#because guess what happens when you openly criticise the ruling party on social media? | Explore Tumblr Posts and Blogs

cowbroughcommunications · 3 years

Text

Good spokespeople don’t need the answer to every question

In a previous life I had a boss who insisted on producing media briefings of biblical proportions.

If the CEO was being interviewed or taking part in a media conference, teams of people would sit around brain storming for days on end, endlessly trying to think of every possible fence to fall over or ditch to stumble in.

These tomes would run to dozens and dozens of pages with categories divided and subdivided for quick reference.

They were masterclasses in self generating paper pushing with every new question opening a pandora’s box of new potential pot holes. It was self perpetuating, on and on the treadmill would go until his appearance day arrived.

Of course the whole exercise was a complete waste of everyone’s time.

I and every member of the media team knew that the said CEO wouldn’t read a briefing of more than three paragraphs. But of course the very idea of trying to second guess every question a journalist is likely to ask is utterly ludicrous.

It is not the questions that spokespeople should be preparing for, but the types of question that might be asked and the techniques for answering them.

For purposes of example let’s put the questions into the context of a real situation. Primark were the main UK company mentioned in the aftermath of the tragic building collapse in Bangladesh recently. For purely illustration purposes let’s imagine their spokespeople under scrutiny.

You don’t know the answer

As I said, it is impossible to know the answer to every single question you will be asked. You will invariably be asked something at some point that you don’t know the answer to. So what do you do?

This can be particularly distracting if the interview is live.

A Primark spokesman might have been asked in the immediate aftermath of the collapse: ‘How many t shirts did your company have made in that factory last year?’

It is highly unlikely he would know the answer but saying ‘I don’t know’ doesn’t look or sound too good.

Better to tell the reporter what you do know related to the story. He may well know who their contractor there is, for how long the company has worked with them, what they make for Primark etc

If the worst comes to worst it is ok to say ‘I don’t know’ if its is supported with ‘but I’ll find out and get back to you.’

Social media is a great platform for disseminating supplementary information after a mainstream media interview. You can talk directly to your audience without the potential distortion of the message by a third party journalist. So don’t just go back to the journalist who did the original interview with the answer to the question. Tell everyone.

You’re asked to speculate

A Primark spokeswoman might have been asked in a live interview:

‘Is the company going to pay compensation to the families of the dead and injured?’

If she answers wrongly, then it could come back to bite in the future. Don’t take the bait. Stick to the facts, if compensation is being looked at, say so.

If it hasn’t been discussed yet, say you can’t speculate until the the facts of the accident have been established.

Answering a speculative question either affirmatively or negatively could damage reputation if the standpoint needs to be changed later on in the crisis.

Asking for personal opinion

‘Do you personally think it is the Bangladeshi government’s lax building control rules that is ultimately responsible for this accident?”

As a spokesman or women you are always the representative of the company. Never give personal opinion, even if you predicate the statement with ‘this is my view only’ it never is. In the eyes of the viewing, listening or reading public you are the company or organisation.

A simple yes or no

“I’m looking for a simple yes or no answer here?”

How many times have you heard interviewers use this technique when they know fine well they will not get a simple yes or no answer. It is designed to knock the interviewee off guard and make them look shifty. And how it works.

They are so effective because they almost always have an obvious answer and the viewer or listener knows it.

But if the interviewee does answer yes or no it can come across really badly as there is no room to manoeuvre from this position.

“Is it true that Primark knows that its Bangladeshi suppliers pay workers less than £1 a day?”

To answer ‘yes’ is to admit that you condone the payment of what amounts to slave wages. To answer ‘no’ is to admit your company either doesn’t know or doesn’t care what goes on in its supply chain.

This is where the great phrases of obfuscation come into their own. Don’t answer on the reporters term.

> You know, it’s not that simple.

> There are instances when things are never black and white

> This is a very grey area.

> To give such a definitive answer would be unfair on those involved in the case at this stage.

> If we want to encourage true understanding of what happened here then it is far more complicated than a one word answer can justify.

> This would not be a dignified answer to the complexities of this case.

> It would be insulting to the intelligence of your viewers to treat such a complex matter with such simplicity.

Sometimes though it can get out of hand. For instance the BBC’s Jeremy Paxman once asked the then Home Secretary, Michael Howard, the same yes or no question 12 times about the dismissal of a prisons’ chief.

But most interviewers are not as tenacious and will move on, if the question is dealt with skilfully.

Bringing in third parties

Promoting conflict always helps make a story more interesting. For example a Primark spokeswoman might be asked.

‘Marks and Spencers today said that they always personally inspect their suppliers, no matter where they are in the world. Will you be following their best practise?’

Again don’t take the bait, talk about the positive aspects of your own company’s performance or experiences.

No one ever won any bonus points by getting into a public spat criticising competitors without them there to give their right of reply.

Repeat, repeat, repeat

Reporters will often ask the same question several times over but slightly altering the words to make sound like a different question.

Don’t lose patience. Stick to the key messages you want to get over. But it is fair enough to play the same game and slightly alter the words to make it seem like you’re giving a different answer.

It is the reporter’s job to give you a hard time. He or she needs to be seen to be painfully extracting the truth from a cornered corporate giant twisting and turning to avoid the consequences of their company’s actions

It is a spokesman or woman’s job to be seen as a willing participant offering the truth openly, confidently and honestly. But remember you don’t need to know the exact answer to every question to successfully achieve this.

0 notes