Speak to Lead

Persuasion: Dangerous Message - Joe Friday vs Clarence Darrow at Political Bloggers Conventions

"Just the facts, ma'am."* The phrase made famous by Dragnet's Sgt. Joe Friday, raised its deceptive head last week at the Netroots Nation (liberal) and RightOn (conservative) political bloggers annual conventions in Pittsburgh.

Toward the end of a Q&A session a woman stood up, thanked the presenters and said, "The facts are on our side. I realize now if we just get them out there, we will win."

In the non-partisan tradition of this blog, I won't be specific as to which of the conventions I attended. I did, however, expect the dangerous thinking exemplified above to be unique to us. I was therefore gratified to see an attendee of the other convention quoted in the newspaper professing the same misguided thinking.

Facts do not produce converts.

Facts are too susceptible to fabrication, half-truths, intentional and accidental misrepresentation, interpretation, skepticism, disinterest, rationalization, and denial. 

Facts can be useful in conversion, but only when used as part of a process, never as a stand alone.

If we want converts, we need to meet them where they are. We need to deal with their concerns, their perceptions, their assumptions, and their experiences. We need to build a relationship of genuine concern and trust.

And we need to offer, in the words of Bush 41, "that vision thing" so people find a better way.

Clarence Darrow, one of the most prominent American defense attorneys in the late 18- and early 1900s, summed it up well: "Don't give the jury reasons to acquit your client. Make them want to acquit him and they will provide the reasons." 

* Joe Friday actually never said the phrase he made famous. But he came close. What he did say was "All we need are the facts."

Media training/Reputation Protection: Reporter's Words You Don't Want to Read

Apple's Worldwide Developers Conference 2009 (WWDC 2009) opened today in San Francisco. It's described by Apple as "the premier technical event for developers and IT professionals innovating with Apple platforms."

One thousand Apple engineers; 5,000 developers. A new iPhone expected to be announced.

And here is the first tweet from the Wall Street Journal's legendary dean of technology, Walt Mossberg (shown here with Steve Jobs):

waltmossbergAt Apple #WWDC where it's all about iPhones and AT&T service is overwhelmed. You'd think they'd have prepared better.

OUCH! "You'd think they'd have prepared better."! What a great first impression.

I don't have any inside info from AT&T as to what went wrong. Maybe they thought they had done everything possible. Coverage would be, it seems to me, an obvious concern. 

Still, having observed how often the obvious gets overlooked, I wonder if coverage was on anybody's checklist.

Where were the reputation czars for AT&T and it's iPhone partner, Apple?

Media Messages: Sound Bites Gone Wild - Over 30 Sound Bites in 1 Statement

One form of sound bite is the use of vivid words - words that evoke the five senses and emotions or are different (often made up). 

This is one of the most frequently used sound bite forms and generally involves using one, two or at most three vivid words. 

So it was with great delight that I read in The Washington Times the following statement by Congressman Ron Paul (R-Texas). It contains nearly 40 clauses or phrases, any one of which could be lifted out and used as a sound bite or quote. Most of these sound bites are vivid words, but a couple of cliches, absolute statements and a prediction also appear. 

To make it easier for you to keep score, I've numbered the sound bites.

1) Could it be a bad dream or a nightmare? 2) Is it my imagination, or have we lost our minds? 3) It's surreal; it's just not believable. 4) A grand absurdity; 5) a great deception; 6) a delusion of  momentous proportions, 7) based on preposterous notions and on ideas whose time should never have come; 8) simplicity grossly distorted and complicated; 9) insanity passed off as logic; 10) grandiose schemes built on falsehoods with the morality of Ponzi and Madoff; 11) evil described as virtue; 12) ignorance pawned off as wisdom; 13) destruction and 

impoverishment in the name of humanitarianism; 14) violence, the tool of change; 15) preventive wars used as the road to peace; 16) tolerance delivered by government guns; 17) reactionary views in the guise of progress; 18) an empire replacing the republic; 19) slavery sold as liberty; 20) excellence and virtue traded for mediocrity; 21) socialism to save capitalism; 22) a government out of control, unrestrained by the Constitution, the rule of law, or morality; 23) bickering over petty politics as we collapse into chaos; 24) the philosophy that destroys us is not even defined. 

25) We have broken from reality; 26) a psychotic nation. 27) Ignorance with a pretense of knowledge replacing wisdom. 28) Money does not grow on trees, 29) nor does prosperity come from a government printing press or escalating deficits. 30) We're now in the midst of unlimited spending of the people's money, 31) exorbitant taxation, 32) deficits of trillions of dollars spent on a failed welfare/warfare state; 33) an epidemic of cronyism; 34) unlimited supplies of paper money equated with wealth...

