News Articles

Repetition makes your message magnetic

16th May 12

By Bernard O'Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

Anyone who's old enough to remember the classic Australian television ad about “football, meat pies, kangaroos and Holden cars” would be familiar with the concept of repetition as a persuasive communication technique.

In this clip from the 1970s, (there was also a US version), you'll notice the mantra is repeated close to a dozen times. We’re beaten mercilessly over the head with a slogan that is so iconic, it must have been unpatriotic to consider buying anything other than a Holden.

Advertisers like Holden have long known that repetition is the mother of all learning because it helps to make a message magnetic. With repeated exposure, an idea or concept that at first may seem strange to us can become familiar, clear, understandable, comforting - and most importantly, memorable.

And as anyone who deals regularly with the media will know, it can be just as effective when you are trying to convince or persuade a reporter. Shining a spotlight on a word, phrase or idea several times during an interview signals to a reporter that it’s an angle you believe to be important or newsworthy.

Subtle repetition is important in an interview because a reporter is busy taking notes, listening to what you are saying, analysing it and preparing to ask the next question. They might not hear an important point if you say it just once.

You could mention a name or a number, but without repetition chances are it would be wiped from a reporter’s short-term memory in less than 30 seconds.

A German psychologist named Hermann Ebbinghaus scientifically tested this theory in 1885 when he coined "the forgetting curve". He was one of the first to examine repetition and how the short term memory works in terms of retaining information.

Various studies have since proved that if you only make a point once in an interview or presentation, probably less than 10 per cent of people will remember it. If you repeat it three to six times in different ways, retention can jump to around 90 per cent.

So whether they like it or not, repetition is a valuable technique when it comes to helping reporters and the public absorb new ideas. When done badly though it becomes odious, counter-productive and starts to marginalise what might be a very important message.

Remember that reporters are masters at seeing through clichéd, tedious spin - and so is the public. Perhaps we should blame politicians for that because they often provoke a strong negative reaction when they repeat a message or phrase without providing any real context, meaning or evidence.

The Australian Prime Minister Julia Gillard faced an immediate backlash after using the phrase “Moving Forward” 24 times in five minutes before the 2010 federal election. She might have made her message stick, but it was like fingernails down a blackboard due to poor tone, an unconvincing message and overkill.

Similarly, the Opposition leader Tony Abbott sounded like a broken record when he reeled off his "stop the boats" slogan six times in his pre-election speech, with four of those references jammed into the last 20 seconds.

To put that into context, imagine if someone tweeted the same repetitive message all day, every day on Twitter. It would quickly become so annoying and so counter-productive that we would tune out and stop following.

So while repetition is a powerful way to ensure reporters (and even your colleagues and clients) hear your key message, you really need to be smart about it.

That means repeating words, statistics or facts in the right proportion and in a variety of ways as part of a natural conversation so that they stand out.

For example, you might want to talk about the cost of new regulation and you might say: “The cost for consumers, the cost for industry and the cost for the economy will be high.” This is known as a triple whammy or a hat trick, where you repeat a single word three time to emphasise significance.

The human mind seems to find three an amiable number; we can usually remember things that come in threes better than things that come in higher numbers.

But a random statement like that is not convincing without some evidence to support it. So at another point in the interview you might mix it up by just talking about the cost to customers, and providing examples of how customers might be worse off.

If I hear the word 'cost' enough in various forms, I'm in no doubt as to what you're trying to highlight.

Effective communicators also use their voice to underline and emphasise key points. So don't be afraid to alter the tone or volume of your voice in a media interview to highlight concerns or to create interest.

For repetition to be effective with reporters and the public, you need to be convincing, passionate and interesting. You really need to talk to a theme and provide a meaningful insight rather than just repeating an ambiguous slogan that grates and has no real news value.

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And join the discussion on Twitter by following us @MediaClarity

Julia, you were talking to a footy crowd!

10th May 12

By Bernard O’Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

Julia Gillard’s post-Budget charm offensive saw her squeeze in six television and radio interviews on Wednesday morning – in what was a golden opportunity to woo back disenchanted Labor voters.

The Australian Prime Minister managed to kick a few early morning goals when she appeared on Seven's Sunrise, ABC News 24, Sky News as well as the John Laws AM radio show and Sydney’s 2Day FM.

So why did the PM drop the ball when she spoke to former rugby league hard man Mark Geyer on Triple M’s The Grill?

Instead of a warm, friendly and light-hearted take on the Federal Budget, Triple M’s footy-loving audience heard a feisty and combative PM repeating wave after wave of political rhetoric about the nation’s finances. It was enough to make you choke on your cornflakes.

