TpEBO
Space to focus, think and take action



Rejecting communication When facts are “manipulated” and “manufactured”
(Biden, 2021, p. 2)





BledComm Proceedings 2021



This article focuses on the m​essaging adopted by two politicians, a comedian, and a broadcaster. It shares examples of communication best practise and questionable actions with vulnerable groups and proposes a path forward to thwart the normalisation of logical fallacies in the sector.



In recent times, the reputation of the communications sector has come under the spotlight as a consequence of Brexit, global politics and the pandemic. Trust in the sector has been compromised as a result of the actions and inaction of major institutions who, in theory, should know better. Society has experienced first-hand the consequences of leadership, decision-making, communication and ethical standards in organisations. Some experiences have been positive, others negative and, for communicators, negative incidents are more likely to be remembered by peers and stakeholders. This article focuses on the messaging adopted by two politicians, a comedian, and a broadcaster. It shares examples of communication best practise and questionable actions with vulnerable groups and proposes a path forward to thwart the normalisation of logical fallacies in the sector.


I recently completed my PhD in TU Dublin and interviewed 34 organisational leaders and communicators with an international remit over an eighteen month period. Many commented that communicators tend to complicate things and wondered why this was necessary. This sparked my curiosity because throughout the literature review process, I regularly used dictionaries and specialist resources to unpick the language patterns and thought processes of some writers to understand what they were saying. Participants in the doctoral research, (called Communication at the Core: Exploring decision-making when communication is at the heart of an organisation’s strategy development) said that communicators need to be clear on their strategic intent and adapt the message according to the context. This paper shares practical examples which demonstrate that language, clarity and accuracy are important drivers of communication and that there can be serious consequences when one or more elements are out of balance.


Communication, some say, boils down to “getting people to do what you want them to do” (Tolley, 1988, p. 4) and involves the creation of arguments based on “the interpretation and communication of scientific evidence in relation to concepts of the truth” (L’Etang, 2001, p. 158). When communication works well, it is invisible and often taken for granted by internal and external stakeholders. However, on occasions when things to go wrong, the problem is often fault-based and framed as inept or clumsy communication, a job ‘anyone’ can do.


For example: Prime-Minister Johnson’s ad-lib communication style confused citizens throughout the UK as he explained English plans to open up after the first lockdown in May 2020 (quote 1). He said:



“And so no, this is not the time simply to end the lockdown this week. Instead we are taking the first careful steps to modify our measures. And the first step is a change of emphasis that we hope that people will act on this week. We said that you should work from home if you can, and only go to work if you must. We now need to stress that anyone who can’t work from home, for instance those in construction or manufacturing, should be actively encouraged to can travel g​o to work. And we want it to be safe for you to get to work. So you should avoid public transport, travel by car, cycle or walk if at all possible – because we must and will maintain social distancing, and capacity will therefore be limited. So work from home if you can, but you should go to work if you can’t work from home. And to ensure you are safe at work we have been working to establish new guidance for employers to make workplaces COVID-secure has been updated. And when you do go to work, if possible do so by car or even better by walking or bicycle. But just as with workplaces, public transport operators will also be following COVID-secure standards.”



Quote 1: Original transcript (Johnson, 2020, pp. 1–6 Sky News, May 10th, 2020)



UK comedian Matt Lucas pointed out on social media platforms that the call to action was not clear. Truly frustrated, he demonstrated that communication which contradicts and lacks clarity creates confusion (Blake, 2018). His late night parody went viral and copycat videos were posted across multiple platforms. He joked, “so we are saying don’t go to work go to work don’t take public transport go to work don’t go to work stay indoors if you can work from home go to work don’t go to work go outside don’t go outside and then eh we will or won’t e s s something or other” (Lucas, 2020 Twitter).