Of course, 35) it could all be a bad dream, a nightmare, and that 36) I'm seriously mistaken, overreacting, and that my worries are unfounded. I hope so, 37) but just in case, we ought to prepare ourselves for revolutionary changes in the not-too-far-distant future.

Phew! What a bonanza for a reporter!

Leadership Under Fire: Answering Tough Personal Questions Positively

Unprepared interviewees.

They seem to be ubiquitous in the news these days. Every election, at almost any level of politics, seems to have at least one candidate who stumbles when asked a question about embarrassing personal or professional conduct.

And it's not only politicians. Business executives, professional athletes, and plain Joes suffer the same fate.

I'm often asked why people, many of them experienced public figures, aren't prepared when the inevitable questions come.  

Former New York Governor Eliot Spitzer, who was forced to resign after being caught in a sex scandal, provided an answer.

When asked by NBC Today Show's host Matt Lauer whether it had ever occurred to him his actions might be exposed, Spitzer replied,

Persuasive Speaking: Reputation Protection Part 3 - Five "Quick Fixes" to Safeguard Your Client

In Part 1 (Do Speakers Need a Reputation Czar?) I pointed out that many high-profile speakers end up looking bad because their personal staff and public relation advisers fail to make sure the speaker is ready for "prime time."

In Part 2 (Why Staff & PR Pros Fail to Protect the Speaker) I identified six triggers that produce poor counsel.

Here then are 5 tactics you can do to protect your speaker's reputation:

1. Be clear about what the speaker wants to accomplish in the speech or interview. Thendetermine what conditions you'll need for that to happen. In Secretary Geithner's Wall Street presentation, for example, a major goal was to reassure investors that the administration's rescue plan would work. A necessary condition to get investor buy-in was a detailed plan. Instead, investors got generalities. 
2. Become the audience. Ask the questions they'll be thinking: So what? Who cares? See your speaker's actions through the listeners' experiences. Perhaps using the corporate jet does save money for General Motors in terms of the CEO's time, but that's not part of the listeners' experience.  Note: If you're too close to the speaker and having trouble thinking like the audience, bring in someone who can. 
3. List your speaker's vulnerabilities. As you think like the audience, you'll discover soft points in the speaker's thinking or inconsistencies in his or her actions. Write them down. Then decide how to eliminate or neutralize them.
4. Know your speaker's comfort level and don't exceed it. For example, in Governor Jindal's response to President Obama's Address to Congress, the staging required him to speak directly into the camera for several minutes while standing in place. That unnatural staging would have been hard for even a good actor to pull off, let alone Governor Jindal. 
5. If something doesn't work in rehearsal, change it. In these high-profile situations, rehearsal time is often short. If your speaker is still having trouble with a word, phrase, or movement after two or three tries, change it or move on. Trying to "get it right" is unlikely to succeed and will lead to heightened frustration.

  Applying these five tactics well will help your speaker accomplish the desired objective.

Persuasive Speaking: Reputation Protection Part 2 - Why Staff & PR Pros Fail to Protect the Speaker

In Part 1 (Do Speakers Need a Reputation Czar?) I pointed out that many high-profile speakers end up looking bad because their personal staff and public relation advisers fail to make sure the speaker is ready for "prime time."

Why is it that even competent, often highly-paid, professionals fail the speaker? Here are six reasons I've observed:

1. Too close to the speaker, the issues, and doing business as usual. Out of touch with the audience. To the auto execs, flying the corporate jets to DC was normal. To members of Congress and the American taxpayer it was wasteful and arrogant.
2. Underestimating the symbolic impact of the speech, and not understanding that symbolism is much more than just the speech text.
3. Being unable to get the speaker to commit the time to rehearse, arrive early, and prepare mentally.
4. Complacent. Operating with an everything-will-be-fine attitude and therefore not aggressively anticipating potential problems and developing contingency plans. 
5. Unable to be blunt in telling the boss or client that something isn't working, especially if what isn't working was the boss or client's idea. 
6. No experience as a director and performer able to recognize all aspects that make a persuasive speech a powerful experience.  

Hence the need for a specialist, a "reputation czar."

In  Part 3 I'll give you a list of "quick fixes" that even an inexperienced staffer can use to protect the speaker's reputation.

Persuasive Speaking: Reputation Protection Part 1 - Do Speakers Need a Reputation Czar?

