Trevor Noah Announces Leaving The Daily Show
At the end of the show and the middle of a bunch of jokes, Trevor Noah announced that he’s leaving The Daily Show after seven-years. The video is an example of bad news, although I’m surprised at how he delivered the message (and I missed it last month).
His decision seemed to surprise his boss, who had lunch with him the day before and thought he would stay for at least the 2023-24 season. Even more surprising is that people at the media company would admit this to The Hollywood Reporter, which quoted a “high-ranking insider” (debatable?) as saying, “We were completely shocked.”
Noah’s five-minute video started with his gratitude for the seven-year experience. About two minutes in, he said, “My time is up. Yeah, but in the most beautiful way, honestly.” Then he described what he enjoyed about the show and what he misses, including traveling. All of it sounded unscripted, which of course, is consistent with his style and sounded authentic.
His approach is understandable partly because he didn’t have a set departure date at the time. He joked, “I’m not disappearing. Don’t worry. If I still owe you money. I’ll still pay you.”
Otherwise, it felt awkward. He did say, “I’ve never been good at, uh, goodbyes.” That much is clear.
Accommodations and Persuasion in the PA Debate
The Pennsylvania Senate Debate between John Fetterman and Dr. Mehmet Oz illustrates several interesting points for business communication students. One is the art of not answering questions, perhaps best illustrated by the first question, an opportunity to describe the candidates’ own qualifications, which they spent criticizing their opponent.
Another example is how the debate was structured to accommodate John Fetterman’s auditory processing issues, five months after he suffered a stroke. Fetterman kicked off the debate by admitting his illness and saying, “I had a stroke. He’s never let me forget that.” His speech was sometimes halting and repetitive, and he confused a few words. Repeating his doctor’s clearance, he tried to persuade voters that he is fit to serve.
Hot topics about abortion and fracking were discussed at length, with candidates balancing their party affiliations and ideals. At some point, Dr. Oz said, “I want women, doctors, local political leaders, letting the democracy that’s always allowed our nation to thrive to put the best ideas forward so states can decide for themselves.” This inspired jokes and “Inside Amy Schumer” segments that I won’t link (because they’re NSFW).
Students will find more to discuss about the candidates’ presentation skills, responses to questions, and persuasive communication.
Comparing Company Statements About Kanye West
Since his anti-semitic posts and after pressure from consumers and industry leaders, companies are dropping ties with Kanye West. Here are several statements for students to compare. These messages could be considered positive or bad news, but they are all persuasive. Which demonstrate more courage and compassion?
MRC Entertainment: Company leaders wrote a personal note about their decision to stop distribution of a Kanye West documentary. They explain his flawed logic about Jewish people and call out others for being silent.
Balenciaga: The fashion company gave only a short statement to WWD: “Balenciaga has no longer any relationship nor any plans for future projects related to this artist.”
CAA: Similarly, CAA Talent Agency reportedly dropped West as a client but gave no statement.
United: This talent agency’s CEO, Jeremy Zimmer, was more vocal. In an email, he encouraged staff to boycott Kanye West.
Adidas: After much pressure, including a dropping share price and a tweet and petition from the Anti-Defamation League, Adidas finally announced an end to their partnership. The Adidas statement identified what Kanye (“Ye”) did: “[H]is recent comments and actions have been unacceptable, hateful and dangerous, and they violate the company’s values of diversity and inclusion, mutual respect and fairness.” But the rest of the statement focuses on the financial impact. Fun fact: Adi Dassler, the founder of Adidas, was a member of the Nazi party.
Gap: In as short statement, Gap announced the end of its Yeezy partnership. Posted the same day as Adidas’s announcement, the message doesn’t mention that West ended the relationship in September for breach of contract. The current decision is to stop selling products that were in the pipeline.
CAM Communication Model
At the 2022 ABC Conference, I presented with colleagues about the CAM communication model. Useful for deciding whether, what, and how to communicate, the model walks students through three steps:
Character Check: What drives me to communicate? To what am I reacting, and what is my purpose? What impact do I want to have? How do I want others to perceive me? How can I demonstrate good character?