Prime Minister Johnson’s original speech and language patterns were analysed. When redundant text was removed, the communication was clearer. The remaining text was concise, the message was easier to understand and instructions easier to follow (quote 2). The word count reduced from 215 to 51 words and the call to action is clear. Crisis communication requires clarity and in this example, the text in bold is explicit and crystal clear:



“And so no, this is not the time simply to end the lockdown this week. Instead we are taking the first careful steps to modify our measures. And the first step is a change of emphasis that we hope that people will act on this week. We said that you should work from home if you can, and only go to work if you must. We now need to stress that anyone who can’t work from home, for instance those in construction or manufacturing, should be actively encouraged to can travel go to work. And we want it to be safe for you to get to work. So you should avoid public transport, travel by car, cycle or walk if at all possible – because we must and will maintain social distancing, and capacity will therefore be limited. So work from home if you can, but you should go to work if you can’t work from home. And to ensure you are safe at work we have been working to establish new guidance for employers to make workplaces COVID-secure has been updated. And when you do go to work, if possible do so by car or even better by walking or bicycle. But just as with workplaces, public transport operators will also be following COVID-secure standards.”



Quote 2: Speech extract, redundant text removed (Johnson, 2020, pp. 1–11 Sky News May 10th, 2020)



So what happens when organisations intentionally communicates messages which contradict and confuse stakeholders? What needs to be in place in order for communicators to act in the best interest of all interested parties in a discussion? Modern communication environments are in a continuous state of flux. Democratisation of media and technology platforms and citizen as communicator has created a paradigm where information sharing takes place in real time and not necessarily authenticated. What is said, is not necessarily true creating a situation where citizens do not know what to believe and disseminators of information leverage information gaps to adapt beliefs.


For example on January 6th 2021 a member of the US Senate, Ted Cruz (quote 3) made a speech in Congress and said:



“Recent polling shows that 39% of Americans believe the election that just occurred, “was rigged.” You may not agree with that assessment. But it is nonetheless a reality for nearly half the country. I would note it is not just Republicans who believe that. 31% of independents agree with that statement. 17% of Democrats believe the election was rigged. Even if you do not share that conviction, it is the responsibility, I believe of this office to acknowledge that as a profound threat to this country and to the legitimacy of any administrations that will come in the future. I want to take a moment to speak to my Democratic colleagues. I understand. Your guy is winning right now. If Democrats vote as a block, Joe Biden will almost certainly be certified as the next president of the United States. I want to speak to the Republicans who are considering voting against these objections. I understand your concerns, but I urge you to pause and think, what does it say to the nearly half the country that believes this election was rigged if we vote? Not even to consider the claims of illegality and fraud in this election.”



Quote 3: Original text (Cruz, 2021b, pp. 1–11 transcript , 2021a video)



Analysis of the text suggests that the language choice in this example has two purposes. First of all it repeatedly questions the election result and secondly sentences and turns of phrase are explicitly used to build rapport with the receiver of the message. For instance, the scale of the problem shifts from“39% of Americans” to “nearly half the country” and is repeated twice in the speech. Furthermore phrases which cast doubt, fear or uncertainty such as “rigged” appear a number of times in the transcript. Synonyms such as “illegality” or “fraud” “concerns”, “objections” and “threats” potentially build mistrust in validity of the result and that there is a risk to the country, to the people and to democracy itself. The speech is peppered with rapport building phrases such as “believe”, “acknowledge”, “I want to speak”, “I urge” and “I understand,” and the authors’ tone of voice appears reassuring, authentic, considered, informed and reasonable (quote 4).



““Recent polling shows that 39% of Americans believe the election that just occurred, “was rigged.” You may not agree with that assessment. But it is nonetheless a reality for nearly half the country. I would note it is not just Republicans who believe that. 31% of independents agree with that statement. 17% of Democrats believe the election was rigged. Even if you do not share that conviction, it is the responsibility, I believe of this office to acknowledge that as a profound threat to this country and to the legitimacy of any administrations that will come in the future. I want to take a moment to speak to my Democratic colleagues. I understand. Your guy is winning right now. If Democrats vote as a block, Joe Biden will almost certainly be certified as the next president of the United States. I want to speak to the Republicans who are considering voting against these objections. I understand your concerns, but I urge you to pause and think, what does it say to the nearly half the country that believes this election was rigged if we vote? Not even to consider the claims of illegality and fraud in this election.”



