listening. The framing of the question
assumes that the failure to win or to sustain a lead is the con- sequence of a physical and or mental failure and that addition- ally, the failure could have been avoided had the competitor been more focused or disciplined. The accusation equates imperfection with a mental or physical defect. The athlete should be aware
that the demeaning question is not intended to elevate her stat- ure or to honor the accomplish- ments that enabled her to be in the position to win in the fi rst place. You can’t ‘choke’ if you’re sitting in the bleachers. The question is cheap rhetoric, most likely made by a person of trivial achievement who, in Teddy Roo- sevelt’s words in his “The Battle of Life,” is one of those “cold and timid souls who have tasted nei- ther victory nor defeat.” The overarching rule in deal-
ing with an accusation of this ilk is never allow anyone to hurt
or demean you. Never. Several skills are available to defl ect the offensive question. You can as- sert analogies that demonstrate the absurdity of the question. For example, did quarterbacks Tom Brady or Peyton Manning ‘choke’ in the 2013 NFL playoffs because they didn’t win ‘the big one?’ The absurdity of the ques- tion is self-evident. Another skill is to appeal to facts, the logos, that will undermine the implica- tion. At your level of competition, the concept of ‘choking’ is self- refuting. Just being in the competi-
tion is conclusive evidence of such extraordinary skill and dis- cipline that the charge is rightly viewed as nonsensical. In my example, the winner hit one tar- get more than the person being questioned. Does that mean the winner also choked but only one less time? That response re- duces the accusation to silliness. Defl ection is another technique for constructing a response. The
May 2013 | USA Shooting News 49
interviewee can reply: “The win- ner is an outstanding competitor and today was his / her day.” The larger point the reader
should grasp is that even if ‘choking’ exists and even if you did it, allowing someone to tat- too you with that charge does not advance your interests. Worse, it transfers undeserved power to the person asking the question: the power to cause you to be seen in unfl attering terms. Don’t let it happen.
Give The Best Available Of All Answers Aristotle asserts in his Rheto-
ric that a speaker should make the best of all available argu- ments. That means the speaker should be aware of the many ar- guments that could be made but selects the best one in the con- text of the facts, the biases and prejudices of the audience and the speaker’s skill, character and reputation. The same principles apply in media relations: be ju-
Page 1 |
Page 2 |
Page 3 |
Page 4 |
Page 5 |
Page 6 |
Page 7 |
Page 8 |
Page 9 |
Page 10 |
Page 11 |
Page 12 |
Page 13 |
Page 14 |
Page 15 |
Page 16 |
Page 17 |
Page 18 |
Page 19 |
Page 20 |
Page 21 |
Page 22 |
Page 23 |
Page 24 |
Page 25 |
Page 26 |
Page 27 |
Page 28 |
Page 29 |
Page 30 |
Page 31 |
Page 32 |
Page 33 |
Page 34 |
Page 35 |
Page 36 |
Page 37 |
Page 38 |
Page 39 |
Page 40 |
Page 41 |
Page 42 |
Page 43 |
Page 44 |
Page 45 |
Page 46 |
Page 47 |
Page 48 |
Page 49 |
Page 50 |
Page 51 |
Page 52 |
Page 53 |
Page 54 |
Page 55 |
Page 56 |
Page 57 |
Page 58 |
Page 59 |
Page 60 |
Page 61 |
Page 62 |
Page 63 |
Page 64 |
Page 65 |
Page 66 |
Page 67 |
Page 68