Audience Analysis: How can I tailor my communication to my audience? What context should I consider? How does communication travel within the organization? What barriers might get in the way?
Message and Medium: What is the content of my message, and how will I convey that message?
You’re welcome to download and use this handout, which provides generic questions and then a sample activity for students to apply the model when deciding whether to include something potentially controversial or perceived negatively during the job search.
The King's Speech
Although not a business presentation, King Charles III’s first address after Queen Elizabeth’s passing teaches communication lessons. His objectives are to pay deep respects to his mother, while reassuring the British citizens (and the world) by establishing his leadership.
Although, news reports show people “shocked” by the Queen’s death, this time was inevitable, and The King had plenty of time to prepare. He tackles difficult subjects, for example, the family split, in expected fashion—by alluding to them without addressing them directly. Another example is the extraordinary inflation that Britain has suffered. He mentioned “charities and issues for which I care so deeply” that will now be taken up by the new Prince of Wales.
The Guardian identifies a few examples of “expressions of open emotion.” One was “I want also to express my love for Harry and Meghan as they continue to build their lives overseas.” The couple’s leaving royal life after experiencing racist comments from the family has been painful and a public scandal. Other examples follow, as The Guardian reports:
“I count on the loving help of my darling wife, Camilla” and finished with an emotional sign off to his “darling Mama” when he wished: “May ‘flights of angels sing thee to thy rest’,” a quote from the ending of Shakespeare’s Hamlet.
From an American perspective—and other cultures—the speech may be considered flat. He is sitting and reading from a script, and his pace is slow and deliberate. But the speech is certainly appropriate for the difficult situation that the King faces, just one day after a new Prime Minister shook hands with the beloved Queen.
Honest Email Auto-Responses
The New York Times published a series of automated email responses that let senders know why the receiver will take a while to reply or will not replay at all. Each explains a mental-health reason, for example, vacationing or recovering from a miscarriage. Some are funny, like this one:
Thanks for your email—but unfortunately, I’m rocking in a corner somewhere trying to find my inner peace. As soon as I’ve found it, I’ll be back at work, so please bear with me.
Alain Sobol, Sharm el-Sheikh, Egypt
Generally, I like the idea. The responses are honest and demonstrate integrity, vulnerability, and authenticity. A few of the examples might be “TMI” (too much information), but that’s for each receiver to decide.
Students can draft their own responses, but I’ll add a word of caution: these shouldn’t be overused. How much senders will tolerate depends on the situation and relationship. If an email is important, the sender needs alternatives, which I don’t see in the NYT examples. A time estimate or someone else to contact would be appreciated.
Boris Johnson's Resignation Speech
British PM Boris Johnson’s resignation speech is a lesson in delivery skills. Johnson reads a script and yet sounds natural—he uses conversational language and comes across as authentic.
Johnson resisted calls for his resignation, both at this point and previously, when lawmakers believed other transgressions were cause for him to leave office, for example, holding parties that violated Covid guidelines. The “final straw" was when Johnson hired someone who faced sexual misconduct charges. Although Johnson denied knowing about the claims, he later admitted that he did know. Two high-ranking officials resigned, followed by several others.
The speech, 6.5 minutes long, begins with his decision and the “will of the Parliamentary Conservative Party” that a new leader should be instated. He then highlights successes during his tenure, including Brexit, Covid actions, and supporting the Ukrainian people during the war. Expressing regret, he concedes that “no one is indispensable.” At the same time, he acknowledges that some people will be “relieved” and, with colloquial language says, “Them’s the breaks.”
Ending with gratitude for the job, lawmakers, and the public, Johnson leaves on a positive note about the future of the United Kingdom. Despite issues of integrity throughout his time as PM, Johnson does the right, if not obvious, thing in the end.