Quote 4: Language casting doubt and reassurance (key: black = logical fallacies, red = mistrust building language, green = trust building language, blue = national, democratic language (Cruz, 2021b, pp. 1–11 transcript , 2021a video)



The literature says that arguments can be strong or weak. Strong arguments are logical, truth-based and robust, which means that flawed reasoning is absent. Weak arguments on the other hand use logical fallacies and flawed logic to appear stronger than they actually are (Sesonske, 1968, p. 217 to 231) and evident in this example. This concurs with the viewpoint that logical fallacy based communication fractured US politics, influenced the outcome of the UK’s Brexit referendum and has enabled the rise of conspiracy movements for decades. It demonstrates that the selective use of information divides and polarises stakeholder groups (Rose, 2017, p. 556).


The normalisation of logical fallacies (intentional or not) in the UK and US political speech extracts casts doubt on the motivation and credibility of those involved in the design and dissemination of information. This is because communication which contradicts and lacks clarity creates confusion (Blake, 2018). Fake news hiding under a veneer of authenticity is commonplace (Tandoc, Lim and Ling, 2018, pp. 137–153) and the blurred lines between trust, fact, evidence and fallacy has been experienced by at global and grass-roots level in political dialogue, during the pandemic and a characteristic of election communication styles. “Because of the intense competition and the sophisticated technology which is needed to effectively reach the contemporary voter, the cost of modern communication is high-high enough to drive many out of the political marketplace and, occasionally, drive some into rebellion” (Alexander, 1969, p. 255). The resulting confusion, in many cases, undermines trust in the communications profession and the integrity of information circulated.


Yet when the message of the US speech is distilled down to its intent, the word count reduces from 198 to 25 words and contains a clear call to action which potentially has broader appeal. In this case, the selective use of information can divide and polarises stakeholder groups (Rose, 2017, p. 556). The text in bold (quote 5) reads as:



“Recent polling shows that 39% of Americans believe the election that just occurred, “was rigged.” You may not agree with that assessment. But it is nonetheless a reality for nearly half the country. I would note it is not just Republicans who believe that. 31% of independents agree with that statement. 17% of Democrats believe the election was rigged. Even if you do not share that conviction, it is the responsibility, I believe of this office to acknowledge that as a profound threat to this country and to the legitimacy of any administrations that will come in the future. I want to take a moment to speak to my Democratic colleagues. I understand. Your guy is winning right now. If Democrats vote as a block, Joe Biden will almost certainly be certified as the next president of the United States. I want to speak to the Republicans who are considering voting against these objections. I understand your concerns, but I urge you to pause and think, what does it say to the nearly half the country that believes this election was rigged if we vote? Not even to consider the claims of illegality and fraud in this election.”



Quote 5: Speech extract with redundant text removed (Cruz, 2021b, pp. 1–11 transcript , 2021a video)



When “repetitive public communication with a selection of supportive facts designed to manipulate or persuade where the source is not always identified” (Moloney, 2006, p. 8), what is our responsibility as a sector and as a profession? Are we empowered to question the ethics of communication professionals who adopt these practises doubt when the evidence and data propose something different? Or are communicators tasked with “wrangling and horse-trading for advantage (material, ideological, legislative, reputational) between organisations and groups representing interests”? (Moloney, 2006, p. 85) where stakeholders question the integrity and intent of information circulated.


When an evidence, trust-based approach is taken and language is designed to be accessible. The message can be complex, clearly structured and understandable for all ages and reading levels. The best practise example below from public broadcaster NPO Zapp was originally published in Dutch and directed at mainstream media and youth audiences (quote 6).



IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

Saturday, September 26, 2020


The corona virus strikes JSF finalists Demi and Robin


Unfortunately, we have sad news about tonight's final. Two of our finalists, Demi from UNITY and Robin, tested positive for Corona, and did not have any symptoms. This means they cannot participate in the show. The final will continue, with 3 acts. Maud, Naomi and Jayda from UNITY perform as a trio. It's incredibly disappointing for the girls and our best wishes go out to them. This automatically means that Robin no longer has a chance of winning. If UNITY wins tonight, Demi can participate in the international final. Sadly, moving the final is not an option.


