Here's a good one: "I was opposed to (or supported) it from the very beginning!" To what "beginning" are you referring to? The beginning of your political career? The beginning of this campaign? The beginning of your sentence?
+Jake Pillsbury That's a great example! There's even more that can be added, too! To what extent of the thing in question do you oppose/support? The whole thing? The idea behind the thing? A minuscule (and seemingly insignificant) part of the thing? The way in which the thing is being presented?
+Jim Fortune Well, one of the reasons I wanted to make this video is that Trump is comfortable telling straightforward, provably wrong lies in a way that most politicians aren't. (I actually think this is one of the things that makes him seem more honest than traditional politicians.) Like, Trump is knowingly and provably lying about having served as his own spokesperson under the pseudonym John Barron/John Miller; he is knowingly and provably lying about how his tax plan will personally cost him more; etc. But the straightforwardness of the language is appealing in an age when professional politicians sound like they are hedging their bets. That said, Trump also uses a lot of the tricks of non-denial denials. For instance, he constantly criticizes the press and often describes negative articles about him as "libelous" and "false." -John
+vlogbrothers He also is practically a master of deflecting an accusation. When a group or person of questionable background and ethics endorses or supports him, he merely says: "I don't know anything about that." or "I don't know enough about them." Or recently, he said, "I don't remember ever being John Miller. I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about." Even though a simple google search will quickly show you that that's untrue. I'm sure this is an example of a non-denial denial, and it is definitely an example of deflecting accusations by feigning ignorance. All politicians do it to some extent, but Trump does it so comically that it's hard not to laugh.
+vlogbrothers Youre confused john, Trumps supporters know hes lying about the recordings, and we love it. Because we hate the media with a burning passion, and watching him troll them is hilarious and brings us great joy. Only the media could ever care about anything this dumb, so its clogging them up and confusing them. And it so damn funny. You underestimate trump, as many do, and this is why you fail to understand him and his popularity. To quote a meme: "Trump is playing 4d chess on a 3d chess board against people playing 2d chess"
+Snowball Simpson I'm almost waiting for someone to say that to me, so I can say that I believe that they believe that means something. I mean, I've got to have a little fun if I'm going to feel insulted.
+Snowball Simpson why is that a problem? as long as one has come to their opinions through logical deduction and fully belives that they are the correct things to be believing, why should they not stand up for their opinions? where i live, free speech is a treasured right, and if i dont have time to explain to you why i hold my opinions, saying im sorry you were offended is a polite brief way to end the conversation. your tone would indicate that you see this statement as offensive
William Langan To be fair, I think "I'm sorry I offended you" would be significantly better than the other one mentioned. At least that way there's an acknowledgement that their behaviour caused it even without involving guilt or regret. Although obviously a "well I never!" style tone and a goofy expression might ruin the whole thing...
The non-denial denial may be the standard response from politicians. But there is also the Tony Abbott response, which is to remain silent, shaking your head up and down slightly, and then say you have answered the question.
This reminds me of when I was little and my dad would stand in the bath if he didn't want to talk to someone who'd called him, so when I said "He's in the bath at the moment", to the caller, he wasn't technically making me lie!
That reminds me of something a history teacher told me, that kids who wanted to join the war effort but weren't old enough would write on a piece of paper "18" and put it in their shoe, so when they were asked if they were over 18, they could honestly say yes.
is it bad that i wouldn’t mind straight up lying instead of telling a half truth? both have the same effect, but telling a half truth like physically going into the bathtub requires more effort. might be cause my parents also had this philosophy
+Haley Ginn That's good. I think everyone does a little bit of this at some points. Maybe it's just me but it seems I can almost have myself convinced of my own lie when I word a statement as demonstrated in the video.
I can only thank "adults" (I say the word as if I'm not 25 already) like you for sharing your wisdom and experiences with younger people like me in a non-judgmental, non-belittling way that makes people like me eager to discover even more. Every time I learn something new a small frustration comes along with it that I haven't learned more yet, simply because I haven't been alive long enough to see these patterns across time for myself. I don't have as much to draw from in my personal history when I form opinions and outlooks on the world that I'm not necessarily familiar with, compared to someone in my same demographic who is 20 years older. As someone who is newer to the political process, I am just now discovering "the machine" that is our country's political-corporate marriage. Meanwhile, there are books that have been out for decades saying the same thing. It's as if we're fighting the same fight over and over again because there is no communication between generations. I believe you play a large part in bridging that gap. You pull from history in a way that puts our current politics into perspective for younger people, in a way that is so pleasant to watch. Really love everything you guys do.
+Penny Lane That's sort of the opposite. The "oddly specific denial" is incriminating in that you, yourself are providing far more details than your accuser. The "non-denial denial" is carefully worded so as to be vague enough that you could be denying anything. Two sides of the same coin, really--you could call the "oddly specific denial" an amateur attempt at a "non-denial denial".
I think "non-denial denial" acts as an umbrella term. It includes both oddly specific denials and oddly unspecific denials. Saying "That would be outrageous" doesn't actually specify whether or not it's true.
