The Power of Words

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers, LLC

“It’s not what you say, but how you say it!”

Perhaps you received that admonition from your mom or dad—or both—while you were growing up. And probably because they didn’t approve of something you said.

But it says so much more about how we communicate today. The deluge, the cacophony of voices and messages are overwhelming. We typically respond by ignoring most of it.

Until that one thing you hear or read jumps out…because of the way it's said or written.

Consider this video of a blind beggar on a street somewhere in England, perhaps London. One passerby stopped and rewrote his message. The result, donations increased substantially.

The message was the same, but stated in a much more powerful way.

What Happened to Comparatives?

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers, LLC

When did “healthier” become “more healthy?” Or, when did “smarter” become “more smart?” Or, when did “stronger” become “more strong?” The rules for these things we call comparatives keep getting broken:

1. One syllable words form the comparative by adding -er and -est:

brave, braver, bravest
small, smaller, smallest
dark, darker, darkest.

2. Two-syllable words that end in -y, -le, and -er form the comparative by adding -er and -est:
pretty, prettier, prettiest
happy, happier, happiest
noble, nobler, noblest
clever, cleverer, cleverest

3. Words of more than two syllables form the comparative with more and most:
beautiful, more beautiful, most beautiful.
resonant, more resonant, most resonant

This may sound like a minor point to you. Don't be fooled. If someone thinks you made a mistake with your comparative, they just might not hear anything else you say. Result: message lost.

It's often the little things that make a big difference.

Here's a little song for you in this video clip to help you remember when to add "-er" or "more":

Succeeding a Legend

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers, LLC

It’s tempting to strike back when you’re being attacked through the media. We’re getting a belly full of examples from the GOP presidential debates.

It’s the unusual person who can constrain that reflex and take the high road in such a way that their response is even more powerful.

Bill O’Brien is the newly-named football coach at Penn State. You probably know about the sordid scandal that institution is experiencing regarding a former assistant coach and charges of pedophilia. It cost one of the most celebrated coaches of all time, Joe Paterno, his job. It was very tragic for an icon to be forcibly retired.

And it’s quite a challenge to be the person who follows him.

O’Brien, the successor, has no Penn State roots; no connection at all. And while he has significant experience as an assistant coach in the pros and with major college programs, he’s never been a head coach. Those are two primary reasons his selection was not greeted favorably by everyone. Some notable former players have complained very loudly and publicly.

“It would have been nice if we felt like we were part of the process,” said D.J. Dozier, a member of the 1986 national championship team. “This is a pretty important situation in transition for the university and the program. There are a lot of guys that feel a certain way. Today I have more questions than answers.”

Former linebackers LaVar Arrington and Brandon Short led an online petition in support of interim coach Tom Bradley who’s been with Penn State and at Paterno’s side for decades.

It would be easy to understand O’Brien if he responded in anger. But, instead, his reaction was not only positive, it was powerful, giving his critics little opportunity to continue their public denunciations.

When he was introduced at a press conference, O’Brien acknowledged the controversy, said he understood it and took responsibility to “get this football family moving in the right direction.”

“We respectfully request the opportunity to earn your trust through communication and field it through our abilities, ethics, beliefs, work ethic and commitment to Penn State. In time, we will find that we have more common interests and goals than not. We are here now with you. You should be proud of Penn State’s numerous accomplishments. You should be proud of Penn State’s football program. You should love this school. You are why we want to be here. We want you to know that you will always be welcome and a part of our program because we are Penn State!”

With those brief remarks, Bill O’Brien created an open, accessible and welcoming posture to even his most strident critics, leaving them little room to credibly continue their public complaints.

This is an excellent example of how to channel your emotions through the media to help drive persuasive and positive messaging.

(You can see and hear O’Brien’s statement, which runs about one and a half minutes, just click on the video below.)

The Good Do Die Young

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers, LLC

This is a very personal post about a very special friend and journalist.

Jim Huber’s prose resonated like poetry. A newspaper sports reporter who graduated to radio and television, everywhere he went, everyone he met, the result always was positive. Look up the words “class” and “gentleman” and certainly the picture you see above should be included.