Unfortunately, professional jury member Emma Heesters will not be there tonight, someone close to her has corona. Although she has no symptoms, we and Emma naturally take our responsibility seriously and she will stay at home as a precaution. Fortunately, we found a good replacement: presenter and singer Fenna Ramos takes place in her jury chair.


We hope everyone will watch our final and cheer on our finalists from home!”



Quote 6: Original text translated from Dutch (NPO Zapp, Junior Song Festival 2020, pp. 1–3)



Crisis requires accuracy, facts, critical thinking, clarity and a clear call to action. The intent of the communication was clear. The update states that two participants and a jury member tested positive for Covid-19 even though they had no symptoms of corona. The consequences of the positive test results were clearly communicated to stakeholders. In the case of the competition finalists aged between 10 and 15 years, the solo artist could not attend the event The four piece girl band performed as a trio and the judge was replaced with a standby jury member.


The text was examined and when redundant words were removed (quote 7), the structure of the message remained the same and word count reduced from 182 to 94 words.



IMPORTANT ANNOUNCEMENT!

Saturday, September 26, 2020


The corona virus strikes JSF finalists Demi and Robin


Unfortunately, we have sad news about tonight's final. Two of our finalists, Demi from UNITY and Robin, tested positive for Corona, and did not have any symptoms. This means they cannot participate in the show. The final will continue, with 3 acts. Maud, Naomi and Jayda from UNITY perform as a trio. It's incredibly disappointing for the girls and our best wishes go out to them. This automatically means that Robin no longer has a chance of winning. If UNITY wins tonight, Demi can participate in the international final. Sadly, moving the final is not an option.


Unfortunately, professional jury member Emma Heesters will not be there tonight, someone close to her has corona. Although she has no symptoms, we and Emma naturally take our responsibility seriously and she will stay at home as a precaution. Fortunately, we found a good replacement: presenter and singer Fenna Ramos takes place in her jury chair.


We hope everyone will watch our final and cheer on our finalists from home!”



Quote 7: Text translated from Dutch, redundant text removed (NPO Zapp, Junior Song Festival 2020, pp. 1–3)



When communication works well, it is invisible and often taken for granted by internal and external stakeholders. In this case the primary audience consists of primary school children and the text is written to an equivalent level of the Crystal Mark in the UK which is run by the Plain English Campaign. The organisation campaigns against jargon and misleading public information and argues that people should have access to clear and concise information (Plain English Campaign, 2020). The organisation acknowledges effective and in effective communication. For example, Prime Minister Johnson was awarded a lifetime award in 2019 and the UKs’ government information services received special recognition when it was announced that “the definition for deaths in England changed on 1 June 2020.” Organisations are also recognised for communicating clearly, especially on matters that are potentially complex, upsetting or sensitive, trailblazers include the British Red Cross, mental health charity MIND and The Money Advice Service (Plain English Campaign, 2020).

It is time for the sector to work together and consider the following call to action. The sector (i.e. industry, academia in consultation with stakeholders) must, hold ourselves accountable for the messages we disseminate and recalibrate standards of best practise. We need to position communicators as intermediaries managing mistrust (Bourne, 2013, p. 72 Hoffmann, 2019). As the sector works together for change, it is vital that the profession protects its’ reputation and raises the benchmark of what it means to be a communication specialist so that the profession is understood, its impact and value is recognised and that it rejects “the culture in which facts themselves are manipulated and even manufactured” (Biden, 2021, p. 2).


Keywords:


trust, mistrust, communication, public relations, power dynamics.



Author: ​

Sinéad Hewson’s PhD research explored decision-making when communication is at the heart of an organisations’ strategy development was successfully defended in October 2020. Her background is in health, business and communication specialising in co-opetition, group dynamics and gender equity. Based in the Netherlands, Hewson sits on the board of turn2me an online mental health provider in Ireland and is a former Board Member of the European Institute of Women’s Health, former Chair of Education for the Public Relations Institute of Ireland. She sits on the advisory board of Women’s Business Initiative International. Sinead speaks internationally and is a guest lecturer in TU Dublin and also lectured in Webster University Leiden and Rotterdam University of Applied Sciences.