"Maybe the story is false because it claimed your met your mistress at noon, when in fact it was 12:06." John, you made mint tea come out my nose. Thank you, it was refreshing.
Great video about a great topic (like usual), but I was disappointed as I thought the title was "A Brief History of Non-Dental Denial". While this put many tabloid headlines into perspective, it had very little to do with dental denial, which I am very interested in. I expect more on it next week. Thank you.
What I love about the vlog brothers is that, although they address each other by their names, they are speaking to all of us so, when john is speaking, we are all Hank and, when Hank is speaking, we are all john. It really makes it seem like more of a communtiy
no mention of Rob Ford saying that he isn't a meth user!? (He backed it up saying something like "I wasn;t doing meth right then and there during that question"
"I did not say I wanted to eat her pussy, I would never do that, I'm happily married and I have more than enough to eat at home" -Rob "the legend" Ford
I feel like John Green is the kind of person who I could sit in the same room with for 10 minutes silently with and then walk out going "Wow, that totally answers all of my questions - thank you!"
This video is so good. Thanks for addressing this, John. It's something I feel intrigued and frustrated with regularly and thinking of it as both a longstanding cultural phenomenon as well as a linguistic "art" is much more productive than simply feeling angry.
I love the thumbnail. I love that it's you using air quotes, which perfectly summarizes the video, but also that it makes you look like you're doing Nixon peace hands.
Great video! And I also love that you can say things like "render things opaque" which I love as a phrase, without sounding pompous. I think that is an underrated skill.
I had a class in college, that I took as a "fluff" class which means it was suppose to be easy and just something to fill my day kinda thing, after a bit into it some people aka my mother thought that it was not a fluff because it was a "political speech" class. and it was very informative about just this kind of things. It is a class that only comes around election years, I loved it, more people should be able to take such a class so they understand what is really going on.
I totally agree with everything John said in this video. I think the non-denial denial stems from a mentality that if it will hold up in court you can say it to the public. While this is true, the last time I checked the public wasn't a courtroom. We, the regular people, expect that when you say something you aren't using technicalities to work around the problem. It works so well because after the story stops being headline news, the perpetrator can explain the specifics of the statement to the much fewer number of people that demand to understand. Well done John!
+123aflfan I can tell you from the heart that the history of non-denial denial is one which is questioned by some, while any claims that it's real to me are outrageous
I just had my central exam Dutch last friday, and there was an article about this topic. It took me a long time to actually get what they were talking about, now I'm here wishing you made this video a bit earlier cause you explain it so well!
The non-denial denial often keeps company with the non-apology apology. You know, the one where the person, attempting to mollify your pain, gives excuses for why they acted a certain way and then says something along the lines of 'water under the bridge', which, let's admit, is a terrible metaphor for the way your feelings might as well just off themselves. And absolutely under no circumstance will they say, "I'm sorry. I was wrong. Please forgive me." Didn't Hank make a video about this once several years ago?
You should look up an interview with the Clare hurling manager Davy Fitzgerald. He could be interviewed for maybe 2 minutes and yet say absolutely nothing. Truly spectacular
Thought provoking, for sure. I appreciate your use of a variety of accessible and fairly widely known examples. It illustrates just how ubiquitous it is, even though I didn't realize non-denial denial was a thing until about 3 minutes and 33 seconds ago.
Carlos Vargas It's a joke about how Clinton always misrepresents Sanders' stance on money in politics. Sanders is well-known for saying that we need to get big money out of politics entirely, while Clinton says that she agrees that, "we need to get dark money out of politics." Their stances might sound nice and identical, but the word "dark" gives us a lot of information about where Clinton actually stands. However, very few people ever catch it, which is disappointing to say the least.
"Language exists to facilitate communication ... but we have to remember that language can also be used as a tool to render things opaque." Well put, John, thank you. :)
it's amazing just how much I can get to love john when he speaks of stuff like this.... I mean everything is SO true and about politicians??? just brilliant!!!
Great video! This reminds me that if a company write 'we are strongly opposed to animal testing / animal cruelty' they and their products may very well be involved in animal testing. I am also opposed to me procrastinating but I still do it all the time.
+Sonnet Lockheardt I own more than one shirt but I really like the way this one fits with my background. Obviously. I WILL TRY TO VARY IT UP MORE IN THE FUTURE! -John
Not a denial, but this reminds me of Hillary Clinton saying she agrees with Bernie Sanders about getting "anonymous money" out of politics. She gets to say she opposes "money in politics" and makes it sound as if her position is the exact same as Sanders', but is actually referring to a very small and specific portion of that money
Reminds me of a line from _Yes Minister_, saying that Sir Humphrey (the quintessential bureaucrat) "saw language, not as a window into the mind, but as a curtain to draw across it."
Throughout the video, all I could think about was Hank saying, "Are you calling politicians liars?" and John replying, "I ain't calling them truthers!"
As a person who works in a very small governmental media outlet, i work with people who are experts in non-denial denial. Those sentences usually started with how great of a nation we are and how much experience (related or unrelated) they have.
+Sean Murphy Happy Birthday, Sean!! You should still vote even if John doesn't wish you happy birthday because it is the right thing to do as a citizen. Hope you have a great day!!!
