Like many Americans, I am concerned about a trend in today’s media. Too often, news coverage goes beyond reporting what someone said and ventures into telling us what that person meant or even what they were thinking. Pundits on television seem unable to resist editorializing a short video clip. They present the clip and then immediately add their interpretation, sometimes going so far as to explain the speaker’s “true” motivations. It seems designed to evoke a reaction.

Depending on which “camp” you sit in, the viewer either nods in agreement or becomes agitated by the clip and commentary. Either way, the television station wins. The audience is engaged, emotions are stirred and ratings go up. But the deeper issue is this: When did we assume we could know what someone else is thinking? The honest answer is that most of the time, we do not.

A Lesson in Assumptions

A short story from a recent trip to the golf driving range helps illustrate the point.

It was crowded that afternoon. A man walking by with a bucket of golf balls suddenly tripped and fell. The bucket flipped, and golf balls scattered in every direction. A young man hitting balls next to me was closest to the fallen golfer and immediately went to help him. He reached down to assist him, asking, “Are you alright?”

To everyone around, the reaction from the fallen golfer was surprising. He became irritated and pushed the young man away.

Meanwhile, the rest of us scrambled to gather the golf balls rolling in all directions. Once the bucket was refilled, the man took it and walked to a nearby bench, sitting alone without speaking or thanking anyone.

A few minutes later, I noticed him stand up and walk back over to the young man who had tried to help him. He apologized for being rude.

The truth was, he had not been angry at the young man at all, he had been embarrassed. I understood that feeling immediately. As we get older, none of us wants to appear unsteady or have others see us as a doddering old man. Sitting on that bench for a few minutes gave him time to reflect. He realized he had been rude to someone who was simply trying to help.

As he walked away, he glanced toward me. I nodded, as if to say, I understand and you did the right thing by apologizing. He nodded back, almost as if to say, “Thanks, from one old guy to another.”

That moment stuck with me because it was a reminder: what we think someone is feeling or thinking is often wrong, especially in the moment.

From Assumption to Jobsite Risk

Interestingly, I am currently involved in an anti-trust lawsuit, and as the lawyers prepare me for trial, they repeat the same advice: Do not speculate about what others were thinking. Stick to what was said. Do not guess at motivations or assume intent—even if opposing counsel tries to bait you.

That is interesting advice, especially considering how many commentators, broadcasters and politicians come from the legal profession. Perhaps we could all benefit from remembering an old saying: When you assume, you make a fool out of yourself and a jerk out of me.

Maybe that explains why so many news outlets today feel polarized—too much assumption, too much interpretation and not enough straightforward reporting of the facts.

On construction projects, misunderstandings happen every day. A contractor may assume an architect intended one thing. An inspector may assume a contractor can cut a corner. A subcontractor may assume a general contractor is being difficult or unfair. In many cases, the reality is much simpler: Someone misunderstood the details, reacted to pressure or was simply having a bad day.

But on a jobsite, those assumptions can lead to rework, delays and disputes. Acting on perceived intent instead of verified information often escalates small issues into larger problems.

After nearly two decades writing this column, I have learned that most people in our industry are trying to do the right thing. But when we start assuming motives instead of asking questions, problems tend to grow larger than they need to be.

Which brings me back to the title of this editorial: “I Know What You’re Thinking.” That is exactly the claim many commentators make every day. But perhaps the better question is this: Do we really?