Text Meets Text: Preaching with Real Time Feedback

 

    Text Meets Text: Preaching with Real Time Feedback

I had an amazing experience last week while preaching the North Central University (http://www.northcentral.edu/) chapel with about 800 millennials in the house. At the beginning of the talk, I announced my cell number and asked them to text me while I was speaking with comments on the presentation. I learned this technique from my friend Sam Farina (http://www.samfarina.com/) and have attempted it only one time previously, and that with an older crowd of about 50 people in a local church.

Text Meets Text: Preaching with Real Time Feedback

I had an amazing experience last week while preaching the North Central University (http://www.northcentral.edu/) chapel with about 800 millennials in the house. At the beginning of the talk, I announced my cell number and asked them to text me while I was speaking with comments on the presentation. I learned this technique from my friend Sam Farina (http://www.samfarina.com/) and have attempted it only one time previously, and that with an older crowd of about 50 people in a local church.

 

With the first group we stopped for around ten minutes in the middle of a seminar to make an opportunity for the younger people in the room to train the older ones in texting, the goal of which was to send their first text message to my phone. When over a dozen messages came in almost simultaneously, my “smart” phone had a brain freeze and spontaneously reset itself with no help from me. I think I may have witnessed the first documented case of a PDA experiencing a mental breakdown. The point of the exercise was to provide a case study in reverse mentoring.

But no such issues occurred at NCU. (Of course, I requested that stalkers and anyone with a chainsaw in the trunk of their car refrain from writing down my number.) During the 30 minutes for which I spoke, about 50 text messages arrived. One female student told me later how delighted she was that texting was actually encouraged during a time when it is normally banned.

The next day, I developed a “box score” from the feedback received in real time (and from some messages that straggled in hours later). I pushed back on some of the generic, “liked your talk” messages by asking for details. That really helped. For example, when I asked one student by text reply how he/she evaluated the talk as effective, the response was very direct: “The fact that no one in chapel was asleep.”

In general the messages were positive, except for the person who thought I was too much like listening to “Christian stand up comedy” and another critic who simply blurted, “You smell.” There were also several comments on parts of the talk that were not clear, which they weren’t. I attribute the absence of more negative to the lack of anonymity and the fact that those who don’t like what you do generally just ignore the presentation and move on.

A group of about a dozen young-ish leaders then helped me to process the box score, working through questions of “what” are millennials like (the easy part) and “why” are they that way (the hard part). It’s interesting to watch a 30 year old struggle to understand a 20 year old. We talked through the idea that thinking missionally means getting past the surface traits of a group’s culture and probing the reasons, the things that only the citizens of that culture can teach us.

So, here are some of the communication lessons our processing group discussed after reviewing a summary of the real time feedback provided in the 50 texts:

1. It’s all about the fashion. This group of millennials sees culture and message as inseparable. There were more mentions of my new hipster glasses than of Jesus, more references to my shoes (Skechers) than to the Scripture. (I bought the former to avoid losing unused medical reimbursement funds, and the latter because they were really cheap.) This perspective does not make young adults nonspiritual or superficial. Issues of “loook and feel” are as naturally a part of their language as bulleted lists are of mine. I got the sense that they actually cannot see me apart from my L & F profile, almost as if they were processing me like a video, rather than listening to a live talk (which raises some interesting possibilities of its own--do I really need to show up in person? What if I did, but showed a video of myself anyway?).

2. Humor can have no victim but me. Self-deprecation is the way to go, especially if it reverses any sense of entitlement based on age or position. My favorite text message was, “The glasses should stay. It takes the focus off your bald spot.”

3. The optimal large group communication genre is stand-up comedy. My critic was exactly right. The style of the talk (which was on the missional church) definitely derived from stand up. I’m thinking through this for the first time, but it seems like the value here is that humor is by definition a part of the genre, as is irony and that sort of coy word play that under-25’s seem to enjoy as I do (provided it includes multiple references to TV and film). As one texter put it, “The humor commands attention.” Most of the positive messages, in fact, contained references to the talk being funny.

4. The highest value is authenticity. The “A” word is used so much now as to be almost inauthentic. What I mean by it here is a visceral commitment to the message that invites the listener/texter to look over the precipice with you into something that could rock their whole word. Bible autopsies don’t cut it, so to speak. This kind of A.... seems to require a high level of spontaneity, is helped by using either no notes or a manuscript (for word control), and feels like a roller coaster ride when you’re in the middle of it. What it lacks in polish is made up for in energy, sincerity, and personal commitment. Or as one messenger put it, “You were real.”

5. We are peers, not speaker and audience. A very strong sense came through the cryptic texts that the students regarded me as a peer, not chronologically or culturally, but positionally. In other words, the fact that I was on the platform only raised me above them in terms of architecture. One text put it this way: “Hey, Earl. I have funky glasses too. That means we’re both fabulous.” Speaking with a group of these young adults, then, resembles the internet where all communication is lateral. I can say anything to them (even be extremely confrontational) so long as I never do so to elevate my own position.

6. I have to make the first move. When I am outside the country I do what I can to learn even a few words of the local language or some of the customs that are natural for the area. People who live wherever I am visiting seem to respect even awkward attempts at communicating with them. My NCU experience would say the same thing. On message said, “It’s very cool you text.” Another expressed support for my use of a Coldplay mp3 ("Clocks") during the talk. The point here is not the technology, but the symbolic value of making even a clumsy effort at using the native symbol system. My instinct is that if I take the first chance, they will respond by taking a chance on me.

My first experience with real time sermon feedback leaves me feeling three things strongly:
1. They thought they were in school, but the truth is that I was.
2. I have no idea how the other 750 students responded to the talk.
3. I am definitely going to do this again.

Thanks, Sam.

About the Author:  Earl Creps has spent several years visiting congregations that are attempting to engage emerging culture. He directs doctoral studies for the Assemblies of God Theological Seminary in Springfield, Missouri (http://www.agts.edu).  Earl and his wife Janet have pastored three churches, one Boomer, one Builder, and one GenX. He speaks, trains, and consults with ministries around the country. Earl’s book, Off-Road Disciplines: Spiritual Adventures of Missional Leaders, was published by Jossey-Bass/Leadership Network in 2006. Connect with Earl at http://www.earlcreps.com .