+Sean Murphy I'm not John, but Happy Birthday, Sean! And please always vote, regardless of whether or not John responds to you or not. I hope you have a great day! :)
When I was in grad school we talked a lot about how people (especially politicians) use grammar to hide blame. Using the passive voice means that the subject of the sentence is hidden away. "Mistakes were made" is a far cry from "I made a mistake." Who made the mistake? Only that second sentence admits the guilt.
On a lighter note, here's one of my favorite non-denial denials from fiction. This is from the Daredevil comics. This was the press conference Matt Murdock gave after a newspaper (which actually was basing their story on hearsay based on rumor, and the fact that they got *anything* right at all, was kind of a miracle) published an article speculating that Matt was Daredevil: "When I was a young boy I saw an old man crossing the street. A truck was coming a little faster than it should have been -- but regardless of that fact, the old man didn't see it coming. I didn't know what else to do, so I jumped in front of the truck -- pushing the old man out of the way. He broke his hip and, thankfully, lived. I, on the other hand, was hit by the truck. "I broke my arm and one of my toes... and I was blinded for life. My optic nerves completely detached from my brain and were damaged beyond repair. "Boxing fans might know that my father was a middleweight named 'Battling Jack' Murdock. He died a couple of years after my accident. I was left orphaned and blind without a penny to my name. "I have had a lot to contend with in my life. I have coped with my handicap. I have put myself through law school. I opened a successful law practice with my partner here, Franklin Nelson. I have fought for each and every client who has come through our doors with the passion and integrity that they deserve... and I live my life in a fashion that would hopefully make my father proud. "Tough I faced every challenge life has sent my way, I never in a million years could have imagined that I would be forced to face this latest challenge. My life, and the lives of my loved ones, have been put in grave jeopardy because of a headline story that started in the Daily Globe newspaper published here, in New York City. The headline stated that I was the masked vigilante known as Daredevil. That I was faking my handicap, that I was pretending to be blind as a cover for my secret costumed life as Daredevil. This information is one hundred percent... untrue." -- Daredevil: Out, by Brian Michael Bendis and Alex Maleev
This vein of thought was what attracted me to my once favourite show Lie To Me. Then they cancelled it. :'( This is bringing back many memories.. I might just rewatch the whole series again. THANKS.
I was just thinking about this subject the other day, our language system is amazing in how far it has come with so many different ways to explain or describe other things, yet it seems like in the current world language is used more as a way to talk yourself out of trouble rather than conversing ideas and opinions with others.
Just been reading "American Gods" by Neil Gaiman and found this lovely little quote in it:- *"I believe that all politicians are unprincipled crooks and I still believe that they are better than the alternative."* (It's quickly followed by a fantastic observation on Schrödinger's Cat)
Cf. George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language". The last few sentences of this video seem like almost a direct quote from Orwell. I agree with everything in the video, but I think it would be a good exercise to apply these insights to politicians we may be inclined to admire. For instance, I love Bernie Sanders, but he does sometimes use the traditional political skill of avoiding or ducking or concealing the truth in response to some questions. Less than others, sure, but he still does it. Another example that sticks in my mind was when Kirstin Gillibrand pretended to be a populist and non-denial denied being a puppet of Wall St. on some late night show (Jon Stewart's Daily Show, maybe).
I honestly don't know how I looked at this title so many times over the last few days before watching it (sorry John, I was leaving it as a reward for after my finals!) and every time I thought it said "Non-Denial Dentistry." I was enraptured by the mystery and now that's just gone.
People saying "defamatory" just annoys me now. I took a communication law class and we spent a lot of time talking about defamation in relation to media and it's a word that public figures throw around so much that no one really understands what it is anymore
So the ad in front of this was a twelve-minute-long video of a guy making over a blowtorch what I originally assumed was a bong but what may have just turned out to be a glass paperweight in the shape of a lava lamp, but either way it was awesome and I watched the entire thing, so just congrats on the excellent ads y'all are getting or something.
excellent points, top to bottom. I have a lot of problems with Scott Adams, but his use of the phrase Weasel Words comes to mind. I hope we can put sufficient pressure on those who lead, or seek to lead, to speak plainly, truly, and directly.
It's called equivocation! I learned about it in my Shakespeare class because the people of the Jacobean period did this when asked whether or not they believed in the Anglican church; they would say something like, "the lord is my sovereign." We actually discussed what Bill said about Monica and how it was mostly equivocation and so yeah. That's what non denial denial is called. (If you want to know more I'm sure you can just google Henry Garnet equivocation and there will a bunch of stuff that pops up).
If I were ever a judge, all questions would be "YES" or "NO", and I would not let up until either the word "YES" or "NO", and only that word, was expressly said without any modifiers or qualifiers.
Then it's yes. The rest should be heard out though, since it could be something like "yes I did sign that contract, but I was under duress" or something like that.
+Andrew Sang It wouldn't stop non-denial denial, especially if they could convince the judge (and politicians are rich) to ask some specifically worded questions...
I love all your videos but this one stands out because I like thinking about words and how you can make something completly different based on the order on which you place them... writers syndrome I guess...
