is higher likelihood that the story will take on a deeper meaning when it solves a problem in real life. When you are trying to communicate boring facts, they don’t take on meaning until you create a story in which the protagonist must know those facts to accomplish a necessary task. When done properly the solution to the story- lies in the principle you are trying to convey. The stakes must be high. Stories with a happy ending must first overcome obstacles. Before you get to the end of the story, you want to create dramatic tension that makes the listener think, “Will the character reach his or her goal?” A good story knows how to identify such tension, develop it and then use it.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 8 30

8. Appeal To Their Senses - Set the Scene: When preparing your story, activate as many senses as possible. Humans have five senses; sight, sound, touch, taste, and smell. The more a story activates the senses, the more memorable it becomes. It may seem like more work, but ultimately- the principles learned will not soon be forgotten. It is crucial to create an environment for your story. Describe the surroundings, the weather, or the pre-existing conditions. Use rich detail so the listener can picture the environment in their imaginations. Words, descriptions of smell, sounds, and sights will make the story more meaningful.

9. The Story must bear the burden of Trust: It is called “cheating” when a storyteller automatically twists the laws of the universe to make the story work. Don’t offer coincidences that magically solve the problem. Whatever world or situation your client is in, don’t break its rules just to end the story. Coincidences may have gotten your client into trouble, but they cannot get them out.

10. Don’t Give Away Too Much: When you tell a story that has some mystery, you invite the listeners to solve it themselves.When they do, chances are- it will be more memorable and long lasting. Particularly if they have followed the argument as to what the resolution should be, what the story demand that it be. The key is to give enough information so the listener can solve the problem, but not so much that it is obvious. If you leave no trail of hints and clues, then it will be frustrating and impossible to solve. Think about how an author leaves crumbs in a mystery novel. Stories are meant to bring meaning, feeling, and context to concepts that are dry and lifeless by themselves. Invite your listeners into the storytelling process. Give them enough to understand and follow along, but not so much that you are spoon-feeding. Add drama, props, effects, and set the scene, so the listeners are drawn into the story; its characters, problem, and ultimately, the solution that the story itself requires.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 9 30

November 01, 2012 - The Persuasive Litigator Blog

Cut Through the "Stickiness" of Prior Beliefs By Dr. Ken Broda-Bahm:

! Here is one belief I'm pretty sure about: Most of us tend to be pretty sure about our beliefs. As the waning campaign season has continued to demonstrate, we tend to select a chosen belief and stick to it rigorously, even in the face of contrary information. In our personal campaign to understand the world, we are not dictated by the fact checkers. Substantial portions of the American public believe that Barack Obama was not born in the United States and is a Muslim, that childhood vaccines cause autism, that there is no consensus on human-caused global warming, or that the Bush tax cuts increased revenue for the government. All of those beliefs can be refuted with hard evidence, but they're sticky. For many, the refutation just hardens the resolve to stay with current beliefs.

In litigation, jurors may find many forms of misinformation sticky as well. They may believe that if a lawsuit makes it to trial, or even if it is simply filed, then there must be something to it. They may believe that a corporation will always lie, or always put profits ahead of people. They may feel that juries are cash machines motivated primarily by sympathy. They may believe that most or all lawsuits are frivolous, buttressed by misinformation on the McDonald's Hot Coffee case. They may believe that if a product has met relevant regulations, then the product maker and seller is immune to suit. Countering these and other forms of misinformation can be an important part of legal persuasion. A recent research review (Lewandowsky et al., 2012) takes a broad look at the accidental and purposeful contributors to misinformation -- traditional media, interest groups, social media and even, gulp, bloggers. The article (which is available in full and is free) provides a very comprehensive review, to the point that reading the entire piece is a veritable graduate course in the persistence of B.S. But unlike many research articles, this one is particularly helpful in providing specific recommendations for debunking misinformation. In this post, I take a look at how these recommendations can be concretely applied to cut through sticky misinformation in a trial context.

Some factors that make misinformation sticky in a public context apply to litigation as well. For example, the authors point to the mass media's practice of promoting "balance" as creating the false perception of parity. Putting one expert who believes in a human role in promoting global climate change up against a second expert who denies it, can create the false perception of a rough parity on the issue, when in fact more than ninety-five percent of scientists would side with the former. In the same fashion, the fact that each party in trial has its own expert can foster a sense of there being "two sides to every story" which can end up helping the less popular and less credible position. .

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 10 30

I won't attempt to review the full scope of research findings in this post. "The literature we have reviewed," as the authors acknowledge, "may appear kaleidoscopic in its complexity." But following the same advice we would give to any litigation team, they thankfully not only provide recommendations, but boil them down to a relatively simple graphic. This chart from the paper covers the four main reasons misinformation sticks (the left-hand column) along with helpful strategies for combating each (the right-columns).

!

