Please or Register to create posts and topics.

She used Daniel Pink's teachings and got "cancelled" for it

When taking Daniel Pink's Masterclass, this was one of the teachings of his that I noted:

The Contrast Frame (The “Contrast – Misreaction Tendency” Cognitive Bias)

“…we understand things in relative terms, not in absolute terms. What does that mean? All right. Is this expensive? Compared to what? Am I tall? Compared to who? IS this a good place to visit? Compared to what [where]? The single most important question in sales and persuasion is not ‘what’s in it for me’? That’s what we’re taught in sales training classes. ‘What’s in it for me?’ That’s an important question. It’s the second most important question. The most important question in sales and persuasion is, ‘Compared to what’? The way you make something clear is by contrasting it with something else, not letting it sit on its own.”

The example Pink used here is the story of the blind beggar, sitting by a sign that reads, “I am blind”. And, a man named Rosser Reeves takes that beggar’s cardboard sign and writes, “It is springtime and…I am blind”. And, as the legend goes, coins start piling up for the blind beggar. So, in terms of the contrast principle, as Pink puts it, “We understand this person, he can’t see. Compared to what? Compared to being someone like me on a beautiful spring day and seeing everything.”

Enter, Gina Carano.

She steps out of her Charmer style of dominance and into the Charismatic in order to deliver a message. A message that touches on a touchy topic. A message directed to some people who weren't too happy about the storming of the capitol:

As Daniel Pink said, we understand things not in absolutes, but in relative terms. So, Gina decided to compare the trump supporters being hated for their political views to Jews being hates for their political views.

And, what do you think happened?

Twitter lit up with the hashtag #FireGinaCarano. And, she was immediately fired.

The main problem in her approach wasn't only the timing (people were still shocked by the event), but her choice to compare one dark situation to another dark analogy.

Trevor Noah leverages the contrast bias all of the time, but he'll take the touchy topic he wants to make a point about and compare it to a light-hearted analogy (usually the analogy also doubles as a joke).

Here, Trevor Noah compares the republican party wanting to move past the capitol hill riots to a terrorist wanting to watch the Croods.

He also seems to be able to avoid backlash since he often leverages a mix of the Charmer and Jester styles of dominance.

And, as a final note, it also feels like this approach can make Trevor Noah appear as a de-facto leader for some—his show's episodes works as summaries of current events (i.e. I'm the leader that summarizes what's important for you and leaves out what's not).

Matthew Whitewood has reacted to this post.
Matthew Whitewood