Picture yourself at the edge of a watering hole or out foraging, tens of thousands of years ago. Suddenly, there’s a noise. You don’t see the source, but your brain senses danger. Your heart races, your adrenaline surges and your muscles tighten. Maybe a saber-toothed cat is lurking. Could be a giant short-faced bear. Waiting for confirmation of a predator might mean the end of you. This is fight-or-flight time, so you bolt to safety.
Long before humans had language, we had feelings. For our early ancestors, those impulses enabled them to avoid and evade threats, even invisible ones, so that they could live another day (and pass on their genes). It’s one reason why we’re here.
That ancient hardwiring still shapes how we react to messages today, which can create friction when trying to communicate and reason with an audience.
People have always operated with a fast brain (instinctive, emotional) and a slow brain (deliberate, analytical). Or, as some call it, our lizard brain and our wizard brain.
The neuroscience 101 version: the amygdala reacts in milliseconds, as a rapid response system, long before the conscious brain (our prefrontal cortex) weighs in. It’s why we ran from perceived perils, or today make snap buying decisions and only justify them after the fact with logic.
The “two brains” create a built-in tension. Persuasion isn’t just a logical exercise, and never has been. Reflex pulls us one way, reflection in another.
Where perception and reality collide
To take one example of how that plays out, just look at discussions around crime in Toronto.
In December 2025, the Toronto Star reported that the number of homicides in the city was at a 50-year low, and that most other major crime indicators – like assaults, auto thefts, break-and-enters and shootings – were also down. That’s the general trend across North America. Despite that, the article noted that 70% of respondents in one survey believe crime in Toronto is increasing.
There are all sorts of reasons why perception doesn’t match reality:
- Some news outlets sensationalize certain crimes, making them seem far more common. (Among the worst offenders is one 24-hour channel whose repetitive “breaking news” tone creates an endless loop of alarm. The only time I see it is on the TV in my dentist’s waiting room, and I’d rather have the hygienist’s pick in my mouth for an hour than watch 20 seconds of the broadcast.)
- Social media is built to amplify whatever pushes our emotional buttons, so crimes (even if isolated, even if trends are down) get outsized attention, and the resulting hot takes are rewarded.
- People often rely on intuitive beliefs and long‑held assumptions about who commits crime, which can outweigh actual evidence.
- For some, their mental model of crime is something dramatic, like a smash‑and‑grab or a random street assault, rather than less visible (yet prevalent) offences like corporate misconduct or financial fraud.
- Many elected officials, as the Star noted, routinely talk about being tough on crime as a key plank in their platform. That constant framing can push crime (and misplaced solutions) higher on the public agenda than the data supports.
The Star quoted a University of Toronto criminology professor, Scot Wortley, who said many people talk about the “good old days” when things were safer, which statistically was untrue. “If you talk to members of the public and tell them that crime is down, they will tell you that it doesn’t feel like it.”
Doesn’t feel like it.
That’s a reminder of the age-old challenge that communicators face. We need to be talking to both brains at once: the lizard and the wizard.
Meeting the messaging challenge
Keeping that in mind holds true whether you’re trying to sell a running shoe, inspire people to change health behaviours or share tips about financial well-being.
Any time you’re trying to reach people, don’t think of facts vs. feelings. It’s about hitting on facts and feelings. Here are eight ways to do both.
1. Lead with what people feel. As people process feelings way faster than facts, that affects what they’re willing to hear. So consider their hopes, worries, frustrations, etc. before you introduce the factual information you want them to absorb. That creates space for your message.
2. Frame facts in ways that align with identity. People’s opinions can be part of their sense of self. Show how your facts fit with their values or priorities.
3. Use storytelling as the delivery system. Strong narratives activate both emotional and analytical processing. Pick examples, metaphors or scenarios that let people feel the stakes.
4. Reduce the cognitive load. If information is dense or confusing, the emotional brain takes over. That makes it tough to get the nuance. Simplify structure and language – clear, concise and easy to follow – so your audience can think and not just react.
5. Anticipate and address emotional reactions. Some messages can in fact “threaten” someone, but psychologically, maybe in their status, their idea of security, their comfort with the status quo or their belief that change is possible. That can raise emotions like doubt, discomfort or defensiveness. Acknowledging those reactions can be disarming and lower resistance.
6. Show empathy. You can respect people’s feelings without necessarily agreeing with them. Meet your audience where they are, and then take them along.
7. Guide the audience into what’s next. Whatever emotions your message provokes, people might not know what to do with it. Give your audience concrete actions so they can translate their feelings into a way forward.
8. Build trust. Facts matter, but credibility is built on more than accuracy. When people perceive that you’re fair, reliable and understanding, they’re more likely to buy into what you’re selling.
Back in ancient times, our lizard brain helped us to quickly escape possible danger. Sometimes a rustle in the grass was a predator, sometimes it was just the wind. The lesson still applies: facts matter, but feelings move us.
Beware of weaponizing emotions
I want to be clear. I’m not saying that professional communicators should elevate feelings over facts. This isn’t either/or. They work in tandem, reinforcing each other and creating the conditions where facts can be heard.
As an aside, bad-faith actors do the opposite.
They manipulate emotions, unethically, to frame facts as optional or convince people to distrust evidence. We see too much of that in the political realm, on click-driven platforms, among ideological influencers, inside conspiracy communities, and in any corner of our world that thrives on confusing or enraging us.
There’s also a big chunk of the population that, at this point, simply can’t be reached. In public discourse, we might assume that adding another piece of data to an argument can tilt someone’s opinion. That’s ineffective when people are willfully ignoring the truth, or when their worldviews have been shaped by biases so entrenched (or by the misinformation/disinformation machine) that they resist logic.
So if you’re on the watch for modern-day predators, they’re not in the tall grass. They’re in plain sight, twisting facts and wielding emotions like a weapon. That’s what we need to outrun – and expose.
Stuart Foxman is a Toronto-based freelance writer, who helps clients’ products, services, ideas and organizations to come alive. Connect with me here on LinkedIn, or check me out at foxmancommunications.com where I share these blogs too. More original posts coming regularly about communications, information, motivation, writing, branding, creativity, media, marketing, persuasion, messages, learning, etc.
January 28, 2026