The watergate congressional hearings were absolutely fascinating. Almost every day for weeks stunning, bizarre or simply unbelievable shenanigans would be revealed. 'Watergate' and its many offshoots was a big messy soap opera, convoluted spy novel and character driven tragic-comedy all rolled into one. Definitely a fun topic of study. Unfortunately most of the 'reforms' that were enacted post impeachment have been watered down or gotten rid of entirely.
+Emma Robison Ah, the end of the year "Oh crap, we spent too much time in the 1800's! Let's make sure to highlight some of the 1900's before school ends!" ;) At least that's how my public education went most of the time.
Great video as always, John. :) I was distracted by the photo on your top shelf. Is that a photo of you vlogging "Adorable Baby and Insufficient Cartography"? #VlogbrothersThrowback
I'm sure a lot of people have read the Wheel of Time book series, but if you haven't there are a group of people in the book that are unable to lie. It's really quite interesting to see how the author uses things like the Non-Denial Denial so that this group can still sort of "lie", and how much you start to think over every word these people are saying, trying to see if there is a linguistic side-step in there.
Oh was that the big group of female casters? I didn't finish the series but I was able to appreciate their use of the non-denial denial.. pretty tricky
+Tyler Mitchell I did read that, and when I read it, I was thinking how very politic it was. The Aes Sedai were very manipulative much like politicians playing on our emotions and fears.
Here's a good one: "I was opposed to (or supported) it from the very beginning!" To what "beginning" are you referring to? The beginning of your political career? The beginning of this campaign? The beginning of your sentence?
+Jake Pillsbury That's a great example! There's even more that can be added, too! To what extent of the thing in question do you oppose/support? The whole thing? The idea behind the thing? A minuscule (and seemingly insignificant) part of the thing? The way in which the thing is being presented?
+Jake Pillsbury Well I think my record on it is very clear at this point.
+Elliott Collins That was painful.
+Jake Pillsbury Wait... dude are you turning against me? I WAS SUPPORTING YOU FROM THE BEGINNING DUDE, THIS IS NOT OKAY
+Jake Pillsbury "I was for it before I was against it."
-John Kerry
Trump is so much simpler. He just lies.
+Jim Fortune Well, one of the reasons I wanted to make this video is that Trump is comfortable telling straightforward, provably wrong lies in a way that most politicians aren't. (I actually think this is one of the things that makes him seem more honest than traditional politicians.) Like, Trump is knowingly and provably lying about having served as his own spokesperson under the pseudonym John Barron/John Miller; he is knowingly and provably lying about how his tax plan will personally cost him more; etc. But the straightforwardness of the language is appealing in an age when professional politicians sound like they are hedging their bets.
That said, Trump also uses a lot of the tricks of non-denial denials. For instance, he constantly criticizes the press and often describes negative articles about him as "libelous" and "false." -John
+FreedomForceUSA That was rude. I understand if you don't agree, but please don't use personal attacks. Thank you.
+vlogbrothers He also is practically a master of deflecting an accusation. When a group or person of questionable background and ethics endorses or supports him, he merely says: "I don't know anything about that." or "I don't know enough about them."
Or recently, he said, "I don't remember ever being John Miller. I have absolutely no idea what you're talking about."
Even though a simple google search will quickly show you that that's untrue.
I'm sure this is an example of a non-denial denial, and it is definitely an example of deflecting accusations by feigning ignorance. All politicians do it to some extent, but Trump does it so comically that it's hard not to laugh.
Bob B Provably = can be proved, not probably.
+vlogbrothers Youre confused john, Trumps supporters know hes lying about the recordings, and we love it. Because we hate the media with a burning passion, and watching him troll them is hilarious and brings us great joy. Only the media could ever care about anything this dumb, so its clogging them up and confusing them. And it so damn funny. You underestimate trump, as many do, and this is why you fail to understand him and his popularity. To quote a meme: "Trump is playing 4d chess on a 3d chess board against people playing 2d chess"
"I'm sorry you were offended" = "I stand by every word I said and I wish you would shut up about it"
It's the equivalent of punching someone and then apologizing that their skin is so delicate.
+Snowball Simpson I'm almost waiting for someone to say that to me, so I can say that I believe that they believe that means something.
I mean, I've got to have a little fun if I'm going to feel insulted.
+omegasavant Or a result of gently brushing someone by accident and then that same person screaming in agony and demanding an apology.
+Snowball Simpson why is that a problem? as long as one has come to their opinions through logical deduction and fully belives that they are the correct things to be believing, why should they not stand up for their opinions? where i live, free speech is a treasured right, and if i dont have time to explain to you why i hold my opinions, saying im sorry you were offended is a polite brief way to end the conversation. your tone would indicate that you see this statement as offensive
William Langan
To be fair, I think "I'm sorry I offended you" would be significantly better than the other one mentioned. At least that way there's an acknowledgement that their behaviour caused it even without involving guilt or regret.
Although obviously a "well I never!" style tone and a goofy expression might ruin the whole thing...
I can neither confirm nor deny that this is a great video
The non-denial denial may be the standard response from politicians. But there is also the Tony Abbott response, which is to remain silent, shaking your head up and down slightly, and then say you have answered the question.