Things went pear-shaped when Geyer said he wanted to hear from the real Julia Gillard rather than the "scripted corporate answers" she was spouting.

Mark Geyer: “That’s reading from a script. I’ve got here five questions that I want to ask the PM, about her favourite drink, her favourite food, her favourite way to relax. It just sounds like, to me, you’re reading from a script.”

Julia Gillard: “No it’s not. That’s really unfair. I’m sitting here at my desk just talking to you. It’s simply not true. I don’t have any notes in front of me.”

A golden rule of any media interview is to know your audience, and it’s something the Prime Minister seemed to forget. Maybe her gruelling round of early morning interviews had taken its toll; or perhaps as the No 1 ticketholder for the Western Bulldogs, she just prefers AFL.

But here she was on Triple M – a light-hearted FM sports breakfast program – and she was talking as if she was on the ABC's current affairs show 7.30.

I don’t expect Ms Gillard to necessarily be kinder or softer than her male colleagues, but I do expect her to understand who her audience is and use everyday language that they can identify with. A bit of warmth wouldn't have gone astray either.

It was a missed opportunity to reconnect with grass roots Labor voters and show that the Government understands their concerns, recognises their hopes and most importantly, talks their language.

Even when she appeared on FM radio station Nova later that day the PM showed she has a one track mind. After revealing she hadn’t seen Channel Nine's ratings blockbuster The Voice, the drivetime host says: “There’s no point asking you why The Apprentice is working this year.”

True to form the PM responds: “We have a lot of apprentices working this year, that’s because of that Budget.”

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And come follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Sharpen your pitch to stressed-out hacks

9th May 12

By Bernard O’Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

About a year ago The Economist copped some stick for haughtily comparing public relations professionals with London's urban foxes, suggesting there were more of them about and they were as brazen as ever.

It's a cute little analogy and it's one that has a ring of truth about it when you consider the staggering growth in PR numbers. In fact a new report suggests there will soon be more PR professionals employed in Australia than working journalists or writers.

According to Economic & Market Development Advisors, there were about 23,000 working journalists and writers around the country at the end of February (down 2.2% on last year), compared to around 21,500 PR people (up 11.3%).

It's even more lopsided in the US, where PR professionals now outnumber journalists by 3 to 1. And it's a trend that is likely to continue as newsroom redundancies, falling newsstand sales and the shift to digital news platforms gathers momentum.

The latest circulation figures are just another nail in the coffin for traditional media: newspaper sales in Australia fell 5.1 per cent in the three months to the end of March, while magazine sales slipped 6.1 per cent..

Fuelled by an appetite for fast information via mobile apps and the web, we've seen an explosion of PR and corporate advisory firms as individuals and organisations seek to control their image and brand.

But before PR practitioners start rubbing their hands with glee, consider what fewer journalists might actually mean.

In short, we'll see more flacks peddling more information at over-worked, over-stressed and under-paid hacks than ever before. The big risk is that there'll be fewer reliable contacts to pitch to; and those reporters still at the coalface will be so exhausted they probably won't be able to spare you the time of day.

Many reporters, already juggling multiple rounds (along with blogging and other social media or digital responsibilities), simply don’t have time for many of the PR pitches that land on their desk each day.

So if your organisation or business isn't already thinking about how to engage more meaningfully with reporters who are stretched, you might have your work cut out attracting the media exposure that you or your clients need.

This sea change means PR practitioners will need to be smarter about how and when they contact reporters. Because in this new reality, one meaningless media release or one annoying phone call on deadline could see you struck form a reporter's little black book forever.

Many PR professionals I've spoken to acknowledge that sharper PR skills and smarter content are crucial if the media pitch is to continue yielding results. But there's an opportunity for PR professionals to become a valuable resource and help to reporters in this slimmed down digital environment.

With that in mind, here are a few tips to consider before you rush to pick up the phone or fire off an email to a strung-out reporter:

• Respect their deadline: Reporters are juggling more balls than ever, so know when the best time to call is. At most major metros it's mid-morning when news lists are being compiled. Don’t even think of calling a newspaper reporter after 3pm unless you’ve got big, breaking news.

• Know the reporter: Newsrooms these days are like departure lounges: reporters come and go in a flash. So it's worth updating your media list and knowing who covers what. Twitter can give you a remarkable insight into what journalists are thinking and what interests them.

• Make it newsworthy: It sounds like a given, but you need to present content that’s genuinely newsworthy and ticks all the boxes for a busy reporter in the digital age. Thanks to social media there's so much too choose from, so it has to be significant, ground-breaking or different. If you’ve got a good story, they’ll listen.