Lizzo Apologizes for Ableist Slur
Singer and songwriter Lizzo apologized to fans and critics, many of them on TikTok, offended by the term “spaz” in her new song, “GRRRLS.” One tweet explained the controversy:
@lizzo please re-release “grrrls” without the ablist [sic] slur. That word is not kind to disabled people. Your music is global and you have a voice folks listen to. We are trusting and asking you to release it without the slur.
Others mentioned their surprise because the singer “champions women, plus size people and others whom society treats poorly, Lizzo preaches inclusivity and should do better.”
Lizzo responded with an apology that demonstrates accountability and authenticity. She admitted the mistake, announced a new version, and highlighted her own identity. The apology could have been improved by recognizing how the term is offensive and harmful. Regardless, fans seemed to appreciate the response and, overall, the apology was effective.
Musk's Meeting with Twitter Employees
A summary of Elon Musk’s meeting with Twitter staff gives us a window into a typical “all-hands meeting.” Employees who ask questions demonstrate courage—and humility.
Of course, in this case, employees are most concerned about their jobs if/when Musk’s acquisition of the company is final. A Wall Street Journal article describes his stance:
Regarding layoffs, Mr. Musk said anyone who is a significant contributor shouldn’t have anything to worry about, according to people who viewed the meeting. “Right now, costs exceed revenue,” he said, according to the people. “That’s not a great situation.”
Likewise, this isn’t a great response for worried staff. How do they know whether they are “a significant contributor”? Doesn’t everyone believe that they are? As one person tweeted, “still not sure if I need to start packing my bags.” The company might lose good people in the meantime—people who don’t want to stick around to see what happens.
As expected, Musk was asked how he views freedom of speech. Musk distinguished between freedom of speech and “freedom of reach,” giving the example of “walk[ing] into the middle of Times Square and deny[ing] the Holocaust" but not allowing that to be promoted. "So I think people should be allowed to say pretty outrageous things that are within the bounds of the law, but then that doesn’t get amplified. It doesn’t get, you know, a ton of reach."
A lot of uncertainty remains for Twitter employees. It’s difficult to know how sincere the meeting was. As this employee cartoon suggests, employees expected that the meeting, although billed as confidential, would be leaked. Still, the format was probably useful for employees to hear directly from Musk, which is the point of these meetings, whether in person or virtual.
Twitter's New Privacy Notice
Like most people, I ignore privacy notices, those jumbles of legalese in small print with too few headings. But Twitter’s latest is well designed and written in an authentic voice with conversational language. I can’t say whether previous notices were similar, but this one covers what users might care about and walks the reader through each part.
The notice starts with an engaging introduction that speaks to the reader: “Before you scroll, read this.” Six main points are up front, and each section leads with a user’s question, for example, “Seriously — what happens with my data?”
I wish more companies would write privacy notices this way. But then, people might actually read them.
Business Attire Trends
A New York Times article describes new approaches to what people wear to work, which could influence what students wear on interviews and on their first day at the office. Since the pandemic, new language has emerged: “business comfort,” “workleisure,” and “power casual.” Dress is more relaxed, with more elastic waistbands and stretchier fabrics. The article author says that trends follow the economy: in bad times, people dress up to impress recruiters and managers, while in good times (tight labor markets like today), people tend to dress down.
This advice for recent grads seems reasonable for now:
J.T. O’Donnell, a former human-resources executive and founder of the career coaching platform Work It Daily, said she would not recommend that job applicants or recent graduates automatically buy interview suits these days. While that may work for some industries, like banking and consulting, she said, job candidates should research potential employers on social media to get a sense of how people at the company dress, then “dress slightly higher than what their proclaimed style is.”
“It can be very easy to say right now that they’re lucky to even have me walk through the door, so I just don’t care about my appearance right now,” Ms. O’Donnell said. But “you do want to not be wrinkly, have stuff tucked in, look like you made an effort.” She advises job hunters to wear clothing suitable for visiting their grandmothers.
In addition to reducing stress, the new attire may reflect students’ authenticity—who they are and what they like to wear. Both are good results of new clothes instead of the black/gray/navy suit-costumes of the past.