+Justin dying xD
+Michael Gibb Seeing that was so funny. XD
+
This reminds me of when I was little and my dad would stand in the bath if he didn't want to talk to someone who'd called him, so when I said "He's in the bath at the moment", to the caller, he wasn't technically making me lie!
Soo funny! Great way to bend the truth.
+Emma Lane that is fantastic. If you don't mind I think I'll stick that in my handbook.
Jabberwock5 go for it. He'd also stand just outside the front door so I could say "unfortunately, he's just stepped out"!
That reminds me of something a history teacher told me, that kids who wanted to join the war effort but weren't old enough would write on a piece of paper "18" and put it in their shoe, so when they were asked if they were over 18, they could honestly say yes.
is it bad that i wouldn’t mind straight up lying instead of telling a half truth? both have the same effect, but telling a half truth like physically going into the bathtub requires more effort. might be cause my parents also had this philosophy
This is good. And not solely related to politics. I feel a little bit called out for my own non-denial denials, to be honest. XD
+Haley Ginn That's good. I think everyone does a little bit of this at some points. Maybe it's just me but it seems I can almost have myself convinced of my own lie when I word a statement as demonstrated in the video.
I can only thank "adults" (I say the word as if I'm not 25 already) like you for sharing your wisdom and experiences with younger people like me in a non-judgmental, non-belittling way that makes people like me eager to discover even more. Every time I learn something new a small frustration comes along with it that I haven't learned more yet, simply because I haven't been alive long enough to see these patterns across time for myself. I don't have as much to draw from in my personal history when I form opinions and outlooks on the world that I'm not necessarily familiar with, compared to someone in my same demographic who is 20 years older. As someone who is newer to the political process, I am just now discovering "the machine" that is our country's political-corporate marriage. Meanwhile, there are books that have been out for decades saying the same thing. It's as if we're fighting the same fight over and over again because there is no communication between generations. I believe you play a large part in bridging that gap. You pull from history in a way that puts our current politics into perspective for younger people, in a way that is so pleasant to watch. Really love everything you guys do.
"Non-denial denial?" I thought this was called "oddly specific denial."
Like "No, I totally did not sleep with your best friend that Saturday!"
+Penny Lane That's sort of the opposite. The "oddly specific denial" is incriminating in that you, yourself are providing far more details than your accuser. The "non-denial denial" is carefully worded so as to be vague enough that you could be denying anything. Two sides of the same coin, really--you could call the "oddly specific denial" an amateur attempt at a "non-denial denial".
I think "non-denial denial" acts as an umbrella term. It includes both oddly specific denials and oddly unspecific denials. Saying "That would be outrageous" doesn't actually specify whether or not it's true.
+Penny Lane That reminds me of this...
tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/SuspiciouslySpecificDenial
"Maybe the story is false because it claimed your met your mistress at noon, when in fact it was 12:06." John, you made mint tea come out my nose. Thank you, it was refreshing.
You too, John, are almost beautiful in your linguistic sophistication
Great video about a great topic (like usual), but I was disappointed as I thought the title was "A Brief History of Non-Dental Denial". While this put many tabloid headlines into perspective, it had very little to do with dental denial, which I am very interested in. I expect more on it next week. Thank you.
The vlog brothers are the best source of news.
"I have never been, nor will I be responsible for casting The Fault in Our Stars movie".
JOHN IS CASTING TFIOS IRRESPONSIBLY!!!
What I love about the vlog brothers is that, although they address each other by their names, they are speaking to all of us so, when john is speaking, we are all Hank and, when Hank is speaking, we are all john. It really makes it seem like more of a communtiy
I am always impressed at John's talent for spinning words in an interesting, nuanced, and informative manner.
no mention of Rob Ford saying that he isn't a meth user!? (He backed it up saying something like "I wasn;t doing meth right then and there during that question"
+David J. Fulde Omg, that one...
"I did not say I wanted to eat her pussy, I would never do that, I'm happily married and I have more than enough to eat at home" -Rob "the legend" Ford
"This financial plan is an outrageous demand and has too many damn pages for any man to understand" has a whole new meaning to me after this video.
I feel like John Green is the kind of person who I could sit in the same room with for 10 minutes silently with and then walk out going "Wow, that totally answers all of my questions - thank you!"
There are enough instances of politicians using logical fallacies that someone could probably make a whole TH-cam series on it. I'd watch that.
This video is so good. Thanks for addressing this, John. It's something I feel intrigued and frustrated with regularly and thinking of it as both a longstanding cultural phenomenon as well as a linguistic "art" is much more productive than simply feeling angry.
This has become my favorite channel. I love listening to you guys talk.
I love the thumbnail. I love that it's you using air quotes, which perfectly summarizes the video, but also that it makes you look like you're doing Nixon peace hands.
Great video! And I also love that you can say things like "render things opaque" which I love as a phrase, without sounding pompous. I think that is an underrated skill.
I'm not going to make a dumb joke about being early. I'm just gong to watch John talk and be happy.