Contact details: ​

Sinead Hewson, School of Media & Communications, TU Dublin City Campus Email: d13129063@mytudublin.ie / sinead@tpebo.com Mobile: +31615071701



REFERENCES



Alexander, H. E. (1969) ‘Communications and Politics: The Media and the Message’, Law and Contemporary Problems, 34(2), pp. 255–277. doi: 10.2307/1191090.


Biden, J. (2021) President Biden Inauguration speech. Available at: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/joe-biden-first-speech-as-president-full-transcript-at-inauguration.


Blake, A. (2018) ‘The Trump team’s 24 hours of ridiculous and contradictory arguments’, Washington Post, September. Available at: https://www.washingtonpost.com/politics/2018/09/26/trump-teams-hours-ridiculous-contradictory-arguments/?utm_term=.bc13f1e46390.


Bourne, C. (2013) ‘Reframing trust, power and public relations in global financial discourses: Experts and the production of mistrust in life insurance’, Public Relations Inquiry, 2(1), pp. 51–77. doi: 10.1177/2046147x12465280.


Cruz, T. (2021a) Ted Cruz Senate Speech (youtube video). Available at: https://youtu.be/kN4yljm6y5U.


Cruz, T. (2021b) Ted Cruz Senate Speech on Election Certification Transcript January 6, rev.com. Available at: https://www.rev.com/blog/transcripts/ted-cruz-senate-speech-on-election-certification-transcript-january-6.


Hoffmann, J. (2019) ‘Harmonious public relations: a deconstruction of U.S.-based public relations textbooks’, Critical Studies in Media Communication. Taylor & Francis, 36(3), pp. 289–303. doi: 10.1080/15295036.2019.1587784.


Johnson, B. (2020) ‘Prime Minister’s statement on coronavirus (COVID-19): 10 May 2020’. London: Prime Minister’s Office, 10 Downing Street, p. 8. Available at: https://www.gov.uk/government/speeches/pm-statement-on-coronavirus-12-march-2020.


L’Etang, J. (2001) ‘The professionalisation of British public relations in the twentieth century: a history’, Film, Media and Journalism, Ph.D. thes, p. 233.


Lucas, M. (2020) So we are saying...., Twitter @reslmattlucas. Available at: https://twitter.com/realmattlucas/status/1259566662791106569.


Moloney, K. (2006) Rethinking Public Relations: PR propaganda and democracy, Rethinking Public Relations: PR Propaganda and Democracy. doi: 10.4324/9780203030592.


News, Sky (2020) ‘Coronavirus: “You should go to work if you can’t work from home”’. UK: Sky News. Available at: https://www.youtube.com/watch?app=desktop&v=IqHYoV34j0w.


Plain English Campaign (2020). Available at: http://www.plainenglish.co.uk/services/crystal-mark/7-the-crystal-mark-standard.html.


Rose, J. (2017) ‘Brexit, Trump, and Post-Truth Politics’, Public Integrity. Taylor & Francis, 19(6), pp. 555–558. doi: 10.1080/10999922.2017.1285540.


Sesonske, A. (1968) ‘To Make the Weaker Argument Defeat the Stronger’, Journal of the History of Philosophy, 6(3), pp. 217–231. doi: 10.1353/hph.2008.0984.


Tandoc, E. C., Lim, Z. W. and Ling, R. (2018) ‘Defining “Fake News”: A typology of scholarly definitions’, Digital Journalism. Routledge, 6(2), pp. 137–153. doi: 10.1080/21670811.2017.1360143.


Tolley, J. L. (1988) ‘Vern Schrantz Lecture, Department of Journalism, Ball State University, Muncie, IN.’, in Even when you’ve made it, you haven’t got got it made. Available at: http://schranzlecture.com/wpages/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/Tolley_James_1988.pdf.


(Zapp), NPO. (2020) Important Update: Junior Songfestival.




info@tPebo.com


Thrive | Provoke | Engage | Build | Originate

©2005 to 2023 TpEBO all rights reserved