There is more to the story of Dr. Ignaz Semmelweis than merely the fact that people will discount the possibility that they are, in fact, responsible for things that happen. Another part of the story, which is important to us, is found in how Dr. Semmelweis responded to criticism.
To put things mildly and diplomatically, Dr. Semmelweis did not respond well. Among other things, he began writing “open letters” that called out those who opposed him. Here’s a sample of the language that he used:
‘I know that since 1847 thousands of women and children have died, who would be alive had I not remained silent…. In this massacre you, Herr Professor, have participated. Murder must cease!…’
and:
Your teaching, Herr Hofrath, is based on the dead bodies of lying-in women slaughtered through ignorance…. If, sir, without having refuted my doctrine you continue to teach your students and midwives that puerperal fever is an ordinary epidemic disease, I proclaim you before God and the world to be an assassin, and the history of puerperal fever would not do you an injustice were it, on the grounds that you were the first to set yourself in opposition to my life-saving discovery, to immortalise you as a medical Nero.1
What I must admit here is that he is not entirely incorrect. The results of his handwashing techniques seemed to have completely turned the tide at the hospitals that practiced his techniques. However, his tone, as evidenced in his calling those who opposed him “medical Neros,” “murderers,” and “assassins,” was so wholly unhelpful as to leave one in doubt as to whether he actually increased resistance to his correct ideas merely because people refused to like him.
Writing online is one of the most difficult things that we do. We write like we speak — with tone. Unfortunately, we also read as we speak — that is, using the tone that we think that we might be using in order to express the words that we are reading. The result can be disastrous. Something I write in a sarcastic tone in my head can be interpreted in a wholly straightforward tone when read by my recipient. Likewise, something that was intended to be taken at face value by someone else can be misinterpreted as sarcastic, condescending, or otherwise insulting when I read it.
This is an especially important lesson to learn when dealing with policy compliance issues. These matters often leave people dealing with high levels of emotion. When services have been suspended, or a threat of suspension (or worse) is in play, people on both sides of that divide tend to become very emotional. Everyone seems (on occasion, at least) to immediately feel like the “other side” is just out to belittle them at best and take their jobs away at worst.
It is at moments like these when it is vitally important for professionals to walk away before hitting “Send” on that message. Time needs to be taken for reflection, and an editing process should be used to review the tone of the message for levelheadedness and accuracy. While it is perhaps true that business correspondence, in general, is no place for vitriol, sarcasm, or hyperbole, this is especially true when it comes to writing messages touching upon policy compliance. So, wait 10 minutes (or an hour) and consider asking someone else to review the message for tone and clarity.
Whether you are a policy compliance agent or you are dealing with the policy compliance people at your service provider, it’s always worth remembering that the person on the other side of the message is still a human being. They want to be treated with just as much respect as you desire to receive from them. Thus, it is very important that we take the time to write clearly, dispassionately, and succinctly.
Footnotes
- Ignaz Semmelweis, Two Open Letters to Dr. J. Spaeth, Professor of Obstetrics at the Imperial and Royal Joseph-Academy in Vienna, and to Royal Councillor Dr. F. W. Scanzoni, Professor of Obstetrics at Würzburg (1861), quoted in S. D. Elek, Semmelweis Commemoration: Semmelweis and the Oath of Hippocrates, 59 Proc. R. Soc’y Med. 346, 351 (1966). ↩︎
About the Author
Mickey Chandler is a Consultant & Attorney with over 28 years of experience in Email Deliverability & Privacy Law. He has a strong background in email authentication infrastructure (SPF, DKIM, DMARC), ISP and mailbox provider relations, anti-spam policy and compliance, CAN-SPAM and state anti-spam law gained through overseeing the Abuse & Compliance team at Salesforce Marketing Cloud, originating the ISP relations role at Informz (now part of Higher Logic), and working in the fight against spam since 1997. He holds a B.A. in Government, a B.S. in Computer Information Systems, and a J.D. from the University of Houston Law Center. He is a certified CIPP/US professional and a certified CIPM professional.