I had a class in college, that I took as a "fluff" class which means it was suppose to be easy and just something to fill my day kinda thing, after a bit into it some people aka my mother thought that it was not a fluff because it was a "political speech" class. and it was very informative about just this kind of things. It is a class that only comes around election years, I loved it, more people should be able to take such a class so they understand what is really going on.
Love the bipartisan aspect; not too leftie or conservative, both sides are equally guilty.
I totally agree with everything John said in this video. I think the non-denial denial stems from a mentality that if it will hold up in court you can say it to the public. While this is true, the last time I checked the public wasn't a courtroom. We, the regular people, expect that when you say something you aren't using technicalities to work around the problem. It works so well because after the story stops being headline news, the perpetrator can explain the specifics of the statement to the much fewer number of people that demand to understand. Well done John!
John, is that the beer can sword from Paper Towns on the shelf behind you?
(That was a great scene!)
+Lewis Webster That is the very beer sword that Austin Abrams himself held in the film! -John
+vlogbrothers that is really really cool that you get to keep the props! Love these episodes, keep them coming!
+vlogbrothers This goes hand in hand with plausible deniability.
There is no history of non-denial denial!
+123aflfan I can tell you from the heart that the history of non-denial denial is one which is questioned by some, while any claims that it's real to me are outrageous
I just had my central exam Dutch last friday, and there was an article about this topic. It took me a long time to actually get what they were talking about, now I'm here wishing you made this video a bit earlier cause you explain it so well!
Man I just listened to the Anthropocene reviewed episode on this... but did 2016 John even know he’d make the podcast?
The non-denial denial often keeps company with the non-apology apology. You know, the one where the person, attempting to mollify your pain, gives excuses for why they acted a certain way and then says something along the lines of 'water under the bridge', which, let's admit, is a terrible metaphor for the way your feelings might as well just off themselves. And absolutely under no circumstance will they say, "I'm sorry. I was wrong. Please forgive me." Didn't Hank make a video about this once several years ago?
John is one of my favorite human beings in the entire universe.
You should look up an interview with the Clare hurling manager Davy Fitzgerald. He could be interviewed for maybe 2 minutes and yet say absolutely nothing. Truly spectacular
When you click the notification so fast you thought that the title was "Non-Dental Denial."
Thought provoking, for sure. I appreciate your use of a variety of accessible and fairly widely known examples. It illustrates just how ubiquitous it is, even though I didn't realize non-denial denial was a thing until about 3 minutes and 33 seconds ago.
Thanks for this, John. It frustrates me to no end how politicians get away with stuff simply because they create an atmosphere of ambiguity.
Hillary Clinton: ''I agree with Bernie, we need to get 'dark, unnacountable' money out of politics''.
YES! I wish more people caught how she always says that. XD
what?
Carlos Vargas It's a joke about how Clinton always misrepresents Sanders' stance on money in politics. Sanders is well-known for saying that we need to get big money out of politics entirely, while Clinton says that she agrees that, "we need to get dark money out of politics." Their stances might sound nice and identical, but the word "dark" gives us a lot of information about where Clinton actually stands. However, very few people ever catch it, which is disappointing to say the least.
Andrew S Yes. Perhaps even more dissapointing since I am not even American (from the Netherlands, I spend way too much time with foreign politics) ;)
+EXCUSE ME This x10000000000000
"Language exists to facilitate communication ... but we have to remember that language can also be used as a tool to render things opaque." Well put, John, thank you. :)
it's amazing just how much I can get to love john when he speaks of stuff like this.... I mean everything is SO true and about politicians??? just brilliant!!!
Great video! This reminds me that if a company write 'we are strongly opposed to animal testing / animal cruelty' they and their products may very well be involved in animal testing. I am also opposed to me procrastinating but I still do it all the time.
non denial denials are a denial for real denialing
No, it's denialing for denial-non-denial denialment. You're just in denial.
+Peyton Young Yo Dawg!
+Ramuk11 ok what does denial mean again
Watch Dexter or House of Cards. Those shows are full of non-denial denials.
I cant tell if John filmed a whole bunch of videos at the same time or if he only owns 1 shirt. Somehow both possibilities are equally probably to me
+Sonnet Lockheardt I own more than one shirt but I really like the way this one fits with my background. Obviously. I WILL TRY TO VARY IT UP MORE IN THE FUTURE! -John
+vlogbrothers lol
***** I like the plaid though. And the purple. Just buy more varied purple checked/plaid shirts!!
I need a whole documentary on this.
Not a denial, but this reminds me of Hillary Clinton saying she agrees with Bernie Sanders about getting "anonymous money" out of politics. She gets to say she opposes "money in politics" and makes it sound as if her position is the exact same as Sanders', but is actually referring to a very small and specific portion of that money
Reminds me of a line from _Yes Minister_, saying that Sir Humphrey (the quintessential bureaucrat) "saw language, not as a window into the mind, but as a curtain to draw across it."
Great Kenyon speech, John!
Throughout the video, all I could think about was Hank saying, "Are you calling politicians liars?" and John replying, "I ain't calling them truthers!"
As a person who works in a very small governmental media outlet, i work with people who are experts in non-denial denial. Those sentences usually started with how great of a nation we are and how much experience (related or unrelated) they have.