• Be flexible: With newsrooms stretched so thin, don’t expect reporters to drop everything to cover your event, come to your lunch or listen to a long-winded pitch. And don’t expect them to be subject experts when they’re being forced to cover so many rounds. The more help you can give a reporter, the more likely they’ll spare a few seconds to listen to a pitch. So try to be flexible and work with them.

• Keep it brief: Make it is as easy as possible for reporters to use your information as quickly as possible, particularly for online or digital news. When emailing, limit your pitch to three or four dot points and make the subject line count. If you can’t tell a reporter in 30 seconds what it is you’re pitching, don’t call until you can.

This may all sound pretty obvious, particularly for seasoned PR pros who have been working with the media for a long time. But you’d be surprised how many people continue to make some pretty cardinal sins when pitching to reporters.

By understanding and respecting the pressures reporters are now operating under - including what they need and how you can best work with them - PR professionals can continue to have a relevant voice. If this is the reality for reporters, then if you work in PR, chances are it's your reality too.

What’s your take on this? I'd love to hear your thoughts.

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

The five worst professions for jargon

2nd May 12

By Bernard O’Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

Recently I wrote a piece saying we should all take a leaf out of Winston Churchill's book and use simple, jargon-free language when dealing with the media. It prompted someone to ask who the most challenging people to interview were, so I thought that was worth exploring.

At the risk of opening a can of worms, experience has taught me that the most frustrating professions a journalist will ever report on are science/medicine, law, accounting, investment banking and IT, in no specific order.

Not because the highly-skilled professionals working in these fields aren’t friendly or knowledgeable; it’s just that they are often verbose. They tend to use language that is annoying, dull, uninspiring and dripping with industry jargon.

And it’s understandable. Scientists and medical professionals find it difficult to use simple language because they’re immersed in significant, often ground-breaking work that they don’t want to dumb down.

Accountants, investment bankers and IT professionals focus on numbers, complicated financial products and algorithms, not words. And lawyers have trip wires everywhere; they agonise over words and meticulously dot every ‘i’ and cross every ‘t’ before speaking.

Now it’s a great generalisation to suggest anyone who works in these professions is a bad communicator. The late Steve Jobs, for example, lived and breathed technology but he was a master when it came to using simple, informal language to convey big and technical ideas.

But there is a tendency for many other professionals to hide behind industry jargon, legalese and gobbledygook when they talk to reporters.

You know the types of irrelevant buzz words I’m talking about; those inscrutable terms that act like a roadblock in a conversation: “at the end of the day”, “stakeholder engagement”, “leverage”, “sub-optimal targets”, "output based objectives" and “moving forward”, to name but a few.

The GFC threw up so much mind-numbing financial slang that the BBC even created its own glossary of banking jargon-busters for online readers.

Just why people slip into abstract language and meaningless expressions is puzzling, but often it's a safety net or their way of trying to sound smart when they're nervous.

But there’s nothing safe or clever about jargon when you’re dealing with the media because it only serves to confuse and alienate the reporter - and ultimately your true audience, the public. Jargon is lazy, it adds nothing and it’s just not quotable.

A former colleague who’s now the medical reporter for an Australian television network told me it’s her biggest daily frustration. She is regularly forced to stop the cameras and ask the ‘talent’ to try again using plain, simple language her audience will understand.

I know it's sometimes hard to step back and simplify your work, particularly when you’re not used to dealing with the media.

But if you want to reach and be understood by as many people as possible, drop the jargon, the bureaucratic expressions and the multi-syllabic words and choose simple, everyday language. Why say "facilitate" when you could just say "help"? Why go with "ultilise" when it so much easier to say "use"?

And forget the notion that you have to 'dumb it down'. It's actually about making it simpler so that everyone will understand what you are trying to say.

When explaining something complicated to a reporter, imagine you are explaining it to a teenager. If you can explain it in simple, digestable language that a teenager could easily repeat back to you, then it's much more likely you'll be interesting, and quotable.

I'd love to hear your thoughts. What's the most annoying jargon you've heard?

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Shortenâ��s â��Yes, Prime Ministerâ�� moment goes viral

28th Apr 12

By Bernard O’Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

It has been described as “the interview of the year”, “one of the funniest TV news moments ever recorded” and a real “Yes, Prime Minister” moment.

As Labor MP Bill Shorten proved, sometimes truth is stranger than fiction.

In a live television interview that has since gone viral, the workplace relations minister was asked whether he felt the troubled parliamentary speaker, Peter Slipper, should be allowed to go back to work after being accused of sexual harassment and misuse of funds.

Aware Prime Minister Julia Gillard was overseas, but unaware of what she had actually said on the matter, Shorten blunderingly responded: "I haven't seen what she's said, but let me say I support what it is she said."

