This video clip of the Swiss finance minister’s speech during a parliamentary address has been viewed by more than 300,000 people on YouTube and other websites since Monday. What was so interesting about his speech that could garner that much attention from people all over the world? This got me really curious.
The video clip showed the Swiss finance minister, Hans-Rudolf Merz breaking into giggles and convulsing with laughter as he gave his speech about the import of cured meat. He started to crack up as he read a stream of unintelligible bureaucratic language in his script. Despite so, the outgoing finance chief’s hilarious delivery was greeted with howls of laughter and even thunderous applause from fellow ministers. Was he applauded for delivering a good speech? Did he successfully convey his intended message? Regardless, this incident has caught both the positive and negative attention of many others.
After watching the video clip, from a communication student point of view, I believe it wasn’t the content of the speech that had attracted the world’s attention. I believe the huge attention was attributed to the various inappropriate nonverbal cues that the minister had sent out while delivering his speech. The anomaly of this was the main reason that caught people’s attention.
Generally, we associate speech with verbal communication, but spoken words may have nonverbal properties associated with them as well. And in my opinion, Hans-Rudolf Merz’s speech was a good demonstration of how nonverbal cues can function with their verbal counterparts to achieve a negative effect. The sources of nonverbal stimuli stems from the vocal nonverbal stimuli, we can see this in the much punctuation of laughter, and giggles that the minister uncontrollably burst into, while delivering his speech; also the nonverbal cues originating from the minister’s body language, posture, mannerism, and facial expressions, all which constitutes to the personal nonverbal stimuli.
Were these nonverbal stimuli appropriate? I believe not so. Given the context and setting that the minister was giving his speech in, the speech should be delivered with utmost seriousness. For a minister who is addressing a nation wide issue, his mannerism and flippant attitude simply showed a great lack of sincerity. Clearly, the nonverbal message the minister had sent out contradicted with his verbal message, hence it was inappropriate. In my opinion, his speech was a sign of disrespect to the nation, and all politicians.
However, to many, nonverbal communication is subjective, as attaching meaning to these nonverbal cues inherently involves interpretations and judgments. Therefore, a specific cue may mean different in different contexts or to different people.
We can see this despite the contradiction of his nonverbal cues and verbal cues, not only were the audience amused, and responded positively, but also, his speech has now even prompted one maker of air-dried meats to advertise their wares with the slogan: Never lose your sense of humour.
In contrast, let’s put this in the context of Singapore, can you imagine this happening?
I can’t. In the history of Singapore’s parliamentary address I doubt there has been one such incident.
Hence, I conclude, the meaning of any nonverbal cue is always in the eye of the beholder to some degree.
Through this incident, we can see the pervasive and significant influence that nonverbal cues have in our communication. By giving out unintentional nonverbal cues (I am assuming the minister had no intention to send out those contradictory nonverbal cues), it could convey an immense range of specific meanings. Nonverbal communication is the unnoticed, but immensely powerful form of communication. In my opinion, having this awareness could help him or anyone, be a more knowledgeable and effective communicator.
His nonverbal cues might have been inappropriate here, but it did nonetheless attract the attention of many.
Had it not been for his fits of laughter that garnered so much attention, I probably wouldn’t have given two hoots about this speech. Which proves the importance of these nonverbal cues.
I believe this is why many children are sent for speech and drama classes from a young age, to learn how to communicate effectively because its partly the dramatization that makes what they say memorable.
This technique should be employed by all who are facing an audience, such as politicians as well as teachers, because they are responsible for sending across important messages, and the last thing they wish to happen is to lose their audience.
But maybe instead of bursting into laugher, one could choose to inject jokes, interesting anecdotes, gestures, to illustrate their points.
Hi Steph,
Thanks for your comments!
Indeed, the importance of non-verbal cues is clearly evident here, I’m glad you agree with me on this point!
And true enough, speech and drama classes do coincides with the effective learning and usage of verbal and non-verbal cues! This is a valid point for parents to send their kids for such beneficial classes!
You wont want to regret someday after getting on that podium and making a fool of yourself simply because of the lack of awareness of the signals you are sending out to others, through the inappropriate verbal and non-verbal cues one is engaging in.
