In my public speaking I often like to spend time on the subject of the Global Village, the McLuhan metaphor that describes our inter-connected global society. I cite events such as the OJ Simpson trail, the death of Princess Diana, and 9/11 as a few examples among many that illustrate the times when millions of people come together and share their emotions simultaneously across the continent or even the planet.

This week there were two such events, and what I find fascinating is the difference between how the two were understood and experienced.

The death of Heath Ledger was an example of an open emotional moment. Within seconds of the announcement being broadcast, I felt a wave of emotion and saw ripples of reactions across social media like Facebook and Twitter.

Instantaneously news of his body being found spread across society so that everyone was aware and brought together in temporary shock. I refer to this as an open emotional moment because it was clear exactly what it was about, Heath Ledger, and it was accessible to the pop culture to the point of being ubiquitous. Anyone who was connected that day heard this news via their social media.

In contrast, this week's past capital market volatility, with most stock exchanges falling hundreds of points, was also an example of an emotional moment. However this event was not only closed, but also deliberately deceptive.

As it turns out, there's speculation now that the rapid global decline in stocks was a result of frantic activity on the part of Société Générale SA to sell off bad positions resulting from a $7 Billion fraud supposedly perpetrated by Jérôme Kerviel.

Could it be that as the business world spent the early part of the week in a shared panic about economic recessions the truth was more in the cover-up of a multi-billion dollar boondoggle? There are suggestions now in the business press that the US Federal Reserve (and similarly the Bank of Canada) were rash to drop interest rates and have only served to encourage further bad lending practices.

The difference between these two extremely emotional moments this week is clearly a result between transparency and secrecy, or rather open and closed systems.

When Heath Ledger's death was announced open systems spread the word and the responding grief was quick and effective. While shocking, we are able to experience that shared moment and move on with our lives content that the dead have been honoured.

In contrast however, since the Société Générale SA did not immediately disclose the situation they were in, global capital markets went haywire, their closed emotional moment resulting in chaos since nobody was clear as to why such a large global liquidation sale was going on.

Would things have been different if Jérôme Kerviel had been exposed earlier and the extent of the fraud known before the markets went on their wild ride? I certainly think so.

There are many arguments to be made in favour of an open society, and the increasing reality of these shared emotional moments is a particularly strong one.

These are powerful moments where we become conscious of the connectedness our current civilization is cultivating. Having these events shroud in fear and confusion will only result in bad things happening.

The answer instead is to ensure that when they do happen people become aware of what the cause is and why. In an open system this is easy to do, and often happens automatically.

It's in closed systems that the opposite can be true, and the attempt to control the truth or protect secrets can ultimately create the type of negative shared emotional moments that can topple economies and regimes.