Sky News Australia’s political editor David Speers presses Shorten to explain his view, to which he responds: “My view is what the Prime Minister’s view is."

Bewildered, Speers says: “But you don’t know what she said,” to which Shorten replies: “But I’m sure she’s right.”

So farcical was Shorten’s response that the world’s press has mockingly dubbed him “The Talented Mr Shorten”; “the world’s most loyal politician” and a “brown nose” to boot.

It was a moment of madness that could easily have been avoided. A live television interview is no place for an impromptu response on an issue you’re either not fully informed about or haven’t planned for. Even if he was just toeing the official party line, albeit sarcastically, it flopped badly.

Shorten, widely seen as a future leader, obviously wanted to distance himself from the latest scandal engulfing Gillard's leadership. But he is smart enough to know the Slipper issue was the hottest political story of the day and he would be asked about it.

He should have planned a suitable response - one that resonated with the wider community. If he had simply said he had not seen the PM's comments and did not want to contradict what she had said, the fallout would have been much less embarrassing.

Dealing with the media is often high stakes and sometimes it pays to call a spade a spade. Otherwise, just don't go there.

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information.

Is Twitter damaging media relations?

27th Apr 12

By Bernard O'Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

I’m constantly amazed by the number of spats that occur on Twitter and other social media platforms involving reporters and well-educated people in senior public roles.

While technology allows us to talk to a vast audience of clients, customers or fans instantly, it has also become a forum for airing dirty laundry or engaging in spats that traditionally occurred behind closed doors.

Relations between reporters and the organisations or individuals they cover can be prickly at the best of times. But it's nothing a friendly chat or a bit of schmoozing hasn't been able to fix.

Now, with so many business leaders, politicians, sport stars, PR people and others relying on social media as a quickfire way to converse with reporters – and strangely, it's often when they’re angry – media management as a skill seems to have taken a back seat.

Countless tirades against reporters are popping up on Twitter and Facebook every day. Two weeks ago, a very public stoush saw a trainee in a London PR agency hurl abuse at a reporter from The Guardian newspaper.

In the US, Paul Allen, the billionaire owner of the struggling Portland Trailblazers NBA franchise, took aim at a sports columnist from a local newspaper who criticised the team's performance.

A string of harmless Tweets between the boss of the Cronulla Sharks NRL club and several rugby league reporters also caught my attention. I suspect these exchanges would previously have been played out diplomatically over the telephone and resolved to the satisfaction of all parties.

The growing list of cyber-feuds prompted The New York Times to label Twitter as "the coward's way of expressing yourself", blaming the spats on "self-importance gone awry".

While I don't begrudge anyone the right to defend their honour or complain about media inaccuracies, I do wonder why fairly intelligent people use Twitter to do it. Public mud-slinging is just not smart because you're allowing everyone to form their own perception of who is right or wrong without any real context.

If you care enough about the brand or organisation you represent you should know when it’s best to hold fire behind the keyboard and pick up a telephone or have a face-to-face conversation instead.

You can't control what a reporter writes, but you can influence the outcome if you have taken the time to build genuine rapport with journalists in your field. Like it or not, you need each other to tell a story or to generate awareness, support or sympathy.

So think twice before engaging in public argy bargy or alienating a reporter by telling them they're wrong.

To quote some words of wisdom from New York Yankees baseballer Nick Swisher: “Twitter is like having a gun. If you take care of it, you’re OK. But you can shoot yourself.”

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Why we should talk like Winston Churchill

24th Apr 12

By Bernard O'Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

In media training sessions I sometimes encourage participants to “say it like Winston Churchill”. It’s no surprise that it usually goes down like a lead balloon because Churchill was larger than life: an upper class Edwardian, one of history’s great communicators and a perfectionist to boot.

But like US President Ronald Reagan decades later, he knew the power of words and used simple language to deliver messages that appealed to the heart and the head.

Churchill understood that people remembered phrases, not long-winded speeches, so he carefully crafted two or three memorable phrases into every speech. With a few well-placed, punchy quotes he was able to engage and convince people from all walks of life.

In his first speech as Prime Minister of Great Britain, he summarised his entire approach to life in one simple sentence: "I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears, and sweat.”

Churchill wasn’t born with a silver tongue; long hours and deliberate planning went into crafting messages. So there’s no reason we can’t take a leaf out of his book and try to use simple, safe and sparkling language to explain, inspire or convince.

When it comes to the media, simple words used in the right way are usually the difference between delivering a memorable newspaper quote or TV or radio grab and a forgettable one.

