When you're trying to come up with a good approach to reporting on the bleeding edge of where the conversation's moving, you're just leaving a lot of people who aren't on the bleeding edge of that conversation out.
Sentiment: NEGATIVE
I always found that if you handle a problem in a benevolent way and a transparent way and involve other people, so it's just not your personal opinion, that people get to the other side of these difficult conversations being more enthusiastic.
You want people walking away from the conversation with some kernel of wisdom or some kind of impact.
In life, people talk at right angles. One asks a question, and the other replies in part, then uses that part to move the conversation to something else. Everyone has an agenda, has something they're trying to say - or not say.
What I've learned is that people have a desire to talk after the first line of reporters go away, and they are no longer speaking out of shock.
The reason why so few people are agreeable in conversation is that each is thinking more about what he intends to say than others are saying.
I don't like getting people upset, so that's not my goal. But I like putting people in situations where how they respond says a lot about them.
Making small talk about what someone is wearing is just another form of unsolicited feedback.
People take things too personally - I don't. If someone says something about me, I let it go. But unfortunately, everyone isn't like that. So I'm trying to be more diplomatic - but people always want a headline from me!
Frequently the more trifling the subject, the more animated and protracted the discussion.
Direct confrontation, direct conversation is real respect. And it's amazing how many people get that.