I met Jim 37 years ago. I was news director of an Atlanta radio station. He was PR Director for the Atlanta Flames. Our station general manager saw something special in Jim, especially his writing. So he joined us as our sports director and soon his daily morning commentaries were appointment listening. I always was struck by the number of female listeners who tuned in for Jim’s sports-related comments. His prose was that good!

And his sense of humor. It was special. One day many years ago, I believe it was the LA Dodgers who signed the aged Minnie Minosa to their post-season baseball roster. It was a public relations move that generated lots of buzz. Minnie, of course, was a Latino and Jim played a tape supposedly of Minosa speaking Spanish at a Dodger press conference. Actually, it was tape of Brazilian soccer superstar Pele. Later that day, a listener called me and said he wasn't absolutely certain, but he thought the tape was of someone speaking Portuguese, not Spanish. Yes, Jim did it purposely to see if anyone noticed.

Like a perfectly cut diamond, Jim had many facets. And among them was his unflappability. Although originally a print reporter, he adapted to his broadcast environment quickly and smoothly. He was a complete pro. He left radio for local TV, but his talent was much too big for one market. CNN knew that and hired him for their sports department. Anchoring and reporting were his staple duties, but his sports essays became his brand.

Recognizing his very special skill, Jim was given more opportunities to grow that brand. The ideas for his essays were his own and he was afforded the time to write and produce them. CNN knew it had someone and something special and the network took advantage of it.

While sports was Jim’s second love—after family—golf was his special passion. For years, he was the in-depth interviewer and essayist for TBS and its coverage of the PGA. He became a celebrity in his own right (although that probably made him uncomfortable) within the professional golf community. His inherent kindness always came out in his work. Jim had a golden touch; he was a master wordsmith, and when an idea struck, he often could quickly turn out a beautiful piece.

I had lunch with Jim a little over a year ago. It was a great reunion. We had not seen each other for years, despite living in the same metropolitan area. Too often, life gets in the way of what makes living so special. We talked about getting together with our wives one evening soon for dinner. We never did and I will forever regret it.

A few days before this past Christmas, Jim had a cough that kept getting worse. He finally went to an ER for medical assistance. The diagnosis was acute Leukemia. One day after New Year’s, he was gone. Taken from us so unexpectedly, without any warning. I still cannot accept the fact that he’s gone.

Jim was 67. That’s much too young. He had so much more to do, so much more to give.

Too often the good do seem to die young.

There are a number of examples of Jim’s essays online. Here are links to two of them. One on the late Wayman Tisdale chronicling his battle with cancer. The other on the retirement of celebrated NBA coach Phil Jackson.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3paZTyDt0IU

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=GHVG7Rig95c

First Impressions, Lasting Impressions

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers, LLC

Are you aware of your immediate reaction to someone before they even say a word? More importantly, are you aware of how others might first perceive you when you meet? Non-verbals can scream, without making a sound. And, in interviewing, they are critical to your credibility. Here are some examples to consider:

1-800 Flowers CEO Jim McCann has a lot to smile about. This holiday season has been good for his business. But even when things are not this good, McCann warms a room with his smile and his body language. Executives could learn a lot observing McCann in interviews. He's warm, friendly and jovial.

Basic Industry Services CEO Kenneth Huseman has a positive story to tell, but you wouldn't know it from his demeanor. He helps oil companies find employees. And there are plenty of jobs to be filled right now in the U.S., but Huseman is all business. He could loosen up a bit. Maybe Jim McCann could advise him on the value of a smile!

This is Dennis Davern. He captained the boat from which Natalie Wood "fell" and drowned 30 years ago. He contributed to a book recently published that claims, at the very least, negligence on the part of Wood's husband, Robert Wagner, contributed to her death. Did anyone tell Davern to shave and bathe before this interview? Apparently not! By the way, his performance was as poor as his appearance.

This guy, on the other hand, is being hammered with one of the toughest and nastiest questions I've heard. He's Nokia's CEO, Stephen Elop, and the gist of the question is that Nokia's stock isn't worth holding onto, not to mention purchasing. Yet, to his credit, Elop maintains a cool expression, waits for the question to end (and it was long), and then answers it calmly and positively.

