Storytelling: Learn This Weapon of Persuasion!
Nothing better to make you choose a coach or advisor like a soda at the convenience store. But how do we, both creators and readers, build ourselves with all these coexisting, silly, and contradictory injunctions that we’re supposed to internalize, intelligently, of course?
Storytelling in the helping relationship, combined with virtue-signaling, versus true legitimacy: a battle already lost? Let’s explore this with a bit of humor.
The goal is to play with perceptions, to wrap up successes, to elevate failures until they seem magical, celebrating diversity, uniqueness, aligning with values—or really any trending concept that’s good to use without delving too deeply into its meaning, even embracing your own contradictions. Yes, being inconsistent is actually encouraged! Isn’t that nice?
We’re also supposed to accept ourselves and show ourselves as we truly are; we must be authentic. “Authentic” as a concept is then conveniently linked—quite contradictorily—to the diktat of becoming the “best version of ourselves,” a question barely explored in depth today. But no problem, it goes down smoothly. Anyway, digging deeper bores everyone, so it’s better to stay on the surface, keep things entertaining.
Storytelling brings people together and is said to boost sales; it’s about creating a world with yourself, where even the most mundane daily life serves as the backbone for your “personal branding.” But, of course, stories run out of steam, so when there’s nothing left to say, it’s helpful to readers to recycle, rephrase, or rebrand what you’ve seen, read, or heard—without citing sources, of course, which makes it plagiarism.
Alternatively, if the solution is to reshuffle sources without questioning them, like “The Four Agreements” — highly popular with coaches for reasons that escape me — that’s not the answer either. Think critically about what you’re sharing: let’s take the third Toltec agreement, “Don’t make assumptions.” This directive is impossible since the brain, in its processes, naturally makes sensory, emotional, or cognitive inferences based on the data it has; you can’t stop it. Even dear Ruiz couldn’t escape it. It’s part of the sense-making process.
Wait, I almost forgot: it’s essential to be inspiring, convey emotions, be unique, vulnerable, impactful, and appeal to the smallest niche possible; otherwise, one isn’t credible.
It’s the transformation of a world where everything must become positive. Negativity is bad. It’s toxic. Even the word itself is unpleasant, as is contradiction. The current top ambassador of this perception-shifting trend seems to be the word “impactful.” I get mental nausea just from reading it repeatedly.
In case they don’t notice, you should tell readers how to consider what they’re reading: to be impactful, make sure you use the word in an authoritative tone in your post or article.
Sometimes, I wonder if personal development, entrepreneurship (both male and female, inclusivity is positive), social networks, etc., won’t drive a large part of the population a little mad or at least excessively demanding. Because many, even while criticizing certain aspects of this trend, seem not to see the void or connect the dots.
Excessively demanding, with potentially devastating effects on all our relationships, since if we pause for a moment and ask a simple question, doesn’t what we expect of ourselves day after day create a standard of representation we begin to expect in others?
The mechanisms of influence in storytelling are well-known, but perhaps the most dangerous aspect is this process of creating legitimacy out of nothing, or even from something false.
When empty, imaginary content holds more sex appeal and visibility than thoughts, analysis, and ideas—or even a Harvard study—hasn’t the time come to reflect?
Training, experience, ideas, method, approach, and thought have all become secondary. And yet, it’s precisely these elements that largely define the quality of support.