These solutions take on more practical meaning when applied to an example. Taking one that is handy, the November issue of the ABA Journal out today includes a cover story on the role of neuroscience in trial,

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 11 30

pointing out that our evolving understanding of the role of brain physiology is running up against our traditional and practical understanding of legal responsibility. One example of misinformation that applies in criminal cases, as well as some civil cases, is the popular and sticky belief that personal responsibility, and a knowledge of the difference between right and wrong, can trump even more profound and demonstrable forms of mental illness.

Drawing from that example, let's take a look at how the researchers' four forms of misinformation and related solutions would apply.

1. The Continued Influence Effect

Even after erroneous information is retracted, studies show that the incorrect information will have a persistent influence as people continue to rely on it. Even in the face of expert medical testimony that an individual lacked intention, for example, individuals will continue to treat the individual as a moral agent. The solution, according to the researchers, is to provide an alternate account that is as simple as the misinformation. That is, instead of just providing refutation ("That isn't true"), fill in the gap ("Here is what is true"). In the case of brain injury and moral responsibility, that can be a challenge because nothing is simpler than the idea that we are all responsible for our actions no matter what. The alternate account in this case needs to be an argument with comparable simplicity. One option might be found in the idea of a "missing regulator" discussed in the ABA Journal article. Everyone has impulses, like the gas pedal on a car, but just about everyone also has brakes. In the case of some brain-injured defendants, however, they may look and act normal in many contexts, but in other situations they simply have no brakes.

2. The Familiarity Backfire Effect

When a myth is repeatedly rebutted, even the rebuttal can end up reinforcing the familiarity of the myth and making it more likely to be remembered and repeated. Advocates might think they're pounding the false belief down and making it unsustainable, but they're actually just raising its profile. The solution, according to the research team, is to focus on what is true rather than what is not. In the case of showing a lack of legal responsibility, for example, it won't help to keep emphasizing "my client did not know right from wrong." Instead, the message should be, "my client only had a basic understanding that there are police and there are laws...but he lacked the empathy to understand why." The authors also note that one other strategy to guard against the familiarity of misinformation is to warn in advance. For example, counsel could say in jury selection, "you will hear the prosecution emphasize again and again that my client understood the law, but that is not the whole story."

3. The Overkill Backfire Effect

Another way attempts to correct misinformation can backfire is through overkill. If refutations are more elaborate or more complicated than the myth itself, then the myth is the more attractive belief. In the case of assigning legal responsibility to brain-injured defendants, it is certainly attractive to believe that everyone carries responsibility for their actions, because the alternative is to believe that blame lies nowhere. In this case, the researcher's advice is to use fewer arguments in rebutting a myth -- the one very good argument being often better than the three somewhat good arguments. In addition, they argue that a good antidote to misinformation is for the audience to consciously adopt a skeptical frame of mind. In this regard, the context of a jury helps because jurors know that both sides have a strong motivation to persuade them and their job is to remain skeptical and test the evidence. A brain-injury defense could assist jurors in embracing that frame by reminding them that their role is to test, and they should test the prosecution's assumption of personal responsibility as much as they test the defendant's information on brain injury.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 12 30

4. Worldview Backfire Effect

The final explanation the researchers offer for the persistence of false beliefs lies in the critical area of worldview. We want to believe in a just world, a moral universe where bad things don't simply happen, but are instead the result of poor choices. In this case, jurors might simply be threatened by the idea that a brain-damaged individual cannot control and cannot be responsible for her actions. It is more comfortable to believe, even without evidence, that "deep down," the accused knew the actions were wrong and could have stopped them. In this case, the evidence points toward an adaptive strategy. You'll never succeed in convincing someone that their worldview is wrong (e.g., "sorry, but we really do live in a random universe..."), but you can sometimes find a way of framing your argument in a way that is consonant with that worldview. For example, counsel in a brain injury defense might say something like this: "In this case, the attorneys for both sides, the judge, the court personnel, and each of you on the jury all have personal responsibility. That responsibility is to make choices rationally, carefully, and thoroughly, based on what the evidence shows, not based on what we expect, what we assume, or what we want to be true. It is your own personal responsibility that requires you to take a hard and unbiased look at the medical evidence you've heard."

Of course, none of these techniques is fool proof. Even after a tailored strategy to address misinformation, some jurors will stick with misinformation anyway because it is familiar and comfortable. That is why you have jury selection, and why you should spend that time discovering what jurors believe they already know within the broad frame of your case. It will always be easier to avoid misinformation than to correct it.

Research Digest - Blogging on Brain and Behaviour

http://bps-research-digest.blogspot.com/2012/11/introverts-use-more-concrete-language.html

Thursday, 1 November 2012 Introverts use more concrete language than extraverts

! Your personality is revealed in the way you speak, according to new research. Introverts tend to use more concrete words and are more precise, in contrast to extraverts, whose words are more abstract and vague.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 13 30

Many previous studies have looked at the links between personality and language, but usually this has been about the content of what different personalities choose to talk about. It's been shown, for example, that extraverts are more likely to talk about family and friends, and to use words like "drinks" and "dancing", which makes intuitive sense given that people matching that personality type are expected to spend more time socialising.