Familiar with Scott Boras? He's a sports agent, primarily for major league baseball players. His client list includes a number of super stars. Teams hate dealing with Boras. He's very difficult. Indeed some teams have refused to deal with him at all. His image follows him into interviews. In this one, he made very clear non-verbally that he was bored and would rather be somewhere else. So why did he agree to do it?

And, finally, Harry Belafonte was making the rounds not long ago, via satellite, selling his autobiography. Belafonte was in NYC as the local Terre Haute, Indiana, TV anchor introduced him. Unfortunately, Harry had fallen asleep, apparently with no IFB in his ear. She called his name several times, but nothing. Not a flinch, not a muscle. His pose was frozen. No word on sales of his book in Terre Haute, but this "interview" undoubtedly generated lots of buzz.

DAY-OH...DAYLIGHT COME AND HARRY'S STILL ASLEEP!

Blind Man Swinging at a Piñata

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

First, this disclaimer: I have no preference in the GOP presidential contest. I observe press conferences, interviews and debates through the prism of techniques.

With that said, Herman Cain’s response to sex harassment charges has been a graduate-level course in what NOT to do in a crisis.

Observing Cain and his campaign has been like watching a blind man swinging at a piñata. Every response has been an instant reaction without prior thought or planning, constantly missing the mark. As a result, Cain’s story has changed from one interview to the next. As more details emerge, his explanation adds a new wrinkle, provoking more questions and a picture of an organization in chaos.

Cain’s communications team—which may be a generous description—has been amateurish. Chief of Staff Mark Block took that a step further, appearing on Fox News and with a page of messages he visibly referred to during the live interview. In addition, Block charged the Rick Perry campaign for leaking the harassment story to Politico, a charge that very likely could be wrong, thus creating even deeper problems and concerns for the Cain campaign and its credibility. (Click on the video below.)

Herman Cain and his people were alerted this story was coming out about 10 days in advance. Their apparent inaction in doing due diligence and preparing a factual, credible, cogent and comprehensive response inevitably raises questions about the candidate and his ability to organize and lead. They had an opportunity to get ahead of this story, but their inaction has them trailing, keeping them off message.

Today’s reality of instant planet-wide communication makes it a priority to have a strong, credible communications infrastructure. And not just for political candidates; it’s imperative for all businesses and organizations.

The ROI of Interviews

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

Consider this: a reporter interviews you because they want information, or a quote (or sound bite). So, you are fullfilling something they need to do a story. What about what you need, or would like to get in return? Shouldn’t this be a two-sided arrangement?

In either case, neither of you may come away with exactly what you wanted, or needed, to get out of it. But that doesn’t negate the fact that you have every right to pre-determine what you want to get out of an interview BEFORE you submit.

Hence what I call your ROI: Return On the Interview. This is what you want to achieve as result of solid, persuasive messaging. The ROI could be one (or more) of any number of things including, but not limited to:

• Competitive advantage
• Correcting erroneous impressions
• Enhancing or repair company image
• Positively affecting stock value
• Joining an industry messaging campaign
• Potential for immediate financial gains
• Responding to a crisis
• Maintaining a top-of-mind position with clients/customers
• Cultivating media relationships to support your branding efforts

There are no guarantees you’ll achieve your Return On the Interview. But you can be fairly sure no ROI will be derived if none is planned for ahead of time.

Predetermine your ROI and good message development should follow.

Practice! Practice! Practice!

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

When it comes to dealing with the media, it’s all about impressions made on target audiences. Bad ones can be made very quickly and be long lasting. Good ones can be quick, too, and need to be repeated. One misstep can change good to bad right away.

That’s one of the reasons it’s so important to rehearse before you do an interview. Any type of interview. Print or broadcast. And the more challenging the environment, the greater the need to practice. Here’s an evaluation of a recent case in point.

Marcel Fairbarin is the founder of LED Source. He specializes in lighting. But watch him explain what he does to a business network anchor who’s pretty much in the dark. He fails in his first 16 seconds.

