Words That Work: A Workshop With Frank Luntz

Context and Premise: Frank Luntz (political consultant) opens by framing the session as an intervention against escalating political polarization, noting that current discourse has shifted from debate to aggressive, non-interactive monologues.

• Luntz cites polling data indicating the U.S. is more divided now than at any point in modern history, with 87% of those 65+ and 70th percentile of 18-29 year olds reporting this sentiment.
• He argues that perceived division drives divergent behaviors, creating a self-fulfilling prophecy of anger and disconnection.

Core Communication Strategy: Luntz proposes specific linguistic shifts designed to transcend ideology, build trust, and improve persuasive effectiveness.

• Opening with Questions: Rhetorical questions are more effective than declarations because they invite shared agreement (e.g., "How can America succeed without great schools?"); he advises making the opening statement a question to engage the audience.
• Acknowledgment: Use the phrase "I get it" early in communication to validate the listener's concerns and frustrations before presenting an argument.
• Visualizing the Future: "Imagine" is the most powerful verb for aligning perspectives, as it shifts the mental image from the speaker's vision to the listener's own.
• Reframing Security: Replace "security" (which implies threat) with "peace of mind" (which implies a positive internal state).
• Performance Metrics: Use the phrase "meaningful, measurable, track record of success" to signal reliability to investors and voters; the alliteration and specific adjectives enhance memorability.
• Inclusive Language: Replace "one" (implying compromise) with "together" to allow individuals to join a cause without surrendering their identity.
• Consequences of Failure: Utilize this framing (learned from George W. Bush) to make the audience fear the outcome of inaction or retreat more than the policy itself.
• Fact vs. Evidence: Prefer "facts" over "evidence-based," as evidence can be argued by opposing sides, whereas facts are verifiable truths; always cite the source, margin of error, and date to ensure credibility.

Lexicon Updates (Replace these terms): Luntz identifies specific words that trigger negative reactions or misunderstanding in the current political climate.

• Capitalism: Replace with "Economic Freedom"; "Capitalism" evokes greed and Wall Street, while "Economic Freedom" evokes Main Street and opportunity.
• Liberty: Replace with "Freedom"; "Liberty" is viewed as ideological and partisan, whereas "Freedom" is felt and desired universally.
• Balancing the Budget: Replace with "Ending Government Waste"; the former describes a process, the latter describes a result/impact.
• Human Capital: Replace with "Human Talent"; the former implies a price tag on workers, while the latter implies respect and appreciation.
• CEO: Replace with "Business Leader"; "CEO" signals profit margins to the public, while "Leader" signals problem-solving and values.
• Job: Replace with "Career"; "Job" implies a 9-to-5 transaction, while "Career" implies passion and long-term engagement.
• Customized: Replace with "Personalized"; "Customized" sounds financial/profit-driven, while "Personalized" sounds individual-centric.
• Profit: Replace with "Performance"; "Profit" raises suspicion of exploitation, while "Performance" acknowledges all business aspects.
• Sustainability: Replace with "Cleaner, Safer, Healthier"; "Sustainability" implies maintaining the status quo, whereas the public wants genuine improvement.
• Diversity: Replace with "Inclusion"; "Diversity" can imply taking people from specific groups, while "Inclusion" implies a collective "big hug" for everyone.
• Privilege: Replace with "Responsibility"; "Privilege" is often defensive, while "Responsibility" emphasizes the obligation to give back.
• Accountability: Use instead of "Transparency"; the public universally understands accountability, whereas transparency definitions vary.
• Tough Choices: Replace with "Setting Priorities"; the former sounds like a burden, the latter sounds like leadership.
• Commitment: Use only if followed by action; "Committed" is viewed as wishy-washy; "We will" is more definitive, though "Commitment" raises the bar for judgment.

Analysis of Social Media and Politics: Luntz identifies Twitter and social media as primary drivers of polarization.

• Platforms reward brevity, aggressiveness, and negativity; a negative tweet is significantly more likely to be retweeted than a positive one.
• He challenges candidates to publicly commit to running positive campaigns, noting that such a stance could distinguish a nominee in a crowded field.
• He critiques the media ecosystem, stating that outlets like Politico profit from conflict and "pounding the crap out of each other," which reinforces division.

Polling and Data Interpretation:

• Luntz critiques the reliance on state-by-state polling over national polling, noting that national polls were accurate in the 2016 election while state polls were not, yet media focuses on the former due to cost constraints ($25k-$100k per survey).
• He highlights a rising trend where 38% of Americans now view socialism more favorably than capitalism, driven not by a love for socialism but by a rejection of capitalism's perceived rigged nature.
• Data shows only 62% of Americans believe hard work leads to success, a historic low that undermines the core American narrative.

Interactive Session with Students: The session concludes with a Q&A involving NYU Abu Dhabi students.

• Students report seeing cross-cultural friendships (e.g., Indian and Pakistani students, Russians and Ukrainians) despite their parents' conflicts, suggesting the next generation may solve division through direct interaction.
• One student argues that terms like "socialism" are misused as insults; the U.S. should be a strong capitalist country that adopts social policies (like healthcare) without adopting the ideological label.
• The consensus among the young professionals is a desire for "shared prosperity" and a rejection of the binary choice between capitalism and socialism.

Forward-Looking Statements and Warnings:

• Luntz warns that if current trajectories continue, the U.S. risks "dehumanizing" and "delegitimizing" the opposition, teaching the next generation to reject rather than understand differing views.
• He predicts a future where the most successful political figure will be the one who refuses to engage in negative campaigning and focuses on "what I am for" rather than "what I am against."
• He expresses concern over the "identity politics" war being waged on both sides, which he argues is destructive to democratic cohesion.