Camiel Beukeboom and his co-workers took a different tack, asking 40 employees (19 women; average age 34 years) at a large company in Amsterdam to describe out loud the same five photos depicting ambiguous social situations. Participants were told that "there are no right or wrong answers" and given as long as they wanted to describe each photo. Their answers were recorded and transcribed for later coding. Three days later, the participants also completed a personality questionnaire.

Participants who scored higher in extraversion tended to describe the photos in terms that were rated by an independent coder as more abstract. For example, they used more "state verbs" (e.g. Jack loves Sue) and adjectives, and they admitted to engaging in more interpretation - describing things that were not directly visible in the pictures. On the other hand, the higher a person scored in introversion, the more concrete and precise their speech tended to be, including more use of articles (i.e. "a", "the"), more mentions of numbers and specific people, and making more distinctions (i.e. use of words like "but" and "except").

The differences make sense in terms of what we know about social behaviour and the introvert-extravert personality dimension, with the introverted linguistic style being more cautious, and the extravert style being more casual and vague.

The researchers said their results have far-reaching implications because we know based on past research that the contrasting speech styles are interpreted differently. For instance, they said behaviour described in abstract terms, in the style of an extravert (e.g. Camiel is unfriendly), is usually attributed to personality, as opposed to the situation, and therefore interpreted as enduring, more likely to occur again, yet harder to verify. By contrast, behaviour described in more concrete terms, in the characteristic style of an introvert (e.g. Camiel yells at Martin), tends to be interpreted as situation-specific, and as more believable.

"Thus an introvert's linguistic style would induce more situational attributions and a higher perception of trustworthiness than an extravert's style," the researchers said.

The findings also complement past research showing how conversations between two introverts usually involve discussing one topic in more depth whereas two extraverts dance around more topics in less detail.

"By talking at different levels of abstraction, extraverts and introverts report information differently," the researchers concluded, "and induce different recipient inferences, memories, and subsequent representations of the information exchanged."

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 14 30

HBR Blog Network Structure Your Presentation Like a Story by Nancy Duarte | 8:00 AM October 31, 2012

After studying hundreds of speeches, I've found that the most effective presenters use the same techniques as great storytellers: By reminding people of the status quo and then revealing the path to a better way, they set up a conflict that needs to be resolved.

That tension helps them persuade the audience to adopt a new mindset or behave differently — to move from what is to what could be. And by following Aristotle's three-part story structure (beginning, middle, end), they create a message that's easy to digest, remember, and retell.

Here's how it looks when you chart it out:

! And here's how to do it in your own presentations.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 15 30

Craft the Beginning Start by describing life as the audience knows it. People should be nodding their heads in recognition because you're articulating what they already understand. This creates a bond between you and them, and opens them up to hear your ideas for change.

After you set that baseline of what is, introduce your vision of what could be. The gap between the two will throw the audience a bit off balance, and that's a good thing — it jars them out of complacency. For instance: What is: We fell short of our Q3 financial goals partly because we're understaffed and everyone's spread too thin. What could be: But what if we could solve the worst of our problems by bringing in a couple of powerhouse clients? Well, we can. Once you establish that gap, use the rest of the presentation to bridge it

Develop the Middle Now that people in your audience realize their world is off-kilter, keep playing up the contrast between what is and what could be. Let's go back to that Q3 update. Revenues are down, but you want to motivate employees to make up for it. Here's one way you could structure the middle of your presentation: What is: We missed our Q3 forecast by 15%. What could be: Q4 numbers must be strong for us to pay out bonuses. What is: We have six new clients on our roster. What could be: Two of them have the potential to bring in more revenue than our best clients do now. What is: The new clients will require extensive retooling in manufacturing. What could be: We'll be bringing in experts from Germany to help. As you move back and forth between what is and what could be, the audience will find the latter more and more alluring.

Make the Ending Powerful You don't want to end with a burdensome list of to-dos. Definitely include a call to action — but make it inspiring so people will want to act. Describe what I call the new bliss: how much better their world will be when they adopt your ideas.

So if you're wrapping up that Q3 update from above, you might approach it this way:

Call to action: It will take extra work from all departments to make Q4 numbers, but we can deliver products to our important new clients on time and with no errors. New bliss: I know everyone's running on fumes — but hang in there. This is our chance to pull together like a championship team, and things will get easier if we make this work. The reward if we meet our Q4 targets? Bonuses, plus days off at the end of the year. By defining future rewards, you show people that getting on board will be worth their effort. It'll meet their needs, not just yours. This is the fourth post in Nancy Duarte's blog series on creating and delivering presentations, based on tips from her new book, the HBR Guide to Persuasive Presentations. Read the other posts here: Post #1: How to Present to Senior Executives Post #2: Create a Presentation Your Audience Will Care About Post #3: Do Your Slides Pass the Glance Test

More blog posts by Nancy Duarte

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 16 30

More on: Communication, Presentations

! NANCY DUARTE Nancy Duarte is the author of the all-new edition of the HBR Guide to Persuasive Presentations, as well as two award-winning books on the art of presenting, Slide:ology and Resonate. Her team at Duarte, Inc., has created more than a quarter of a million presentations for its clients and teaches public and corporate workshops on presenting. Follow Duarte on Twitter: @nancyduarte.