Can you wish me a happy 18th birthday John? I'll promise to always vote if you do
+Sean Murphy Happy Birthday, Sean!! You should still vote even if John doesn't wish you happy birthday because it is the right thing to do as a citizen. Hope you have a great day!!!
+Sean Murphy I'm not John, but Happy Birthday, Sean! And please always vote, regardless of whether or not John responds to you or not.
I hope you have a great day! :)
+Sean Murphy Happy birthday! Please vote regardless of John's response, and I hope you have a fantastic day!
+Sean Murphy Happy Birthday Sean Murphy!
+Sean Murphy Happy Birthday! I'm not John but please vote anyway!
This was an absolutely fantastic video.
Hillary Clinton should watch this video.
+Electrix Should = "morally obligated to"...?
I won't know how narrowly (or widely?) louisaahh is trying to use the word "should"?
Hillary Clinton straight up lies. This video won't help her
+louisaahh No, not Hillary should watch that Video but everyone old enough to vote! Most politions know that kind of stuff...
+Mike Hermida Not really. Hillary is into more traditional political deception, whereas Donald just straight up lies.
+louisaahh Why? Specify what she lied about.
This reminds me of George Orwell's essay: Politics and the English Language. Great points.
Thanks for picking examples from both parties. Class act.
When I was in grad school we talked a lot about how people (especially politicians) use grammar to hide blame. Using the passive voice means that the subject of the sentence is hidden away. "Mistakes were made" is a far cry from "I made a mistake." Who made the mistake? Only that second sentence admits the guilt.
Educational, thought provoking and useful as always.
eloquently and clearly spoken. Thanks John!
language is such a fascinating thing :)
It's interesting to see and look closer into what kind of language politicians use. Good video!
Now I have a word for that thing I talk about all the time!
On a lighter note, here's one of my favorite non-denial denials from fiction. This is from the Daredevil comics.
This was the press conference Matt Murdock gave after a newspaper (which actually was basing their story on hearsay based on rumor, and the fact that they got *anything* right at all, was kind of a miracle) published an article speculating that Matt was Daredevil:
"When I was a young boy I saw an old man crossing the street. A truck was coming a little faster than it should have been -- but regardless of that fact, the old man didn't see it coming. I didn't know what else to do, so I jumped in front of the truck -- pushing the old man out of the way. He broke his hip and, thankfully, lived. I, on the other hand, was hit by the truck.
"I broke my arm and one of my toes... and I was blinded for life. My optic nerves completely detached from my brain and were damaged beyond repair.
"Boxing fans might know that my father was a middleweight named 'Battling Jack' Murdock. He died a couple of years after my accident. I was left orphaned and blind without a penny to my name.
"I have had a lot to contend with in my life. I have coped with my handicap. I have put myself through law school. I opened a successful law practice with my partner here, Franklin Nelson. I have fought for each and every client who has come through our doors with the passion and integrity that they deserve... and I live my life in a fashion that would hopefully make my father proud.
"Tough I faced every challenge life has sent my way, I never in a million years could have imagined that I would be forced to face this latest challenge. My life, and the lives of my loved ones, have been put in grave jeopardy because of a headline story that started in the Daily Globe newspaper published here, in New York City. The headline stated that I was the masked vigilante known as Daredevil. That I was faking my handicap, that I was pretending to be blind as a cover for my secret costumed life as Daredevil. This information is one hundred percent... untrue."
-- Daredevil: Out, by Brian Michael Bendis and Alex Maleev
If John ran for president he would have my vote, from the hundreds of vlogbrothers videos I've seen he has always been honest and kind.
This vein of thought was what attracted me to my once favourite show Lie To Me. Then they cancelled it. :'(
This is bringing back many memories.. I might just rewatch the whole series again. THANKS.
I was just thinking about this subject the other day, our language system is amazing in how far it has come with so many different ways to explain or describe other things, yet it seems like in the current world language is used more as a way to talk yourself out of trouble rather than conversing ideas and opinions with others.
Just been reading "American Gods" by Neil Gaiman and found this lovely little quote in it:- *"I believe that all politicians are unprincipled crooks and I still believe that they are better than the alternative."*
(It's quickly followed by a fantastic observation on Schrödinger's Cat)
Cf. George Orwell, "Politics and the English Language". The last few sentences of this video seem like almost a direct quote from Orwell.
I agree with everything in the video, but I think it would be a good exercise to apply these insights to politicians we may be inclined to admire. For instance, I love Bernie Sanders, but he does sometimes use the traditional political skill of avoiding or ducking or concealing the truth in response to some questions. Less than others, sure, but he still does it. Another example that sticks in my mind was when Kirstin Gillibrand pretended to be a populist and non-denial denied being a puppet of Wall St. on some late night show (Jon Stewart's Daily Show, maybe).
I honestly don't know how I looked at this title so many times over the last few days before watching it (sorry John, I was leaving it as a reward for after my finals!) and every time I thought it said "Non-Denial Dentistry." I was enraptured by the mystery and now that's just gone.