For another 16 seconds, he gets deeper into the weeds…not very enlightening, nor interesting.

Finally, more than 30 seconds into his description, Marcel hits on what a business network audience would want to know; his product provides strong, positive returns.

Another problem with this interview is that Marcel doesn’t appear to have practiced. His inconsistent eye contact and swiveling in his chair are distractions.

It’s not easy relating to a camera. It requires you to personify the camera and address it as if it’s animate and listening to you. You need to maintain eye contact with an unblinking object staring back at you, and appear to be relaxed at the same time.

Bottom line: Before any interview, Practice! Practice! Practice! Make sure you understand the planned environment, and prepare for it!

No "Feel" for a Sexually Hostile Workplace?

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

The recent arrest of International Monetary Fund Managing Director Dominique Strauss-Kahn has led to reports that sexual harassment is part of the culture at the IMF.

US Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner worked at the IMF at one time. Politico.com reporter Mike Allen asked Geithner about reports of a “predatory atmosphere” there. His answer? Well, you really need to watch this video.

Geithner’s evasive response, and that he had no "feel" for the atmosphere there, inevitably leads to the conclusion that yes, he was aware of the IMF culture, but he was immune to it since he’s a man and it’s a question for a woman. Apparently, it just didn’t affect him like it would female staffers. In other words, this is the way things are and so be it?

His answer would be troubling for any public official, but especially for someone with such a high position in government.

Beware Interview IEDs

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

The media love conflict and controversy. That’s what makes for a good story. So, they often seed questions with a word or two designed to provoke a controversial response. I call these “Interview IEDs.” They’re designed to make you blow up. Figuratively speaking, of course.

And what could be a more fertile potential source of conflict and controversy than the big oil companies after their periodic public spanking by Congress?

Putting yourself in the place of an oil company CEO, it would seem enticing to use the venue of a live interview to fire back. But, the smart executives understand there’s no reward in doing that. And the really smart ones know how to avoid “Interview IEDs.”

For instance, Chevron’s John Watson, shortly after a recent US Senate hearing, appeared live with Fox business anchor, Neil Cavuto.

“Did you feel that you were just part of a kangaroo court…?” Cavuto asked.

“We take the opportunity we get. Sometimes the comments have to be short, but we try to get our points across,” Watson answered.

(Editor note: No need to be quoted talking about the Senate committee being a “kangaroo court.”)

Cavuto: “Do you think if you guys weren’t making so much money…there would even be a hearing today?”

Watson: “Well, our business is big and I think that’s hard for anyone to understand…”

(Editor note: I love this answer; it’s responsive without getting into the issue of money.)

Cavuto: “…making all that money, you certainly don’t need any tax breaks; you don’t need any tax subsidies…”

Watson: “Well, what we need is tax treatment that is comparable to what other companies receive…”

(Editor note: Often, you can adopt a word or phrase in a question to bridge to a response on your terms, instead of being drawn into controversy.)

Watson is a good listener. He made sure he heard the the questions and avoided stepping onto Cavuto’s IEDs.

“Controlling” An Interview

By Eric Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

A reporter may be having a bad day, may not feel well, may not like you or your company, may have had an argument at home, or may be under the pressure of multiple stories and deadlines. These are things you cannot control.

There are two things you have absolute control over in an interview: your emotions and the words you speak. Always make sure you understand that and are consciously aware of it the entire time.

Get angry or belligerent with a reporter and you’ll be giving them a story they didn’t anticipate and one you’d prefer they couldn’t report.

That’s where RIM (Research In Motion—the people who made your BlackBerry) co-CEO Mike Lazaridis finds himself today. Reports I’ve read seem to agree that Lazaridis is a genius when it comes to technology, but much less so when it comes to being the company’s public voice.

And right now RIM has a lot riding on the line today. Its tablet product, dubbed “Playbook”, is due out soon. RIM also has some issues with countries in the Middle East and with India. They want more access to RIM’s tight security.

BBC technology reporter Rory Cellan-Jones interviewed Lazaridis recently, first about the new tablet, and then moved on to the security issues.