Fractured Fairy Tales ‘The False Prince’ and ‘The Hero’s Guide to Saving Your Kingdom’

By ADAM GOPNIK Published: May 11, 2012

An excerpt from the above titled article:

“What makes adult books last is, as with wine, their mix of fruit and acidity, sweetness and tannins; what makes children’s books endure is their sheer density, as with milkshakes. The marriage not only of jokes and non-jokes, but of a fecundity of episodes, of strange storytelling and unexpected lyric corners, supplies for younger readers the satisfying fullness of imagination. What we remember in the classics is their side chapels as much as their altars. Chroma’s color orchestra in “The Phantom Tollbooth,” the discussions of world government in “Mistress Masham’s Repose”, Mary Poppins’s shopping trips — digressions are the diamonds in the mines of storytelling. More recently, Lemony Snicket’s “Series of Unfortunate Events” found its poise between lightness of tone and intensity of feeling — walking the tightrope between charm and harm, but also providing a supersaturation of material. Jokey and spooky did not so much alternate as adjoin at odd angles.

Put simply, we like stories; we need worlds. We make the distinction idiomatically and instantly: we speak differently of good stories and great books, and the difference is in the breadth of the imagined worlds. Works of morality without comedy to make them real are as unsatisfying as comedy without morality to make it matter. Though the laws of serendipity still rule a book’s reception, perhaps the only way for authors to approach the literary lottery is to buy as many tickets from as many different vendors as possible: one from the grim store where Melpomene, the spooky muse, sits; another from the Times Square newsstand of Thalia, muse of laughter. After that, it’s all the luck of the game.”

Adam Gopnik is a staff writer at The New Yorker. His books include “The Steps Across the Water” and, most recently, “The Table Comes First.”

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 17 30

PSYBlog - Understand Your Mind http://www.spring.org.uk/2012/02/how-the-mind-really-works-10-counterintuitive-psychology-studies.php

How The Mind Really Works: 10 Counterintuitive Psychology Studies

!

Ten psychological findings that challenge our intuitive view of how our minds work.

Some critics say psychology is just common sense, that it only confirms things we already know about ourselves. Ironically this can be difficult to argue with because once people get some new information they tend to think it was obvious all along.

One way of battling this is to think about all the unexpected, surprising and plain weird findings that have popped out of psychology studies over the years. So here are ten of my favourite.

1. Cognitive dissonance This is perhaps one of the weirdest and most unsettling findings in psychology. Cognitive dissonance is the idea that we find it hard to hold two contradictory beliefs, so we unconsciously adjust one to make it fit with the other.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 18 30

In the classic study students found a boring task more interesting if they were paid less to take part. Our unconscious reasons like this: if I didn't do it for money, then I must have done it because it was interesting. As if by magic, a boring task becomes more interesting because otherwise I can't explain my behaviour.

The reason it's unsettling is that our minds are probably performing these sorts of rationalizations all the time, without our conscious knowledge. So how do we know what we really think?

2. Hallucinations are common Hallucinations are like waking dreams and we tend to think of them as markers of serious mental illness.

In fact they are more common amongst 'normal' people than we might imagine. One-third of us report having experienced hallucinations, with 20% experiencing hallucinations once a month and 2% once a week (Ohayon, 2000).

Similarly 'normal' people often have paranoid thoughts, as in this study I reported previously in which 40% experienced paranoid thoughts on a virtual journey. The gap between people with mental illness and the 'sane' is a lot smaller than we'd like to think.

3. The placebo effect Perhaps you've had the experience that a headache improves seconds after you take an aspirin? This can't be the drug because it takes at least 15 minutes to kick in.

That's the placebo effect: your mind knows you've taken a pill, so you feel better. In medicine it seems strongest in the case of pain: some studies suggest a placebo of saline (salty water) can be as powerful as morphine (Hrobjartsson et al., 2001). Some studies even suggest that 80% of the power of Prozac is placebo.

The placebo effect is counter-intuitive because we easily forget that mind and body are not separate.

4. Obedience to authority Most of us like to think of ourselves as independently-minded. We feel sure that we wouldn't harm another human being unless under very serious duress. Certainly something as weak as being ordered to give someone an electric shock by an authority figure in a white coat wouldn't be enough, would it?

Stanley Milgram's famous study found it was. 63% of participants kept giving electric shocks to another human being despite the victim screaming in agony and eventually falling silent.

Situations have huge power to control our behaviour and it's a power we don't notice until it's dramatically revealed in studies like this.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 19 30

5. Choice blindness We all know the reasons for our decisions, right? For example, you know why you're attracted to someone?

Don't be so sure. In one study people were easily tricked into justifying choices they didn't actually make about who they found attractive. Under some circumstances we exhibit choice blindness: we seem to have little or no awareness of choices we've made and why. We then use rationalisations to try and cover our tracks.

This is just one example of the general idea that we have relatively little access to the inner workings of our minds.

!