I'm really enjoying all the political videos you guys have been doing, very much based solely on the facts, I hope you guys do more :)
I can neither confirm nor deny that Hank will make a video about the Glomar Explorer next week.
Wow. This hits differently in 2020.
what you guys do means more to me than what i can explain.... thanks
"You want to look smart, answer their questions with your own, rhetorical question. Then answer *that* question."
You guys were a question on our scholars competition today!
Really interesting and informative! Thanks for this! It reminds me of the Rob Ford scandal we saw in Toronto several years ago.
So true! Thanks John! Extremely well worded as always
People saying "defamatory" just annoys me now. I took a communication law class and we spent a lot of time talking about defamation in relation to media and it's a word that public figures throw around so much that no one really understands what it is anymore
At first I read 'denial' as 'dental' and I was so unsurprised given John's history with dentistry 🙈
This is why I love John
So the ad in front of this was a twelve-minute-long video of a guy making over a blowtorch what I originally assumed was a bong but what may have just turned out to be a glass paperweight in the shape of a lava lamp, but either way it was awesome and I watched the entire thing, so just congrats on the excellent ads y'all are getting or something.
2:48
"Truly, truly, truly outrageous"
+Michael Wang Now i'll have this song stuck in my head for the rest of the week...
I admire both of you for how many things you can do in parallel professionally *and* earn money for all of them.
excellent points, top to bottom. I have a lot of problems with Scott Adams, but his use of the phrase Weasel Words comes to mind. I hope we can put sufficient pressure on those who lead, or seek to lead, to speak plainly, truly, and directly.
I love non-denial denial. It's hilarious because it's so easy to see right through it.
Although it is really terrifying when no one calls someone out on it.
+Ionlymadethistoleavecoments you have the best username I've ever seen 😂
+Rebecca O' Sullivan thanks
+Ionlymadethistoleavecoments *cough*DonaldTrump*cough*
+Ionlymadethistoleavecoments Education should teach so much more on calling out non-denial denial.
It's called equivocation! I learned about it in my Shakespeare class because the people of the Jacobean period did this when asked whether or not they believed in the Anglican church; they would say something like, "the lord is my sovereign." We actually discussed what Bill said about Monica and how it was mostly equivocation and so yeah. That's what non denial denial is called. (If you want to know more I'm sure you can just google Henry Garnet equivocation and there will a bunch of stuff that pops up).
If I were ever a judge, all questions would be "YES" or "NO", and I would not let up until either the word "YES" or "NO", and only that word, was expressly said without any modifiers or qualifiers.
Then it's yes. The rest should be heard out though, since it could be something like "yes I did sign that contract, but I was under duress" or something like that.
+Andrew Sang It wouldn't stop non-denial denial, especially if they could convince the judge (and politicians are rich) to ask some specifically worded questions...
First video of this channel I've ever seen, and now I'm subscribed.
I love all your videos but this one stands out because I like thinking about words and how you can make something completly different based on the order on which you place them... writers syndrome I guess...
Crash Course linguistics?
+Drenchilada9 Please?
+Drenchilada9 Yes! As a linguistics major, nothing could be more helpful. Although the Ling Space is a good linguistics channel.
YES please!!
You know John is a real writer when this happens
Or my favorite: "Depends on what your definition of 'is' is." A glorious moment in non denial denial history.
Observation: John has worn this shirt in 3 of his latest videos on this channel(including this video)
WE ARE STUDYING WATERGATE LITERALLY RIGHT NOW
The watergate congressional hearings were absolutely fascinating. Almost every day for weeks stunning, bizarre or simply unbelievable shenanigans would be revealed. 'Watergate' and its many offshoots was a big messy soap opera, convoluted spy novel and character driven tragic-comedy all rolled into one. Definitely a fun topic of study. Unfortunately most of the 'reforms' that were enacted post impeachment have been watered down or gotten rid of entirely.
+Emma Robison Ah, the end of the year "Oh crap, we spent too much time in the 1800's! Let's make sure to highlight some of the 1900's before school ends!" ;) At least that's how my public education went most of the time.
Liked, Subbed, and now watching your previous videos like a netflix binge session. :) Thank you sir :)
+Casey P Rare to see people who don't already know these guys!
This was a very enjoyable video John. Thank you!
This reminds me so much of George Orwell's "Politics and the English Language"
Great video as always, John. :)
I was distracted by the photo on your top shelf. Is that a photo of you vlogging "Adorable Baby and Insufficient Cartography"? #VlogbrothersThrowback
I'm sure a lot of people have read the Wheel of Time book series, but if you haven't there are a group of people in the book that are unable to lie.
It's really quite interesting to see how the author uses things like the Non-Denial Denial so that this group can still sort of "lie", and how much you start to think over every word these people are saying, trying to see if there is a linguistic side-step in there.
Oh was that the big group of female casters? I didn't finish the series but I was able to appreciate their use of the non-denial denial.. pretty tricky
+Tyler Mitchell I did read that, and when I read it, I was thinking how very politic it was. The Aes Sedai were very manipulative much like politicians playing on our emotions and fears.
George the Elder gave us Dan Quayle, Clarence Thomas, and the phrase "plausible
deniability"...