For some reason, many business leaders, politicians and other professionals cling to industry jargon and multi-syllabic words in the belief it makes them sound intelligent or look smarter. But jargon and big, complicated words are like speed bumps, detracting from your message.

If a reporter doesn’t understand what you’re saying, chances are your target audience won’t either.

We could all do well to imitate Churchill's strategy, because, in his words: “Short words are the best, and old words, when short, are the best of all.”

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

How to apologise, and mean it

18th Apr 12

By Bernard O’Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

Australian actor Guy Pearce created an internet firestorm in April when he took aim at the nation’s capital, Canberra, on a US talk-show. The half-hour sledge infuriated quite a few Canberrans, prompting the former Neighbours star to quickly back-track by issuing this apology.

It’s a good lesson for anyone who’s in the media spotlight. When you stuff up, admit it. And do it in that all-important first hour, known as the “Golden Hour”.

source

To his credit, Pearce eliminated days of heartache by responding quickly and with humility, in a very blunt Australian manner. Instead of his apology being a show of weakness, it was a great show of character and probably achieved a measure of redemption.

What it highlights is that there are many different ways to say “I'm sorry”. Some techniques are much better and more likely to succeed than others.

Consider how Oscar winner Mel Gibson pleaded insanity (and alcoholism) for using the 'j' word a couple of years ago, without much success. He was caught on tape in another rant this year. Just as disastrous was former BP chief executive Tony Hayward’s blinkered comment that “I’d like my life back” at the height of the 2010 oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

In contrast, when Tiger Woods apologised for his “irresponsible and selfish” behaviour after he was caught cheating on his wife, it was lauded as “one of the most remarkable public apologies ever by a public figure”, because he left nothing on the table.

But despite a growing list of mea culpas from actors, sports stars and corporate executives, does the perfect apology really exist?

Most public apologies almost never completely succeed, for one very simple reason: you can't please all of the people all of the time, no matter how meticulously and sincerely you follow the ingredients of a perfect apology.

But if you can acknowledge the offense; explain why it occurred; show genuine remorse, regret or humility; and make efforts to repair the damage, then your apology has a much greater chance of being well received.

You need to own your actions. Don’t defend them and don’t tell others how you think they must feel because you can’t possible understand how they feel. It’s often best to admit responsibility, acknowledge critics and promise change.

And if you’ve said or done something that has upset the public, time is of the essence when it comes to damage control. The more time that passes, the more the story can become blown out of proportion by a media that has been starved of answers.

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Can't beat a dog

16th Apr 12

By Geoffrey Stackhouse, Clarity Media Trainer

Was it ingenious pandering to a photo journalist or a happy accident that scored page 2 reporting for a small Animal Welfare protest in today's Sydney Morning Herald?

Either way it shows the best way to get coverage is to know the News Values which drive media. Novelty, Currency and Timeliness served up on a platter proved irresistible and so a cute dog posed in front of a protest banner achieved great exposure for a little reported protest.

The image also drove the headline, a paragraph on the protest and most importantly exposed the Activist's key message. Good media talent gives Journalists what they need to file the story.

Want to know more about news values? Check out our Media Fundamentals seminar. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Without a clear aim, it's super confusing

13th Apr 12

By Bernard O'Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

Federal Labor backbencher Gai Brodtmann was supposed to explain, in simple terms, how the Gillard Government’s planned changes to superannuation would affect small business.

Instead she tied herself in knots during a rambling doorstop interview which left reporters and the listening public – her key audience - scratching their heads.

Reporters wanted to know whether small business would have to foot the bill when the superannuation guarantee jumped from 9% to 12%.

Here’s just one example of the awkward dialogue between reporters and the Labor member for Canberra:

Reporter: So why would small business need to have discussions though? To still discuss this policy?

Brodtmann: No, I'm talking about. No. Let's just, let's leave it at that. Yep. Next question?

Reporter: What?

Reporters are just trying to understand what you know. So if you can’t explain it in simple terms, you probably shouldn’t be talking to them in the first place.

To be fair, Ms Brodtmann was the first to admit it wasn't her "best day at the office". Whether she was out of her depth or just having a bad day, she turned a media opportunity into an embarrassing train wreck.

It’s a classic example of why anybody dealing with the media needs to have a clear strategic aim, regardless of whether you’re a first-timer or a media pro.

If you don’t have a clear aim you’ll just confuse the reporter and miss the mark with the listening audience.
Plan what you’re going to say and how you’re going to say it, don’t try to make it up in the heat of the moment, particularly when it’s quite a technical or complex issue like superannuation.
Finally, reporters are experts at smelling blood in the water. So if you’re not sure of an answer, don’t try to fake it. Explain that you don’t want to mislead them and you’ll try to get them the answers they need later.