6. Fantasies reduce motivation One way people commonly motivate themselves is by using fantasies about the future. The idea is that dreaming about a positive future helps motivate you towards that goal.

Beware, though, psychologists have found that fantasising about future success is actually bad for motivation. It seems that getting a taste of the future in the here and now reduces the drive to achieve it. Fantasises also fail to flag up the problems we're likely to face on the way to our goals.

Instead of fantasising, use mental contrasting.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 20 30

7. Brainstorming doesn't work Want to think outside the box? Do some blue sky thinking? Want to...[insert your own least favourite cliché here].

Well, according to psychological research, brainstorming doesn't work. It turns out that in groups people are lazy, likely to forget their ideas while others talk and worried about what others will think (despite the rule that 'there are no bad ideas').

It turns out it's much better to send people off to think up new ideas on their own. Groups then do better at evaluating those ideas.

8. Don't suppress When you're down or worried about something people often say: "hey, try not to think about it; just put it out of your mind!"

This is very bad advice. Trying to suppress your thoughts is counter-productive. Like trying as hard as you can not to think about pink elephants or white bears. What people experience when they try to suppress their thoughts is an ironic rebound effect: the thought comes back stronger than before. Looking for distractions is a much better strategy.

9. Incredible multi-tasking skills Despite all the mind's limitations, we can train it do incredible things. For example we hear a lot about our multitasking abilities, but with practice, did you know people can read and write at the same time?

One study of multitasking trained two volunteers over 16 weeks until they could read a short story and categorise lists of words at the same time. Eventually they could perform as well on both tasks at the same time as they could on each task individually before the study began.

Read a full description of the study, along with potential criticisms, here.

10. It's the little things We tend to think that the big events in our lives are the most important: graduation, getting married or the birth of a child.

But actually major life events are often not directly as important to our well-being as the little hassles and uplifts of everyday life (Kanner et al., 1981). Major events mainly affect us through the daily hassles and uplifts they produce. The same is true at work, where job satisfaction is strongly hit by everyday hassles.

What most affects people's happiness are things like quality of sleep, little ups and downs at work and relationships with our friends and family. In other words: it's the little things that make us happy.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 21 30

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 22 30

“Million Dollar Case Themes That You Can Steal” by Elliott Wilcox

Our case theme can have a major impact on the jury. When you develop a powerful case theme, you give the jurors a lens through which they will view the evidence in your case. For example, in a rape case, one side might frame the case as the story of "a controlling man who refused to take 'No' for an answer and forcibly raped a young woman" while the other side says the case is about "a woman overcome by remorse and regret after a consensual one night stand."

Depending on which case theme the jurors adopt, they will start looking for evidence that supports that viewpoint. That's why it's so important to invest time developing your themes. The better your theme "hooks" the jurors, the more likely you are to win.

Unfortunately, many trial lawyers never create strong themes for their cases. They know they're supposed to use themes, but they have no idea how to develop them, or even where to start looking for ideas, and so they never use them. In this article, you'll discover a great resource for developing case themes.

If you go to the movies on a regular basis, you probably see dozens of movie posters every year advertising the upcoming attractions. Using splashy graphics, powerful images, and the draw of seeing your favorite celebrity, Hollywood does its best to grab your attention, spark your interest, and arouse your desire to go see the movie. In addition to the imagery, however, they also use another powerful technique to promote the movie. That technique is the use of a tagline.

A tagline is simply a short phrase or two that helps explain the movie. A good tagline will resonate with the moviegoer, sticking in his head even after he walks away from the poster, and subtly push him to go see the movie. Every once in a while, however, someone writes a great tagline, and it jumps to the forefront of our collective conscience. Here are a few examples of great taglines:

• "In space, no one can hear you scream." (Alien) • "You'll believe a man can fly." (Superman) • "We are not alone." (Close Encounters of the Third Kind)

These types of taglines don't write themselves. Every year, Hollywood spends millions and millions of dollars promoting their films, hiring some of the best copywriters available to develop great taglines. That's great news for you, because you can develop some of these taglines into incredibly powerful case themes, without having to spend millions of dollars developing them.

In this article, you'll find dozens of different taglines taken from movie posters and promotional pieces. Read through them (or, better yet, read them aloud) while thinking about your case.

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 23 30

They're not arranged in any particular order, and they're not necessarily the best (or the worst) movies ever created, but they'll serve as a great jumping-off point for writing your own themes.