And Lazaridis lost it.

“That’s just not fair. Because first of all, it’s nuts. We have no security problems... we’ve just been singled out, because we’re so successful around the world. It’s an iconic product, used by businesses, it’s used by leaders, it’s used by celebrities, it’s used by consumers, it’s used by teenagers, we were just singled out.”

“Alright, so it’s over, [the] interview’s over. Please, you can’t use that word, it’s just not fair… We’ve dealt with this, this is a national security issue, turn that off…”

Mike Lazaridis’s over-reaction was completely unnecessary. He had a perfect opportunity to take the security issue and present it calmly and concisely on his (RIM’s) terms and from his perspective.

Indeed, if you listen to him in the video below, his voice remains steady and controlled, almost contradicting his anger. That tone, with a reasoned explanation, would’ve been much more productive and helpful to both he and his company. But, he’s now provided the media a distraction at a time of great business risk for RIM.

What’s Your Name?

Of Nukes, CO2 and Mastodons.

By Eric Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®, LLC

Contentious interviews can sometimes amuse, on occasion enlighten, and often simply frustrate. Here’s one you might find satisfies all three possibilities.

In light of the “Act-of-God”/nature-instigated nuclear power plant disaster in Japan, CNBC lined up an interview with Congressman Jay Inslee (D-WA), a member of the House Energy & Power Subcommittee. But the conversation soon migrated into a disagreement over CO2 and global warming.

In the midst of the debate, the congressman suddenly asked anchor Joe Kernen, “What’s your name? I missed your name…” Kernen’s expression was priceless. This must have been a first in his years of experience. “It’s Joe,” he responded. (You can see and hear it by clicking on the video below.)

Inslee’s failure to know his interviewer’s name is difficult to excuse. But the fact that he stopped and asked is absolutely inexcusable. All he needed to do was continuing using “you” in addressing Joe. Instead, he sacrificed some of his credibility. Hopefully, someone in the congressman’s office had the guts to tell him.

A Prototypical M&A Interview

By Eric Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®

Thirty-nine billion dollars.

That’s what AT&T Mobility is anteing up for T-Mobile. If approved, they’ll form the largest cell system in the U.S. If the Justice Department says “no” to the deal, AT&T has to pay T-Mobile a $3 billion break-up fee.

Those are big numbers…especially the break-up fee. That puts down a pretty heavy bet the sale will be approved.

Lots of questions about this huge merger, posed by the hyper-kinetic, hyperbolized, often over the top Jim Cramer of Mad Money fame on CNBC. On his firing line: AT&T Mobility & Consumer Markets CEO Ralph De La Vega. De La Vega did a good job, overall, although he did answer the first question saying “this is a marriage made in heaven.” That little trite expression took some of the bloom off the rose, to use another trite phrase.

But, he was much more on point after that, speaking directly to government regulators, shareholders and customers about the advantages of the deal and the two companies.

This interview is a good example for you, especially if you’re a public company talking to the media about a merger or acquisition, or any other issues where some of your responses require restraint. Some examples

Q: Cramer: “Why three billion (break-up fee)? How did you arrive at that? That’s such a gigantic amount, especially if the Justice Department says forget it, you’re out (of the three billion).”

A: De La Vega: “We feel very confident. We’re not going to comment on the exact process of the department, we’re very respectful of what they use. They Department of Justice has always looked at competition on the local level…and when you look at it on the local market level 18 of the top 20 markets have five or more competitors…so the combination of this will still keep the U.S. as the most competitive marketplace in the world.”

Q: Cramer: “You say no divestitures are needed…what are you willing to give away? Would you be willing to fund…competitors to get this deal done?

A: De La Vega: “I don’t know that it’s appropriate to talk ahead of time about what we’d be willing to do…but…if you look at the amount of spectrum that AT&T and T-Mobile have combined, Sprint has more… They have three times more spectrum than we have per subscriber… So, there’s still going to be great competition…”

Q: Cramer: “I see a story that ‘AT&T deal raises fears of higher charges.’ (As a shareholder) don’t I absolutely want higher charges?”