Listen to the audio

Read the transcript

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Presenting for Social Media

11th Apr 12

By Sharon Leifer, Media Trainer

Social media is the 21st century soap box. But instead of reaching a few passers by in Hyde Park we can now reach millions. Witness the effect of the Kony campaign. Every teenager in Australia, and much of the world, is now familiar with the crimes of an African warlord.

Social media allows us to get up in front of an audience and pass on ideas, demonstrate how to do things and inspire change on a scale we could only dream about a few years ago. Using it is an essential part of any public relations and marketing plan.

But how do we make the most out of this powerful medium? How do we keep our carefully maintained corporate polish while portraying a ‘real’ edge that makes us look like we’re not trying too hard?

Low production costs and easy accessibility shouldn’t mean low production values. A bit of thought, a dash of imagination and a slug of preparation is all it takes to master social media presentations. You need to:

• Structure your content to be memorable
• Use language that sounds natural
• Look good and be comfortable in front of camera
• Sound great by using the right vocal techniques
• Use the camera to your advantage, frame shots, add close ups, think visually
• Let your personality out, it’s what connects you with your audience

Want to learn more then sign up for PRIA’s workshop on presenting for social media, Maximising Your Social Media Performance, on May 2nd. Whether it’s a demonstration vlog for YouTube, an introductory video for your website, or a direct approach to consumers, this session will give you practical advice on how to look good, sound great and be memorable.

Presenter Sharon Leifer, Clarity’s broadcast specialist, will give you the practical, step by step guide to successful presenting she learned in her 15 years as a journalist and producer with BBC News in London.

The media: friend or foe?

3rd Apr 12

By Bernard O’Riordan, Clarity Media Trainer

No matter how well you think you know a reporter, it isn’t their job to be your friend or advance your agenda. Reporters have a job to do and that means getting a good story in a bid to sell more newspapers or boost ratings on TV or radio.

Reporters are professional storytellers who know the best stories are those you probably don’t want to talk about. So that often means asking the difficult questions.

A recent furore involving NRL player Robbie Farah attracted a lot of unnecessary attention. After appearing on NRL on Fox, Farah tweeted that he had been "ambushed" by former player-turned presenter Matthew Johns.

What it highlighted was the lack of understanding so many professionals, particularly sports stars, have of media workings. Perhaps in the cosy world of sport, it’s expected mates will look after each other and not ask the hard questions.

My advice to clients is that a media interview should never be considered a walk in the park, no matter what the issue is. Reporters can and should be able to ask you anything, so it’s up to you to control how you respond.

If you are going to front the media, you need to plan. Consider the worst questions you might get asked and think of how you might respond. You don’t need to prepare for every possible question, but you should plan for every type of question.

By turning every media opportunity into a strategic conversation you will be better placed to navigate even the toughest interview. It will help you to fine tune your conversation skills and sharpen your argument, and this in turn can give you more control over the flow of questions.

So in short, it’s never wise to assume the media is your friend, but that doesn’t mean they’re your enemy either. As long as you can provide a credible insight and state your position with passion, you will handle even the toughest interview with flying colours. It’s all about preparing for the worst, and performing at your best.

Watch the video at the Daily Telegraph.

Need to hone your media skills? Contact Clarity today for more information. And follow us on Twitter @MediaClarity

Do you Data Dump?

30th Nov 11

Many of us communicate via 'data dump', we blind the audience with details and hope they get our point.

Clear communicators start with their conclusion and support it with evidence. Before you write or speak, ask yourself "What insight am I sharing?"

For reader-friendly communication, begin with that insight and back it up with key facts.

Our Strategic Communication courses will help you eliminate the 'data dump' from your communication. We start with the architecture of your argument, then work on your delivery.

Click here for more information...

Too much of a good thing?

21st Oct 11

I’m all for a strong key message, but Ed Miliband, the UK’s answer to Tony Abbott, proves that being a “message bully” doesn’t make you safe, it makes you a laughing stock. You need to show respect to your audience, and the journalist, by acknowledging their question and then working your message in as a contribution to the debate.

This interview was in response to the Teacher’s strikes which wreaked havoc in the UK earlier this year. He has a great message but the way he delivers it is a total fail.

Meanwhile in Australia Tony Abbott’s response to the Carbon tax “Julia Gillard has folded her tent, taken her bat and ball and gone home” was on the lips of every Liberal MP being interviewed that day – verbatim – and widely quoted in the media. They struck the right balance of message and content and effectively characterised victory as defeat in the public’s mind.