• "The first casualty of war is innocence." (Platoon) • "With great power comes great responsibility." (Spiderman) • "Revenge is a dish best served cold." (Kill Bill) • "Get ready to root for the bad guy." (Payback) • "If Nancy doesn't wake up screaming, she won't wake up at all." (Nightmare on Elm St.) • "Being the adventures of a young man whose principal interests are rape, ultra-violence

and Beethoven." (A Clockwork Orange) • "If you can't be famous... Be infamous." (Chicago) • "His whole life was a million-to-one shot." (Rocky) • "His triumph changed the world forever." (Gandhi) • "This time he's fighting for his life." (First Blood) • "He's having the worst day of his life... over, and over..." (Groundhog Day) • "It was the Deltas against the rules... the rules lost!" (Animal House) • "There's everything you've ever known about adventure, and then there's The

Abyss." (The Abyss) • "The snobs against the slobs." (Caddyshack) • "Every man dies. Not every man really lives." (Braveheart) • "If adventure has a name... It must be Indiana Jones." (Indiana Jones and the Temple of

Doom) • "Get in. Get out. Get even." (The Italian Job) • "Just because they serve you doesn't mean they like you." (Clerks) • "Somewhere, somehow, someone's going to pay." (Commando)

[Feel the alliteration? Can you use similar repetitive word sounds?] • "The truth is out there." (The X-Files) • "There are degrees of truth." (Basic) • "Lie. Cheat. Steal. Rinse. Repeat." (Matchstick Men) • "Four friends made a mistake that changed their lives forever." (Sleepers)

"When friendship runs deeper than blood." (Sleepers) • "Fifty million people watched, but no one saw a thing." (Quiz Show) • "When he said 'I do,' he never said what he did." (True Lies) • "Fear can hold you prisoner. Hope can set you free." (Shawshank Redemption) • "Seen from a distance, it's perfect." (Life as a House) • "Not that it matters, but most of it is true." (Butch Cassidy and the Sundance Kid) • "Their only crime was curiosity." (Hackers) • "His story will touch you, even though he can't." (Edward Scissorhands) • "There's a good reason some talent remains undiscovered." (Waiting for Guffman) • "Everybody loved him... Everybody disappeared." (Jerry Maguire)

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 24 30

• "He was never in time for his classes... He wasn't in time for his dinner... Then one day he wasn't in his time at all." (Back to the Future) [Do you feel the power of the "3-peat"? Is there a phrase you could repeat occasionally throughout your opening?]

• "Don't answer the phone. Don't open the door. Don't try to escape." (Scream) • "No one stays at the top forever." (Casino) • "It's a hot summer. Ned Racine is waiting for something special to happen. And when it

does... He won't be ready for the consequences." (Body Heat) • "Freedom is not given. It is our right at birth. But there are some moments when it must

be taken." (Amistad) • "United by hate, divided by truth." (American History X) • "An outrageous story of greed, lust and vanity in America." (Bonfire of the Vanities) • "In the heat of passion two things can happen. The second is murder." (The Postman

Always Rings Twice) • "Every dream has a price." (Wall St.) • "It's not who he is underneath but what he does that defines him." (Batman Begins) • "He didn't come looking for trouble, but trouble came looking for him." (El Mariachi) • "He's out to prove he's got nothing to prove." (Napoleon Dynamite)

Here are some more taglines pulled from lawyer movies:

• "The truth can be adjusted." (Michael Clayton) • "Justice has its price." (A Civil Action) • "Sooner or later a man who wears two faces forgets which one is real." (Primal Fear) • "There have been many courtroom dramas that have glorified The Great American Legal

System. This is not one of them." (My Cousin Vinny) • "Power can be murder to resist." (The Firm)

"They made him an offer he should have refused." (The Firm) • "A district attorney out for a conviction. A new lawyer out of her league. A young boy

who knew too much." (The Client) • "No one would take on his case... until one man was willing to take on the

system." (Philadelphia) • "In the heart of the nation's capital, in a courthouse of the U.S. government, one man will

stop at nothing to keep his honor, and one will stop at nothing to find the truth." (A Few Good Men)

• "This man needs the best lawyer in town. But the problem is... he is the best lawyer in town." (...And Justice for All)

• "Sometimes it's dangerous to presume." (Presumed Innocent) "Some people would kill for love." (Presumed Innocent)

• "The story of what four men did to a girl... And what the town did to them!" (Town Without Pity)

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 25 30

• "Some people will do anything for money." (The Fortune Cookie) "Some people will do anything for $249,000.92." (The Fortune Cookie) [The first phrase is a common theme that all of your jurors have heard before, but the second phrase is more specific. Does it feel more powerful hearing the actual number?]

• "Nothing matters more than winning. Not even what you believe in." (The Candidate) • "There are two sides of this mystery. Murder...And Passion." (Jagged Edge) • "An act of love, or an act of murder?" (Body of Evidence)

"This is the murder weapon. Her name is Rebecca." (Body of Evidence) • "They locked him up. They crushed his spirit. But they couldn't hide the truth." (Murder

in the First) • "You may not like what he does, but are you prepared to give up his right to do

it?" (People vs. Larry Flynt) • "In a world of lies, nothing is more dangerous than the Truth." (Shadow of Doubt) • "The first scream was for help. The second is for justice." (The Accused) • "Suppose you picked up this morning's newspaper and your life was a front page

headline... And everything they said was accurate... But none of it was true." (Absence of Malice) [This is obviously an improper Golden Rule argument, but you could re-write it to focus the attention on your client]

• "On the other side of drinks, dinner and a one night stand, lies a terrifying love story." (Fatal Attraction)

• "Trials are too important to be decided by juries." (The Runaway Jury) [PLEASE don't use this one in court!!!]