Good point to note!!
wow ! interesting video ! To me, the video is without subtitles and i cannot understand whatever he is saying. therefore non-verbal cues here play a major role.
i am appalled by the way he delivered his speech. i think that it is a shame he did not portray himself as a serious minister giving a speech about such a serious topic. because of constant breaking into laughter, his non-verbal cues did not warrant my attention towards the content of his speech instead i was paying more attention to his expressions (laughing or crying i dont know) but it was funny at some moments. i guess non-verbal cues can have that comical effect but it should be up to the discretion of the speaker to know how to act and to be mindful of certain gestures and expressions.
Hi Amanda,
thanks for your comments!
Indeed, although the video is played in a different language that one may not understand, by simply analyzing and observing the speaker’s non-verbal cues, it truly aids in some understanding of the video!
Not only so, this is especially relevant in watching Tv programs of different languages. Take for example a hindi comedy, one may not understand the language but the non-verbal cues definitely help in the understanding in some ways or another!
Mytalkfest,
This video is hilarious! I cant stop laughing while watching the minister giving his speech.
That aside, after watching the video, I can now better understand why its viewership was so high! Indeed, clearly it was the non-verbal cues that attracted the viewers, rather than the content of the minister’s speech! Maybe this was a ploy to increase publicity?
Maybe advertisers or promoters can learn from this, unintended non-verbal communication in their work, to likewise garner publicity! From this post, we can clearly see how non-verbal cues are in action!
Hi Rebecca,
“maybe it was a ploy to increase publicity”
Well that is a new unconventional thought you have!
I certainly doubt the need for a ploy.
With regards to your comments about advertisers and promoters, indeed, I agree.
Through this simple political video, we can learn so much and apply them to our lives. The fact that non-verbal cues are actually very powerful is clearly much neglected in our society where much more emphasis is placed on verbal cues instead!
It is time to re-evaluate, for all we know we may reap even more benefits!
Haha. That was a pretty interesting video. I disagree with you that his mannerism or method of delivery was inappropriate though. Rather, bravo to him! Because he was able to capture the attention of his audience entirely, I say that his objective has been entirely met. The same ‘gospel’ holds true for advertising all over the world: it is no matter if your message goes down the gutter, as long as it STICKS in your target audience’s minds, you are golden.
Perhaps if Singaporean ministers were able to relay their slogans with a bit of humour, their message would ring truer for a significantly longer time.
Hi Bob,
Thanks for your comments!
However, I beg to differ in the statement,
“His objective has been entirely met”
Indeed as long as adverts stick in your intended audience mind, one is considered a success. However, I believe at the end of the day we still have to look at the context at which you are speaking about. If the impression is merely the comical aspects of the ad that people remembers, in my opinion the advertisement has failed. As ultimately, the main aim of adverts is to sell something, an idea, or a product. By selling the way the message is constructed, created, it does not fulfill advertisement’s key purpose.
The nonverbal cues here might have actually enhanced his message, in my opinion. Because the topic was so dry to begin with, perhaps that was his personal way of injecting some life into his speech, drawing his audience into the content of his address.
Unorthodox perhaps, but highly effective.
Hi Ivan Tan,
Thanks for your comments.
However, i beg to differ. Although it is true that to enhance one’s message, non verbal cues are most definitely the most suitable to injecting life to speech, it has to depend on context! And in this minster’s context, it is not appropriate!
As i mentioned above in my post, for a solemn and serious event, or occasion, the cues only turn out to be a disaster and reflects badly of the minister.
You said that the minister’s speech “was a good demonstration of how nonverbal cues can function with their verbal counterparts to achieve a negative effect”. I beg to differ. Instead, it created a very positive effect on the overall address.
Perhaps due to the fact that his fellow ministers could relate to his plight, what with the massive amount of bureaucracies in a single delivery, they then paid more attention to his speech.
If anything, his nonverbal cues created a diversion of the monotonous nature of his speech, which in all, should be a huge plus.
Hi Desmond,
I see that you share the same opinion as Ivan.
I see a valid point in your opinion, but as mentioned above, once again in context wise I do not see how this could result in a positive effect.
It could be positive in gathering attention and attraction, but It was clearly negative in successful communication.
Take for example, for myself, I only clicked to view this video out of curiosity as to why it gathered that much viewership. I viewed this video without the intention of any interest in the content of the minister’s speech!
I would like to add on that, I agree with your views.
I think it had created a hoo ha! In effect, raising awareness not only on the politics scene but also the identity of the minister as well!