Jawar Mohammed
![criticism2]()
Those of us who air our socio-political views on open public forums often attract responses of all kinds, ranging from praise and constructive feedback to outright defamation, threat and slander. I have friends who are very intelligent, gifted and capable of providing the public with enlightening, and perhaps transformational, perspectives on a wide variety of issues that concern us. However, very few of them brave the tough terrain of the unfiltered, uncensored and often anonymous crowd of the social media. Some of these bright fellas go back to silence after a couple of their commentaries earn them negative attack from a handful of negative commentators. The rest of them never even try to come out because they are terrified of the bombardment waged against those of us who are already out in the field.
For the benefit of those who are afraid of bringing their view into the public, I would like to share a few points of advice that they might find helpful. In my public engagement over the last few years, I have found these points very useful to me both as guiding principles and as sources of strength in tough times.
First, it is important that you know what you are getting into. After reading one of my ‘controversial’ articles, an elderly Oromo person once called me and left me with unforgettable words of wisdom. He said,
“Choosing to make your views, beliefs and position known to public is like choosing to walk naked into an open market. Since you walked in on your own accord, you cannot expect people not to look. Neither do you expect them to look at just certain parts of your body. You cannot expect all those who look at you to have the same reaction or perception. Some would admire what they see; some would dislike it, while others would curse you for the very act of walking naked. Even those who were not at the scene will have some opinion about it. Hence, beware of what you are getting into and prepare yourself for it. Do not get carried away with adulation; do not be demoralized with denunciation.”
There are multiple takeaway points in this short message. First, we–the writers, speakers and painters– choose, voluntarily, to make our opinion public. The public rarely forces views out of us coercively. Thus, for the choice we make on our own free will, we should neither be angry at nor disappointed with members of the public who come after us. We choose to speak up, and so we must be ready to buckle up and face off with those who criticize us.
Second, when we write or speak in open forums about certain subjects, whether it is our intention or not, we will influence public opinion one way or another. There often will be certain individuals or groups that stand to incur perceived or real loss. Those who feel threatened with potential shift in public opinion have all the reason and rights to go after us. Some will focus on debunking our message while others will go after our character. This brings me to the third point.
Thirdly, people often proclaim “don’t shoot the messenger” when advising others to focus their criticism on the message rather than the writer/ speaker. It is a good piece of advice and people should heed it. But they won’t, and we should not realistically expect them to do so because it is often impractical to separate the message from the messenger. Communication contains four inseparable components: message, messenger, medium and audience. An adversarial response to a given speech or writing has to target one or all of the four, prioritizing whichever is the most vulnerable. If it is hard to refute the message, they will find it expedient to go after the messenger. If that doesn’t work, they take on the medium for bias of this or that sort. That is why, every day, we hear people complaining “the media is biased.” If all of their attack fails, they go after the audience for being ‘blind followers’. The best spin often targets two or more of this. The point is, once you put out your views on public forum, you cannot expect your character to be spared. Coming after a messenger might not be fair but it is part of the game, save for some outright illegal types such as physical threat.
Many writers and public speakers often allege severe criticism is an assault on their freedom of speech. Criticism and character assassination might discourage free flow of ideas. However, unless it contains threat and intimidation and endangers the welfare of the person, it doesn’t not qualify as attack on freedom of speech. Just as we–public writers and speakers–have the right to air our opinions freely, we must accord the same freedom to our critics. Civility in public engagement is good thing, even a virtue, but it’s a choice, not a must. Here I am not suggesting that we stay quiet and suck up merciless attacks on our character. Scream bloody murder but only as way to beat back your adversary; don’t take it to heart and roll back from public writing/speaking. If you do, your adversaries win.
Finally, owing to all of the above reasons, a person wanting to air his/her opinion in public must develop a thick skin. You cannot have your cake and eat it, too. We cannot afford being sensitive to criticism while also taking up sensitive and controversial issues such as the ones we take up. This is my advice to those of you who want to have a lot to say but are afraid of letting it out. Before you embark on such ventures, prepare yourself psychologically. Even with the best of preparation, some attack will get under your skin. Therefore, you need to develop coping mechanisms. Some of such mechanisms include:
- Do not let yourself bogged down in endless argument. Respond to criticism only if you felt your original message was not sufficiently clear. Remember most of the time your critics respond to you not because they didn’t understand your points but with aim of irritating you enough so that the discussion will go away from original theme into side issues. Chill yourself up recalling the famous saying ‘don’t argue with stupids, they will drag you down to their level and beat you with experience’.
- Even when your character is targeted, do not take it personal or personalize your response. Remember, most of your critics do not even know you and very few hate you personally. Their aim is to destroy your message by damaging your character. Thus, there is no reasons for your to be sentimental about their attack which will affect the balance of your response.
- Choose the best time to read comments and responses to your writing. For example, don’t read it before you go into exam or public meeting. Find out the best time of the day and under what situation you can hand negative responses. Reading it before bed works for me because I can sleep it off. This might not work for others as it could deprive them sleep.
- Avoid responding to negative criticism right away. Let your emotion subside. Walk away do something else and come back once your immediate reactions has subsided.
- In case of serious engagement, always let one or two friends read your original message or your response to criticism before make it public. They can help make it more objective and detached from you.
Basically, to influence public opinion, you need to learn to live with criticisms, even the harshest and most unfair ones. We need to consume criticisms as avenues of learning as we fortify ourselves for further and more effective public engagement. As in all other endeavors of life, in the heated realm of civic and political engagement, we need to turn challenges into opportunities. And we need to persist in the face of resistance. We need to defy the unrelenting clenched fists of power. We need not only to speak up and let out what we believe in, but also to talk back to the powers that be when they come after us.