Boeing's Scant Statement on Crash
As we wait for details about the plane crash in China, Boeing has issued a statement. The plan was a Boeing 737—not the Max that caused two crashes in 2019 and 2020. Still, the company has suffered greatly, taking longer than expected fixing problems and doing PR damage control in the meantime. This latest situation doesn’t help the company’s reputation.
At the same time, this crash is highly unusual, taking place during descent, during which only 3% of plane crashes occur. In addition, this plane had been operating for six years without issue. Both black boxes were found, so investigators will find more information. But, sadly, knowing the reason for the crash won’t change the fate of 132 victims and their loved ones.
Boeing’s statement is the bare minimum. The company follows its typical communication protocol, saying as little as possible and coming from no one in particular. I understand not taking responsibility at this point, but how about a little more compassion and authenticity? I wonder what lessons company leaders learned in the past two years about communication and character.
Boeing Statement on China Eastern Airlines Flight MU 5735
CHICAGO, March 26, 2022 – Boeing today released the following statement:
“We extend our deepest condolences for the loss of those on board China Eastern Airlines Flight MU 5735. Our thoughts and prayers are with the passengers and crew, their families and all those affected by this accident. Boeing will continue to support our airline customer during this difficult time. In addition, a Boeing technical team is supporting the NTSB and the Civil Aviation Administration of China who will lead the investigation.”
Contact
Boeing Communications
media@boeing.com
Will Smith's Apology
The 2022 Academy Awards ceremony was eventful, with Chris Rock referencing Jada Smith’s appearance and her husband, Will Smith, hitting Rock on stage. Jada Smith has spoken openly about having alopecia, a hair loss condition. Rock’s joke clearly hit a nerve with her husband.
From the audience, Smith cursed at Rock, who continued with his presentation. Later, Smith gave a tearful acceptance speech for Best Actor in a Leading Role, comparing himself to the character he played, Serena and Venus Williams’ father: they both protected their family. He apologized to his fellow nominees and the Academy but not to Rock. The next day, he posted a fuller apology on Instagram, mentioning Rock first.
The Academy tweeted a pat response, “The Academy does not condone violence of any form. Tonight we are delighted to celebrate our 94th Academy Awards winners, who deserve this moment of recognition from their peers and movie lovers around the world.” I don’t see any response from Rock yet.
The rest of the ceremony was awkward, and host Amy Schumer made a joke, “Did I miss something? There's like, a different vibe in here....” Her idea was probably to call out what was obvious.
Everyone seems to have an opinion on the situation. Was Rock’s joke about “G.I. Jane 2” over the top? Was Smith’s response appropriate? Should he have been prevented from speaking after that point? Should the Academy do more?
The situation is complex and calls us to explore issues of character, for example, compassion, courage, authenticity, accountability, and vulnerability.
LinkedIn Gives Options for Employment Gaps
In a new feature, LinkedIn gives users 13 ways to describe reasons for employment gaps. In a blog post, a senior product manager at LinkedIn explained the rationale:
“According to a recent survey, more than half of professionals have taken a career break. Yet for far too long, the possibility of embarking on a career break has been overshadowed by stigma, which 60% of people believe still exists. . . . 46% of hiring managers believe candidates with career breaks are an untapped talent pool.”
Recruiters have business reasons to be more open-minded about time away from work. The “Great Resignation” and tight labor market left openings that employers need to fill.
LinkedIn’s survey found that 51% of employers are more likely to contact candidates who “provides context” about a gap. Of course, what LinkedIn doesn’t say is that 49% may be less likely or just as likely to follow up. Still, we may be seeing more compassion about personal challenges, including breaks for mental health reasons, family responsibilities, and illness.
If this feature is used widely, it could normalize work breaks and reduce the stigma of taking time off. Personal reasons are personal, but revealing them may encourage applicants to be more vulnerable and authentic—to trust that employers won’t judge them harshly and to present themselves genuinely, “warts and all.”
