As the US nears what is shaping up to be a contentious political campaign season, and the rhetoric, vitriol, and semantic arguments multiply, (it depends on what you mean by 'is'), it can get pretty next to impossible to know who is telling the truth, and who is just pushing their agenda.
And even the agenda pushers are not always easy to read. They could be promoting themselves, some faceless political party, some corporate interests, or even a labor union. In the current American political arena, the 'truth' is an elusive concept. Last night I heard a pundit observe that his particular viewpoint on a hotly debated topic had 'the ancillary benefit of being true'. Cool, some ancillary truth to go along with the normal pile of drivel he will be shoving in your direction.
The larger point is every communication in politics, at work, and even at home has some kind of an agenda behind it. We try to inform, persuade, educate, direct, etc. all the time. Sure, most of us (I hope) are not trying to constantly outmaneuver our rivals at work, or are trying to promote some kind of worldview that may or may not be based in truth or what's 'right'.
Aside - not everyone who disagrees with you is 'dangerous', 'radical', or some kind of threat to order and security. Smart people can disagree. Get over it.
But still, I think it a good reminder, and kind of refreshing of this pundit to so blatantly call out the fact that sorting out how much of what he spouts is actually 'true' is certainly a challenging proposition. In the political arena, where side-taking dominates and colors perceptions of the truth more than anything else, it perhaps is not so difficult to come to a conclusion. At work, and when managing and trying to lead teams and individuals, it is maybe not so simple.
As an employee it may not be easy to know if what's being fed to you is a lie, the truth, or just something something in between that has 'the ancillary benefit of being true'.
As a manager or leader how much 'ancillary truth' are you sharing today?