A few days ago I wrote to former President Bush speechwriter Michael Gerson asking him if he'd be up for doing a podcast interview about his Washington Post column declaring President Obama's rhetorical reputation in decline.
I got an auto reply in return:
"Thank you for your email. It is not possible for me to respond to each note, but I attempt to review them all, and I deeply appreciate your input. Sincerely, Michael J. Gerson."
Am I being peevish to ask: How is it possible to deeply appreciate something you're only going to attempt to review?
Good question. I guess I only “appreciate” it.
And I appreciate your response, Michael. (Deeply!) Now, how about that podcast …..
Maybe what he really means is that he deeply appreciates your recognition that he is so eminently worthy of your attention, even if he has automatically assumed that you are not likely worthy of his.
I hate it when people or organizations say that crap – like putting “we value your input” on some survey or feedback card. If I just doodle a pig on the card and submit it, will it be as valued as a card from somebody who actually provides substantive and thoughtful input? I certainly hope not.
A more honest auto-reply (for Gerson or anyone else) would read: “…I attempt to review them all and, assuming I actually read your email and it contains something constructive, interesting or useful, I will likely appreciate the input. How deeply I appreciate it will depend on the substance of what you have written.” Sure, it might sound pretentious. But honesty can come off that way sometimes.
If my input is negative, would he still appreciate it deeply?
Style! No substance!
How about, “If I feel like it, I’ll respond. If I don’t, I won’t.”
Because that’s honest and true.
How about not putting your e-mail at the end of the column in the first place if you’re unable to read what people send you?
Usually when you find yourself straining to find a nice way to say something, the problem is more fundamental than the phrasing.
Bingo.
It bums me out to know that little will come of these discussions, other than the fact that we who agree with David become further entrenched in our beliefs because we see yet one more example that supports those beliefs.
Oh well?
Tyler, take heart. This afternoon I queried Gerson on another matter, partly to see if he’d changed the auto response. I’ve gotten no response so far … but no auto response either!