To explain a gap is to take a risk but so is not explaining a gap. In this case, an employer may think the worst, and applicants have no chance to include their own voice.
Advice for Resignation Emails
A Wall Street Journal article suggests ways to resign from your job gracefully. With a wave of post-pandemic departures, we’re seeing all sorts of resignation messages, some more appropriate than others. The string of emails can be disheartening for people who decide to stay, and leavers should be mindful of burning bridges they may want to walk across in the future.
A law career coach advises that people “Let it rip. Let everything out”—in a document that you don’t send. Then, send an email that respects the workplace and the people you’ll leave behind:
“For the real deal, be gracious and express gratitude. Include up to three career highlights. (Any more and you risk being seen as a braggart.) And skip the passive-aggressive jabs.”
I hadn’t thought about including career highlights, and I wonder whether coworkers would appreciate reading them. Instead, I suggest observing what other resignation emails include and following suit. Every workplace has its own norms around these types of messages.
I do agree with this advice:
“By giving your notice, ‘the power dynamic has been leveled.’ Use that new sense of control and confidence to share more authentically about yourself, not torpedo your relationships on the way out the door.”
The coach is right: you made your decision and are burdening your manager and coworkers who will pick up the slack. Now’s the time to demonstrate humility instead of rubbing it in and causing more hurt feelings.
Deception in the Hiring Process
A New York Times article surprised me. During a video job interview, someone else answered “technical questions while the job candidate moved his lips onscreen.”
All applicants present themselves in the best light. We describe our accomplishments and may push the limits of our expertise. We also “cover” parts of ourselves that we fear may be undesirable to an employer.
But having a friend interview for a candidate is out of bounds. In this example, the interviewer wondered, “What did he think was going to happen when he moved across the country and realized he couldn’t do the job?” The article concludes with a quote from a deceptive candidate who felt relieved when she didn’t get the job. Of course, that’s a better outcome than suffering the embarrassment of failure.
This situation is a clear example of integrity—misrepresenting oneself, claiming to be someone they (intentional plural) are not. Today, we have a particularly strong job market; I would hope that candidates can find a job for which they’re qualified.
Encouraging Humility
David Axelrod, a New York Times opinion writer, weighs in on President Biden’s first State of the Union address, scheduled for March 1. The article, “Mr. President, It’s Time for a Little Humility,” criticizes the president’s previous news conference in which he “energetically sold a litany of achievements” without acknowledging “grinding concerns that have soured the mood of the country.”
In addition to humility, which is defined at recognizing one’s own and others’ limitations, Alexrod is encouraging compassion—caring for yourself and others. He makes good arguments for being positive, while avoiding a “doom and gloom” speech like one of President Carter’s.
Getting the balance right will be difficult. The president needs to remind people of his successes to inspire reelection, while being honest about COVID deaths, the decline of mental health, and economic challenges. As Alexrod says, “Now, he needs to find that voice by telling the story of the ordeal so many Americans have shared, honoring their resilience and painting a credible, realistic picture of how we can all reclaim control of our lives.”
We’ll see how President Biden does. Multiple speech writers will wordsmith his address. But as business communicators know, how the speech is received depends on the president’s delivery as well as his words. I’m curious how much of the president’s genuine self we’ll see—his authenticity.
Arguments in the Joe Rogan, Spotify Situation
A few musicians and podcast creators are leaving Spotify over controversy about “The Joe Rogan Experience,” a popular show that has included misinformation about COVID-19 vaccinations. Comparing messages from different points of view is an interesting look at persuasive arguments and raises issues of character. Here are a few to explore:
Spotify’s stance is explained in this statement and may be summarized as follows from the chief executive and co-founder: “I think the important part here is that we don’t change our policies based on one creator nor do we change it based on any media cycle, or calls from anyone else.” Spotify also created a COVID information hub.
Neil Young removed his music, which had hundreds of millions of views, and explained his rationale in a letter (since removed from his website): “I am doing this because Spotify is spreading fake information about vaccines—potentially causing death to those who believe the disinformation being spread by them.”