Donâ��t shoot the messenger

19th Oct 11

Loose lips in a leaked internal memo show the power of a colourful quote. Shame it contributed to slashing $20billion from Groupon’s IPO valuation.

What was Groupon Founder Andrew Mason thinking when he wrote to staff “…with an I.P.O. baby that, having seen the ultrasound, I can promise you is not one of those uglies”.

The NY Times Dealbook picked it up and ignited a firestorm of negative publicity which has to dampen appetite for the upcoming float.

Apart from the negative images it evokes it’s simply not the language you’d expect from the CEO of a Wall Street darling. Especially in these conservative times.

Closer to home we had Blackmores CEO Christine Holgate describe a deal as meaning pharmacists could offer "Coke and fries" upgrades when selling prescription drugs. Catchy and colourful but not aligned with Blackmores wholesome ‘Wellness’ positioning.

The Most Man in Australia

18th Oct 11

The first, last, biggest, richest, oldest: the best media communicators use superlatives – words that end in “st” – to define the significance of a situation, event or crisis. Check out the way Fairfax Media’s Good Weekend magazine gets the reader’s attention with a playful headline which uses an ‘open-ended’ superlative to describe Greens leader Bob Brown. What "st" describes your claim?

The most ----------* man in Australia

Worst apology - Qantas

17th Oct 11

The Qantas media team look stretched to breaking point this week judging by the way they handled their latest issue - an unaccompanied 11 year old unattended at Hobart airport Qantas-loses-boy

Media report a Qantas spokeswoman saying ''It was one of those really busy days and this is a really unfortunate situation''. This is my current favourite for the worst apology of 2011. Its right up there with “I am sorry you are so angry”.

Another helpful staff member is reported as quipping ''It's all right, they don't go missing very often".

The Qantas team are always polished and textbook perfect (the way they handled the A380 incident was genius). It shows the toll of being in permanent crisis mode and highlights two simple lessons. Apologise effectively and make sure all front line staff know your media protocols.

Geoffrey Stackhouse, Clarity MD

Training Tony Abbott

11th Oct 11

Tony Abbott’s infamous 28 seconds of silence sparked a media furore and hurt his credibility. MD Geoffrey Stackhouse speaks to Business Spectator about how to handle sticky moments in the media.

Read the full article from Business Spectator by following the link below:

Training Tony Abbott

"Today's TV interview is forever's YouTube content – a permanent definer of your character, professionalism and suitability for whatever office you occupy, or aspire to. As today's TV interview is tomorrow's digital resume, it's always preferable to have it bathe you in a flattering light."

Lessons from Orica

13th Sep 11

Read the full article from BEN Business by following the link below:

Lessons from the Orica communications crisis

"After all the unwanted media heat Orica has received over its chemical incident in Newcastle, you may wonder what is worse for a business, the actual impact of the leak or the fact Orica didn’t let the community know about the incident when it happened. Welcome to the world of crisis communications.

Geoffrey Stackhouse, MD of a media communications training company Clarity Solutions, said Orica is on dangerous ground from a reputation perspective."

Word Up, Save Face

21st Apr 11

An organisation’s reputation is its most valuable asset and one of the few risks that cannot be effectively insured.

Risk management strategies, particularly how to respond to the media in a crisis, are now essential tools in a director’s kitbag.

Gerald Ratner

In 1991 Gerald Ratner was Chairman of the world’s biggest jewellery chain when a comment he made at a business dinner about the quality of his firm’s products sparked a media frenzy. Trying to recover from the gaffe he dug himself in deeper. When the dust settled, an estimated £500 million had been wiped from the company’s value and Ratner had left the business.

Ratner was giving a speech to the UK Institute of Directors when he famously said: “We even sell a pair of earrings for under £1, which is cheaper than a prawn sandwich from Marks & Spencer’s. But I have to say the earrings probably won’t last as long.”

Barclays Bank

That was in the heady 1990’s yet the corporate world still hasn’t learned the lesson about the impact of casual comments from the senior team. More recently in the UK Barclays Bank chief executive, Max Barrett, did a ‘Ratner’ when he admitted he did not borrow on his own bank’s credit cards because the interest rates were too high.

It’s still too soon to tell what impact Barrett’s comments have had on Barclaycard’s market share, but his personal reputation has taken a battering. Unlike their corporate peers, politicians have long been aware of the perils of the unguarded media comment. These days even highly experienced politicians undergo regular coaching and rehearse before giving interviews.

"No comment" no longer an option

While it may seem safer to try to stay out of the media spotlight all together, as Mark Latham recently demonstrated, avoiding the press or using “no comment” is no longer an option for political or corporate leaders in this age of accountability.