Taglines, catch-phrases, and themes have a powerful persuasive effect in the courtroom. Invest some time developing your case theme, and then try it out in public. Don't just tell your colleagues and assistants about the theme. Share the theme with your friends and family. Ask the checkout clerk at the grocery store what she thinks about it. Ask your mechanic if the theme makes sense to him. Tell it to your bartender or the person on the barstool next to you. The important point is to refine your theme until it captures the essence of your case, giving the jurors a compelling lens through which to view the trial. Continue refining your theme, and you'll soon become the most persuasive trial lawyer in the courtroom!

What do you think? Let me know whether you liked the article, whether you want more articles on this topic, or if you'd prefer to learn about something completely different by posting a quick comment here:http://www.trialtheater.com/wordpress/general-trial-strategies/million-dollar-jury-trial-case-themes-you-can-steal/

WANT TO USE THIS ARTICLE IN YOUR EZINE, WEBSITE, OR BAR ASSOCIATION PUBLICATION? You can, as long as you include the following blurb with it: Elliott Wilcox publishes Trial Tips Newsletter. Sign up today for your free subscription and a copy of his special reports: “How to Successfully Make & Meet Objections” and “The Ten Critical Mistakes Trial Lawyers Make (and how to avoid them)” at www.TrialTheater.com

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 26 30

Big Think http://bigthink.com/think-tank/your-storytelling-brain

Your Storytelling Brain

Jason Gots on January 15, 2012, 12:00 AM

! Cognitive Neuroscientist Michael Gazzaniga, a pioneer in the study of hemispheric (left vs. right brain) specialization describes "the Interpreter" - a left hemisphere function that organizes our memories into plausible stories. Less romantic, perhaps, than Gone With the Wind, the Interpreter may help to explain our species' profound relationship with storytelling.

'Mesmerizing!'

'Stunning!'

'A Mind-Blowing Triumph!'

Mock these movie poster clichés if you will, but they speak to something we want from a story from about the age of two onward. Some of us might get a bit finicky in later years about which stories we allow to seduce us, and how many spoonfuls of critical reflection we want

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 27 30

along with our dose of narrative intoxicant, but there's no getting around it: humans love stories. In fact, in some fundamental sense, we need them.

Cognitive science has long recognized narrative as a basic organizing principle of memory. From early childhood, we tell ourselves stories about our actions and experiences. Accuracy is not the main objective – coherence is. If necessary, our minds will invent things that never happened, people who don't exist, simply to hold the narrative together. How often have you had a fierce disagreement with a partner or sibling over who gave you that Three Tenors CD or which of you made the pathetic clay reindeer Christmas ornament? How can two eyewitnesses at a trial be absolutely convinced of two conflicting accounts of the same events?

This tendency to confabulate – to fill in the gaps of memory with plausible inventions that preserve narrative continuity – is most pronounced in patients with significant memory loss, or in laboratory tests with participants who have had the connection cut between the left and right hemispheres of their brain (a procedure that, surprisingly enough, rarely results in death or significant impairment of function). Michael Gazzaniga, a cognitive neuroscientist and the author of Who's in Charge?, has performed countless experiments with split-brain participants. They have revealed a function of the left hemisphere called 'the Interpreter,' which jumps in to make sense of memories, when it has no direct access to those memories or the context in which they were made.

What's the Significance?

The arts and sciences have had an uneasy relationship over the past couple centuries, as science has attempted to disentangle itself from its roots in superstition and magic and build a firm foundation on more empirical grounds. So lovers of film and literature may react with suspicion to any attempt at neurocognitive analysis of their passions. This is misguided, says Gazzaniga – understanding our hardwired need for narrative coherence doesn't diminish the aesthetic power of a great story – nor will it enable us anytime soon to program computers to write like William Blake. But it may help to explain what's going on when we are mesmerized or stunned by a novel or the latest Matt Damon flick.

Gazzaniga suspects that narrative coherence helps us to navigate the world – to know where we're coming from and where we're headed. It tells us where to place our trust and why. One reason we may love fiction, he says, is that it enables us to find our bearings in possible future realities, or to make better sense of our own past experiences. What stories give us, in the end, is reassurance. And as childish as it may seem, that sense of security – that coherent sense of self – is essential to our survival.

Follow Jason Gots (@jgots) on Twitter

Image credit: Shutterstock.com

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 28 30

Big Think: http://bigthink.com/ideas/41940

Michael Gazzaniga: Some people, for instance, love the metaphors that come out of, say, literature and the arts and think that you want to leave those whole and untouched by an analysis as to why we may like those metaphors or why those metaphors seem to help our thinking or any of a number of questions.  And there’s a sense that if someone goes in and assesses that situation and gives a biologic dimension to why we do like those things that somehow it’s all diminished by that.  And that’s just not true. 