A: De La Vega: “Well, if you look at the history of the merger and the pricing activity in this country, Jim, what you’re going to find is prices have actually fallen 50% over the last ten years even though you had the Sprint-Nextel merger, also the Verizon merger, prices have come down…”

Q: Cramer: “Shareholders might say…I hope they’re able to not spend that much money on capital expenditures now; they cut back the number of towers they use, they don’t need all these towers; and they can start returning more money to shareholders. But, in terms of growth, you want the opposite of that. How do you reconcile these two?”

A: De La Vega: “Well, I think the way we do it is the way we are planning our businesses. I think we’re going to continue to invest, Jim. In fact, we have said that we’re going to invest an additional eight billion in infrastructure to facilitate us making this merger work and extending the LTE to 95% of the population. We have a metric that we say about every billion dollars results in 7,000 new jobs…I think it’s good for the overall economy.”

De La Vega wrapped up the interview speaking to AT&T’s expectations for continued explosive growth of the cellular industry. Throughout he remained on message, aimed squarely at the Obama Administration, Justice, shareholders and, yes, customers.

Overall, a very good job dealing with sensitive issues, especially speaking to the Justice Department’s role in approving the AT&T-T-Mobile merger and recognizing the Administration's desire for wider availability of wireless.

Marginalizing the Soundbite

By Eric M. Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers, LLC

How many times have you heard the tired excuse, “They took me out of context”? Sometimes it’s true, but too many times it’s proven to be a lame claim that has no factual standing.

The real issue is delivering soundbites that both the media will pick up and use them the way you intended. That does take some practice and experience. The best way is to respond to questions is with positive, self-contained answers.

However, former presidential speech writer Peggy Noonan’s column in the February 26, 2011 issue of The Wall Street Journal has pointed out how the soundbite is being defeated by the Internet. While her specialty is politics, consider this paragraph from her column and how it might apply to messages you need to reach important audiences:

In the past quarter-century or so, the speech as a vehicle of sustained political argument was killed by television and radio. Rhetoric was reduced to the TV producer's 10-second soundbite, the correspondent's eight-second insert. The makers of speeches (even the ones capable of sustained argument) saw what was happening and promptly gave up. Why give your brain and soul to a serious, substantive statement when it will all be reduced to a snip of sound? They turned their speeches into soundbite after soundbite, applause line after applause line, and a great political tradition was traduced.

But the Internet is changing all that. It is restoring rhetoric as a force… I get links to full speeches every day in my inbox and you probably do too.

People…think it's all Facebook and Twitter now, but it's not. Not everything is fractured and in pieces, some things are becoming more whole. People hunger for serious, fleshed-out ideas about what is happening in our country.

The Internet is a two-edged sword, to be sure. You always need to be careful in what you put on it in order to protect your name (ID) and reputation. But it also liberates you to be your own editor, especially when you cannot afford to be reduced to a soundbite.

…But You Can’t Hide

By Eric Seidel, CEO

The Media Trainers®

Did someone forget to tell doctors in Wisconsin about cameras, smart phones, the Internet, social media and cable news outlets?

You’d think people smart enough to get through medical school would understand that in today’s world of instant global communications anything they say or do, especially in the in the public arena, can be recorded and distributed.

And so it appears some doctors—certainly more than just one—were handing out signed notes to protesting teachers to use as illness excuses for their absences from school.

One of those who documented the practice on video was a Fox News producer. The doctor did not know her, had not examined her, yet gave her an official note excusing her from work for being sick.

Have these doctors broken the law, or are they simply guilty of a major ethical violation? Conjecture over that quickly followed on-air. One physician, Marc Siegel, suggested that medical licenses could (perhaps even should) be in jeopardy.

Apparently, stupidity is not limited to the stupid. It can infect all demographics and ethnicities, including even the most educated among us. Today’s media and communication realities are fueling revolution throughout the Mideast. It’s stunning to watch those who should know better ethically and morally act as if no one will ever find out what they've done.

To its credit, the Wisconsin Medical Society has gone on record condemning doctors who are writing and signing illness excuse notes for protesting teachers.