Communication

Mackay, H 1998, ‘The injection myth', The good listener: better relationships through better communication, Pan Macmillan, Sydney, pp. 7-26.

I absolutely loved this article as it made me reflect on communication and my own circumstances. Personally, I am an avid followed of political events. My younger brother, on the other hand, switches off when it comes to anything on this subject. When communicating, the mindset of the person must be taken into account and the reason my brother does not listen is because he is simply not interested in politics and so when I communicate something political, this message is not simply put into his brain. Effectively, it goes in one ear and out the other. Read my summary below on The Injection Myth. 

The Injection Myth, by Mackay (1998), discusses communication and its effects on other people. It begins by giving a scenario from a one-sided view on a person and later, the other’s point of view is established. Margaret, the main protagonist, says ‘…no one around here listens properly to me’ (Mackay 1998, p.10). This is a clear example of the injection myth, as is ‘I make myself perfectly clear… and nothing I say seems to make an impression at all’ (Mackay 1998, p.10). A person who is an ‘injectionist’, according to the article, believes that all people are passive, and the message they receive will be injected into their brain and they will understand what the other is saying. In actual fact, ‘…people only pay close attention to things which directly concern them’ (Mackay 1998, p.11). The communicator needs to treat people as active, and it is what the receiver does with the message that counts, not the giver. In other words, the onus is on the receiver, not the giver. Further, the article discusses how injectors will repeat themselves. As suggested, when the author says ‘We so easily fall into the trap of thinking we made ourselves clear’ (Mackay 1998, p.23), we find it baffling that we ought to repeat ourselves. This is because, as was mentioned above, the onus for communication is on the receiver, not the giver. To summarise, the author ends with the First Law of Communication, which is a great way to conclude this important piece and how it is extremely relevant to the Injection Myth: ‘It’s not what our message does to the listener, but what the listener does with our message, that determines our success as communicators’ (Mackay 1998, p.26).

What are some implications for us as teachers in considering the injection myth?

• Make sure what we say resonates with students to effectively communicate message
• For example – “If it's not raining we will go to the zoo”
• The important piece of the message is at the end. In my journalism unit in first year, we were told the first five (5) words in a newspaper article will determine whether a person reads on. I feel this could be applied to verbal communication. Think of the difference between “John, we should all be sitting down in our seats” and “John. Seat”. To change the above example to hook the listener, place the important part of the message near the beginning. Therefore, the message becomes: “We'll go to the zoo if it stops raining”.
• Messages that are communicated to people must take into account the interests, feels and needs of the person
• In regard to the First Law of Communication – “It’s not what our message does to the listener, but what the listener does with our message, that determines our success as communicators” – we need to ask students if they have understood the message. We don't want to, as the reading suggests, fall into the trap of repeating ourselves because continually injecting the same message will not cause people who initially did not understand to then suddenly get it. What we are communicating may need to be done so differently and this is something we teachers need to be aware of :)