Explanation vs Reason

by Editor · January 14, 2004

Communication experts, known loosely as spin doctors, try to present public figures to the media in the most favourable light possible.

Spin doctors are able to skirt around the hard and unpalatable facts of a case and to present us with an acceptable and, they like to think, reasonable motive for the way their principals achieve their ends. They spin a yarn rather than tell the whole truth in plain language.

This strategy recalls the Mad Hatter who, in an uncharacteristically logical moment, corrected Alice’s remark: “I say what I mean is the same thing as I mean what I say”, by retorting: “Not the same thing a bit. You might as well say that I see what I eat is the same thing as I eat what I see!”

In the wider world and, of course on our own continent, there have been more than a meagre number of prominent people falling under suspicion of deceiving the public. Some have been accused of unscrupulous cover-ups. Some have gone too far and been shown up to be liars.

The public and individual citizens deeply resent being deceived, because if we cannot trust our leaders and those who speak for them, we are threatened by loss of our freedom and human dignity.

On the other hand, the public understands that there are matters of confidence which may not be disclosed to others, not only in the public domain but also in private and professional affairs.

The state exists to advance and protect the good of all its members as a whole and as individuals. When events threaten the preservation of these ends, no matter how apparently insignificant, we all want to be certain of the facts, and not just an explanation embroidered by spin.

There is an explanation for everything and a reason for everything, and the two are rarely the same.

In 1978 South Africans were not surprised that their president, John Vorster, resigned after admitting he had lied to parliament. President Clinton used a mental restriction to evade the truth of his notorious moment with Monica Lewinsky. And now there are strong doubts about the veracity of President Bush and Premier Tony Blair and the reasons they gave for their decision to defy world opinion and attack Iraq.

The Church has not emerged without its own scandals, where senior churchmen in some places have been accused of irresponsibly evading admitting that they had been aware of cases of sexual abuse by some of the clergy.

In all such cases, public suspicion, and sometimes even certainty, that the truth was being concealed, preceded the eventual undignified attempts to regain credibility and public confidence.

Meaning what one says is very different from saying what one means.

The public cannot be deceived all of the time. We are increasingly aware that official stories are too often made of spun yarn not of bare facts. People in the street want to be given the reasons and not the explanations about things that will patently have an impact on our planet, our country and our Church.

We hope all our leaders and their agents are learning this lesson.