Recently Pfizer announced a new position--VP, Corporate Reputation and Policy Communication. Its role? Build (translation: repair) Pfizer's reputation. 

That job used to be an automatic part of public relations. Clearly Pfizer management decided reputation needed more emphasis, a reputation czar.

Executives giving high-profile, high-stakes speeches also need a reputation czar, because their staff and public relations counsel are failing them.

Witness 3 recent disasters: 

1. November 19. Detroit's "Big Three" auto execs come to Congress asking for a bailout.  Their messages are weak, but that's really not noticed because the defining moment is admitting that each of the execs flew to DC in his own corporate jet. Who was looking out for the executives' reputations? Apparently not their internal or external communication folks.
2. February 10. Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner presents the administration's financial sector relief plan. Flawed messaging, uninspiring delivery. Stock market reacts by dropping 5%. Who was looking out for the Secretary's reputation and effectiveness? Apparently no one.
3. February 24. Louisiana Governor Bobby Jindal delivers the Republican response  to President Obama's Address to Congress. His "speech" is an article, not a speech. The staging makes him awkward, ill at ease. Who was watching out for the governor? Not his staff apparently, or anyone else involved in arranging the response.   

Why did otherwise competent individuals fail to protect the speaker? In Part 2, we'll examine 6 reasons speakers don't get the reputation protection they need.    

Media Training: John Edwards on Nightline - 8 Lessons for Responding to Scandal

Last week, after John Edwards admitted he had had an affair with Rielle Hunter, he gave Robert Woodruff of ABC's Nightline an exclusive interview.

Edwards started strong and ended the first half well ahead. But in the second half, many of his answers cut into the credibility he had gained in the first.

So, what can we learn from this? Here are 8 lessons, the first 5 from what Edwards did well, the last 3 from when he slipped.

Lesson 1: Limit your time with the reporter. In his intro to the interview, ABC's reporter Robert Woodruff tells us that Edwards placed no restrictions on the questions, but "gave us only a limited amount of time." To confess and explain, 30 minutes is more than enough.

Lesson 2: Take control at the beginning of the interview. Regardless of the first question, step back, thank the reporter for the opportunity, and open with your explanation or framing of the situation. This may not always seem like the smoothest way to start, but it gives you initial control and confidence.

Lesson 3: In cases of adultery, appear without the wife. Using the wife as a sympathy prop

Media Interviews: Getting Off Message - 5 Reasons Interviewees Stray from the Message

If you are about to do an interview, or are coaching someone who is, keep in mind these situations that can cause you to go off message.

1. Not having any messages. Hard to stay on message when you don't have any. Who would do that? Someone who thinks an interview is just a reporter-asks-a-question, interviewee-answers-it situation.
2. Forgetting (or never having had) the result they want from the interview. If you keep the result in mind, you'll be more likely to do what you need to to get that result, namely, staying on message.
3. Reacting when the reporter pushes your hot buttons. (See my post, Why News Guests Screw Up-Part 2)
4. Not comfortable with the messages. Unless you feel comfortable with the messages, off message will be the more familiar and easier place to be. That's why it's important to personalize and practice the messages.
5. Failure to learn and rehearse methods of transitioning back to message if you start to get sidetracked.

Success in interviews depends on knowing the result you want, having messages that are relevant and interesting, and staying on them.

Media Training: Why Jackson, Gramm & Other Experienced News Guests Screw Up-Part 2

In Part 1 we discussed the problem of you becoming your own worst enemy in an interview situation

Here are the 5 conditions that can trigger the you-as-your-worst-enemy response. And what you can do to avoid or minimize the impact.

1. Being tired physically. It's no secret that people are more accident prone when physically tired than when rested. Mental acuity and emotional resilience are decreased. The likelihood of a misstatement, inappropriate comment, and testy response is increased.
   
   What to Do: Arrange your schedule to include rest time, especially immediately before a key interview. If crossing several time zones, arrive earlier. If you do choose a tiring schedule, commit to staying on message relentlessly, and keep the interviews short.
   
   
2. Growing tired of the message(s). Not much of a problem if you're doing only the occasional interview. But as the number increases and the time between the interviews decreases (gotta love the rapid fire pace of satellite tours), it's easy to get tired of what you're saying.
   
   You have a strong desire to change the message. An urge to be spontaneous. I hate spontaneity...unless it's been written out, memorized, and rehearsed.
   
   What to Do: Remind yourself--before each interview--of the result you want. If you stay result focused, you'll stay on message.