In January this year (2005), while politicians and opinion leaders around the world were expressing compassion over the Tsunami disaster, Latham was conspicuous by his absence. Ironically for a man with a reputation for colourful language and the gift for delivering powerful sound bites, his failure to front the media triggered a backlash that ultimately ended his political career.

In the two decades since Ratner’s comments, legislators are still struggling to define the ‘rules of engagement’ governing corporate disclosure and the media. This struggle has brought the often-neglected communication function into the board’s sights.

Media exposure

Australia’s Clerp 9 for example has provisions requiring a publicly listed company to respond to public or media speculation regarding the disclosure of price-sensitive information. In the US, the Sarbanes-Oxley legislation has triggered a raft of changes in corporate governance and risk management.

While the requirements of Clerp 9 can probably be met by issuing a carefully worded media release, a simple statement, no matter how well crafted, is unlikely to stop media speculation and the potential damage to corporate reputation.

The only defense is well trained and credible spokespeople who can face the media, deliver the facts and defend the corporate reputation. When the media does focus on a company, the board is no longer exempt.

While senior management used to bear the brunt of media scrutiny and accountability, the renewed focus on corporate governance and the role of directors has given boards unprecedented exposure to the harsh media spotlight.

One voice for the Company

And few are equipped to handle it without causing further damage to their personal and corporate reputations. James Hardie Industries’ chair, Meredith Hellicar, endured a gruelling, drawn out and highly critical few months in front of the media. And there is a lot more to come. Her strong performance did much to restore the Australian public’s perception of the credibility of the company’s compensation agreements.

After Hellicar’s ‘media roadshow’ on the new compensation package, investors responded by pushing the share price up to a 12 month high. Hellicar had been unexpectedly thrust into the role of media spokesperson after former chairman Alan McGregor stepped down in August. CEO Peter Macdonald had also resigned after a NSW government inquiry found the fund for asbestos victims had a $1.3 billion shortfall despite original claims that the scheme was fully funded.

With a new top team and little time for preparation, Hellicar had to hit the ground running. Her performance suggests a solid investment in equipping key players with skills and experience to front critical media interviews.

While Hardies’ handling of the asbestos crisis has been soundly criticised, there are valuable lessons to be learned about the board’s role in protecting corporate reputation. It was a powerful demonstration of the value of a competent, media-savvy chairman who can deliver well-rehearsed messages, and stick to those messages.

There was one voice for the company. If there was dissent or opposing views on the board they were not publicly heard, as Hellicar was the only spokesperson responding to media enquiries.

Chairman or CEO?

In the communications business, using the chairman to take on the role of media spokesperson is akin to attacking with your king in a chess match. It is a company’s last defense and should only be undertaken in the most desperate circumstances.

Even in a crisis the first choice is the CEO. Playing the chairman sends a very clear public message about just how seriously the matter is being taken. Of course, in James Hardies’ case there wasn’t a lot of choice since the CEO had resigned.

The case also highlights the need for all directors to be skilled in they way the media works and how to give media interviews. Not just in case they, like Hellicar, have to unexpectedly step up to the plate and field critical media interviews, but as a matter of pure corporate governance.

Crisis preparation and planning

Unless a director is familiar with how the media works, and how they report a crisis, how can he or she form a judgment about the company’s communication capabilities and emergency response plans?

Directors need to contribute to board room discussion and help the chairperson prepare for an interview with formidable journalists such as the 7.30 Report’s Kerry O’Brien.

Hellicar’s interview with O’Brien last year was a ’make or break event’ for Hardies’ reputation. Without experience working with the media and formal media skills training, the outcome may have been fatal for Hellicar and the company.

Media policy in a crisis

Before a crisis hits the company, the board needs to feel comfortable that there are plans and processes in place to handle it. Boards must also ensure their organisation has a clear and reliable media policy.

This policy should address how media enquiries will be handled, who should speak to the media and what training and development they have undertaken to hone their skills.

In most companies the CEO rather than the chairman is the media spokesperson, certainly for operational issues. While the chairman may speak to media, especially at the AGM, it’s critical that both CEO and chairman are seen to be singing from the same hymn sheet.

Media skills are essential when managing reputation risk

As was seen with James Hardie, it is critical to ensure the organization speak with one voice on key issues. This means that both senior management and the board need to know how to respond to media enquires and direct them appropriately.

Like any other risk, reputation risk is best managed by early identification and a consistent well planned response. Increasingly, directors are seeking formal media training as part of the board’s commitment to director education. Many boards are including media skills as part of the new director’s induction program.

ENDS

This article first appeared in Corporate Risk Magazine, February 2005.