In my early part of my career - and it continues - I studied patients who had their two brains disconnected.  What we were responsible for was working out the functions of each hemisphere.  You could work with them independent of the other influencing it, so you kind of got to study it alone.  And over many, many years the basic finding is, of course, that one brain didn’t know what the other one was doing in such people that the information doesn’t transfer between the brains.  We found out that in the left brain there’s a special system that seems to always want to explain actions and moods that we have after they occurred, so we would put a question to the right nonspeaking hemisphere and it, in effect, would direct the left hand to do something.  And so the patient would do that.  And then we would simply say to the patient, “Well, why did you do that?”  The patient would make up a story that would explain why their hand had done one thing and why the other hand had done another thing and wove a tale that made coherent, as it were, the behaviors that are coming from all these separate brain areas.

The behavior comes out and then there is this little narrator up there that turns it into a story that makes us feel coherent and unified.  Turns out it’s a thing in the left hemisphere that does this.  And we called it The Interpreter, and it’s a very powerful force in the human condition and it’s always trying to figure out and seek explanations for our behavior.  That’s what it does.  

I think the human as a storytelling animal, as some people put it, is because this system is continually trying to keep the story coherent and, even though these actions may be coming from processors going on outside of, initially, of conscious awareness, an action is produced and then you might want to explain that action as to be part of your coherence and your story, your narrative.

Why does the human always seem to like fiction?  What is that?  Could it be, as some people have suggested, could it be that that prepares us for unexpected things that happen in our life because we’ve already thought about them in our fantasy world or read about them in a fictitious setting and saw how those characters acted and so then when we’re confronted with it we’re ready?  We’ve sort of lived through that movie, as it were.  

So why do we like that stuff?  Well, maybe that is a reason why we like it.  And to think of all of those things seems to me just to make it all richer, a richer experience. 

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 29 30

What are the ten rules you need to know to communicate effectively?by eric barker

���

Frank Luntz has “engineered some of the most potent political and corporate campaigns of the last decade.” His wordsmithing helped Republican Rudy Giuliani get elected twice in New York — a city where Democrats outnumber Republicans 5-to-1.

Luntz and his polling firm have learned a great deal about language by conducting nearly 1500 surveys and focus groups for a wide range of products and politicians.

The key takeaway from his book is actually part of the title:

It’s not what you say, it’s what people hear.

In Words That Work: It’s Not What You Say, It’s What People Hear Luntz breaks down the ten main lessons he’s learned from years of crafting political messages; lessons we can all learn from:

1) Simplicity: Use Small Words“Avoid words that might force someone to reach for the dictionary… because most Americans won’t. They’ll just placidly let your real meaning saiVel over their heads or, even worse, misunderstand you. You can argue all you want about the dumbing down of America, but unless you speak the language of your intended audience, you won’t be heard by the people you want to reach.”

Professor Charles H. Rose III Stetson University College of Law

Oxford Storytelling Lecture

Page ! of ! 30 30

2) Brevity: Use Short Sentences“Be as brief as possible… The most memorable political language is rarely longer than a sentence. “I Like Ike” was hardly a reason to vote for the man, but the simplicity of the slogan matched the candidate and the campaign.”

3) Credibility Is As Important As Philosophy“People have to believe it to buy it. As Lincoln once said, you can’t fool all of the people all of the time. If your words lack sincerity, if they contradict accepted facts, circumstances, or perceptions, they will lack impact… The words you use become you — and you become the words you use.”

4) Consistency Matters“Too many politicians insist on new talking points on a daily basis, and companies are running too many different ad executions. By the time we begin to recognize and remember a particular message, it has already been changed… ”The breakfast of champions” tagline for Wheaties was first launched back in 1935 and is still going today. Hallmark’s “When you care enough to send the very best” debuted in 1934, and “Say it with flowers” for FTD dates all the way back to 1917.”

5) Novelty: Offer Something New“In plain English, words that work often involve a new definition of an old idea… What matters most is that the message brings a sense of discovery, a sort of “Wow, I never thought about it that way.”

6) Sound and Texture Matter“The sounds and texture of the language should be just as memorable as the words themselves. A string of words that have the same first letter, the same sound, or the same syllabic cadence is more memorable than a random collection of sounds.”

7) Speak Aspirationally“Messages need to say what people want to hear… The key to successful aspirational language for products or politics is to personalize and humanize the message to trigger an emotional remembrance.”

8) Visualize“Paint a vivid picture. From M&M’s “Melts in your mouth not in your hand” to Morton Salt’s “When it rains, it pours,” to NBC’s “Must See TV,” the slogans we remember for a lifetime almost always have a strong visual component, something we can see and almost feel.”

9) Ask a Question“Is it live, or is it Memorex?” “Where do you want to go today?” (Microsoft) “Can you hear me now?” (Verizon Wireless)… “Got Milk?” may be the most memorable print ad campaign of the past decade. The creator realized, whether intentionally or not, that it’s sometimes not what you say but what you ask that really matters.”

10) Provide Context and Explain Relevance“You have to give people the “why” of a message before you tell them the “therefore” and the “so that.”… if it doesn’t matter to the intended audience, it won’t be heard. With so many messages and so many communication vehicles competing for our attention, the target audience must see individual, personal meaning and value in your words.”