Five Steps Toward Writing an Effective Rebuttal
By Douglas Newton
One: Frame your Argument with Charm
Psychology tells us that we are all more likely to listen to a message when that message is presented with civility and respect. This presents the first challenge and something of an overall law to remember when writing a rebuttal to an article. No one wants to listen to abuse or name-calling. Arguments ultimately stand on their own merits, and as such may stand separate from how one may feel about a subject. This is, of course, easier said than done. After all, indignation is what stirred my interest in the problem of misrepresentation of AOM in the media in the first place. Emotion can be useful to energize the creation of an argument (scribbling madly in a brainstorming process). Eventually, however, emotional balance and poise prove essential when writing a letter to another human being. Be kind and your message may be heard.
Two: Offer Counter-Arguments
What do you wish to accomplish? You can draw in the receiver by demonstrating an effort to understand his/her perspective. Persuasive letters often begin not with one’s own assertions but rather with an acknowledgment of another’s perspective. Follow this acknowledgement with a well-phrased invitation to consider another point of view. You are not “correcting somebody” so much as expanding a reporter’s perspective to include information you feel has been unfairly neglected.
Here’s an example:
In your Wall Street Journal article entitled “Leave Alternatives at the Fringe”* on May 1st, 2008, you wrote “Acupuncture deals with ‘energy systems’ that have no scientific basis.” You are correct when you note that acupuncture works with energy or “qi.” Perhaps you found it difficult to validate the existence of qi in your research into the subject matter. I direct you now to www.aaaomonline.org, a site that features many articles that may enhance your understanding of what scientific evidence for acupuncture currently exists.
This is a good beginning to a letter, for the most part. It mentions the article by name and date, and assumes a formal but friendly tone. It considers the reporter’s point of view and even adopts some of Mr. Smith’s perspective. There is one major flaw, however. Directing a reporter to a web site homepage only gets him/her to a general place where all kinds of information compete for limited attention. We want to entice Mr. Smith to pick an apple from a specific tree, not send him into an orchard equipped with a ladder and some vague directions. Which fact brings me to...
Three: Be as Specific as Possible
Let’s try again. This time we’ll write to Ms. Jones. Imagine you are writing a letter rebutting an article that says no studies exist linking acupuncture to pain relief.
In your article in The Independent entitled “Pincushion Therapy?”* on February 6, 2008, you wrote, “When acupuncture can gather evidence from serious universities demonstrating anything approaching scientific legitimacy on pain relief, people may begin to take it seriously.” I understand that finding concrete evidence for acupuncture may have been difficult to find. Perhaps I can help on that account. In fact, several studies demonstrate evidence for acupuncture helping to relieve pain. If you kindly visit http://www.aaaomonline.org/default.asp?pagenumber=44, you may read one such study reporting on how acupuncture induces pain relief:
“Researchers at the University of Maryland in Baltimore, with the support of the Office of Alternative Medicine (OAM), [OAM is the National Center for Complementary and Alternative Medicine (NCCAM) predecessor], conducted a randomized controlled clinical trial and found that patients treated with acupuncture after dental surgery had less intense pain than patients who received a placebo. Scientists at the university also found that older people with osteoarthritis experienced significantly more pain relief after using conventional drugs and acupuncture together than those using conventional therapy alone.” (emphasis mine)
Four: Ask For Clarification in Print, Offer Help and Close Nicely
Now that we have broadened the perspective on the specific matter at issue, we need to close quickly and ask for a specific solution. Sometimes it isn’t clear precisely how to address reporting errors, but most reporters do value accuracy in reporting. Assume the best. Appealing politely to journalistic integrity affords you a better chance of eroding the subtle walls of emotional resistance. Let’s finish the previous letter (charmingly, but with a solid request):
Thank you for your time. I will contact you in a month to determine what you have decided.
Yours truly,
William Shakespeare, LAc, OMD, TTB (Time-Tested Bard)
866-455-7999
william@shakespeareacuclinic.com
Five: Follow Up
Most of us pave the road to hell with our good intentions. “Life is robust,” Bekah Christensen, AAAOM’s ED, always says. It doesn’t hurt to say that you will follow-up. And then. . .well. . .do follow up. People are more likely to take action if they know that a message may be repeated, rather than go away, if nothing happens.
And while I’m repeating myself, please know that the people most capable of representing the truth and beauty of AOM are those who practice it. Kindly get involved and help us to help you represent the profession. If you don’t, who will?
Contact: dnewton@aaaomonline.org
*All articles referenced in this article are fictional examples.