Crosby, Stills, and Nash followed suit and posted their reason on Twitter: “We support Neil and agree with him that there is dangerous disinformation being aired on Spotify’s Joe Rogan podcast. While we always value alternate points of view, knowingly spreading disinformation during this global pandemic has deadly consequences. Until real action is taken to show that a concern for humanity must be balanced with commerce, we don’t want our music—or the music we made together—to be on the same platform.”
Roxane Gay explained her decision to remove “The Roxane Gay Agenda” in a New York Times opinion letter. In closing, she wrote, “I am not trying to impede anyone’s freedom to speak. Joe Rogan and others like him can continue to proudly encourage misinformation and bigotry to vast audiences. They will be well rewarded for their efforts. The platforms sharing these rewards can continue to look the other way. But today at least, I won’t.”
Bréne Brown “paused” her two podcasts and wrote that she is waiting for more information: “I’ve enjoyed the creative collaboration with Spotify, and I appreciate how the leadership has shown up in our meetings over the past week. Now that Spotify has published its misinformation policy, and the policy itself appears to address the majority of my concerns, I’m in the process of learning how the policy will be applied. I’m hopeful that the podcasts will be back next week.” As you might expect, Brown demonstrates vulnerability, including negative, personal comments she has received about the issue.
Joe Rogan apologized in a 10-minute Instagram video, promising to “balance out viewpoints with other people’s perspectives.”
UPDATE: A video compilation of Rogan using a racial slur has emerged, and he apologized—again.
BlackRock CEO Defends Focus
Investment firm BlackRock has pushed companies to pursue a social purpose in addition to profits. The chief executive’s annual letter to investors defends this approach, which has been criticized as anti-business.
Up front in the title, “The Power of Capitalism,” Larry Fink addresses criticism head on and further explains in the letter:
“Stakeholder capitalism is not about politics. It is not a social or ideological agenda. It is not ‘woke.’ It is capitalism, driven by mutually beneficial relationships between you and the employees, customers, suppliers, and communities your company relies on to prosper. This is the power of capitalism.”
Fink states his belief clearly in the last paragraph:
“…it is more important than ever that your company and its management be guided by its purpose. If you stay true to your company's purpose and focus on the long term, while adapting to this new world around us, you will deliver durable returns for shareholders and help realize the power of capitalism for all.”
The letter illustrates persuasive communication, focusing not on emotional appeal but logical arguments. For his audience, which he defines at the beginning as CEOs, he encourages a commitment to purpose—for leaders to let stakeholders “know where we stand on the societal issues intrinsic to our companies’ long-term success.” He writes “long-term” 18 times in the letter, using repetition to drive the point home. Fink illustrates a few leadership character dimensions, for example, authenticity, integrity, and courage.
Candidates for U.S. Supreme Court Justice
Speculation abounds on the next U.S. Supreme Court Justice, but something we know for sure: it will be a Black woman. President Biden promised to fill the spot with a Black woman should a position open up during his presidency.
Several women are in the running, including Judge Ketanji Brown, shown here. Many candidates have degrees from Harvard and Yale, serve as judges, and have experience as law clerks for past and current justices.
The selection process will be interesting to watch. Like any employment situation, the candidates will be interviewed, but unlike business employment situations, they will be vetted under a microscope. After the president nominates a candidate, the Senate votes, by majority, whether to confirm the nomination. We’ll see to what extent race and gender come into the conversations.
The Supreme Court website describes the job qualifications:
The Constitution does not specify qualifications for Justices such as age, education, profession, or native-born citizenship. A Justice does not have to be a lawyer or a law school graduate, but all Justices have been trained in the law. Many of the 18th and 19th century Justices studied law under a mentor because there were few law schools in the country.
Today, it would be quite unusual for a justice to lack a law degree, and the selection process favors certain schools. Of the nine current justices, four graduated from Harvard Law School and four from Yale. Amy Coney Barrett, the most recent addition, graduated from Notre Dame.