Messaged To Deaf

The Secret To Stonewalling An Answer

2011-07-25T09:46:00.000-04:00

One of the most common fears people have about doing a live TV interview is what to do when the reporter repeatedly asks them a question they don't want to answer. It's the stuff of nightmares for a lot of people and understandably so.

Are there any secrets, any words of wisdom, for how to handle this situation when possibly millions of people are watching and the reporter displays obvious dissatisfaction with your answer and re-asks the question?

Yes, there are some techniques as well as mental constructs that are necessities at a time like this. But before we delve into them, watch this two- minute clip of Treasury Secretary Timothy Geithner being pepper-sprayed with the same question by Chris Wallace on yesterday's edition of Fox News Sunday.

Since this is a blog about media training and not politics, we're going to zero in on Geithner's technique and not whether or not he should have disclosed more about his doomsday strategy. I'm giving him an "A minus" for steadfastly holding his own:

he gave the same answer each time, not wavering or adding unnecessary details on the 2nd and 3rd attempts by Wallace to crack his composure
by not changing his response, Geithner eliminated the possibility of giving Wallace new facts to open up for yet more questions
by not changing his response, Geithner did not undermine his credibility or confuse the audience with different responses, leaving them to wonder which answer was the "real" one
he sounded confident, in control, as if he believed in and owned his message
he didn't display anger, fidget in his chair or move forward physically as if to dare Wallace to ask him yet one more time

What the Treasury Secretary did not do that would have made his answer even stronger was to look into the camera and assure the American people that there are contingency plans in place and when, and if, it becomes necessary to discuss them publicly the Administration will do so. In other words, he should have framed his answer more directly so he did not appear evasive even while explaining Congress' role.

If I put my ex-producer's hat back on, of course, Wallace did what he needed to do for his Sunday broadcast. He's out to (a) make news and (b) get some needed answers for the American people. But if you listen carefully to the way Wallace framed his initial question, he immediately put Geithner on the hot seat by challenging him not to answer the question: "You're not going to want to talk about this but I'm asking you a straight question and I'm counting on a straight answer." Score one for Chris because there was no way for Geithner to come out of that a winner unless he gave Wallace what he was after.

So here's the take-away message for you if you're ever in the unfortunate position of dodging repeated questioning on an issue you don't want to discuss - or can't for whatever reason. Hold your own, keep it short, repeat the same message and don't waver, fidget or raise your voice. And, if possible, frame your position at the top for the audience so they understand why you're not going to discuss the topic. For example, "our company policy is to never discuss rumors or innuendos."

And when the knot in your stomach continues to grow with each repeat of the question, remember this: Even a Chris Wallace will stop after three or four attempts because he doesn't want to come off looking like a bully. No reporter wants to ever risk the audience ultimately siding with you.

The Road To Interview Hell

2011-07-21T18:33:00.000-04:00

Quick. Don't ponder this question. Just answer it from your gut: Five minutes from now you are eyeball to eyeball or on the phone with a tough, no-nonsense reporter. It doesn't matter whether this is a "soft" interview for a new company philanthropic project or a "hard" interview for a product launch with a lot of competitive pressure. What's your nightmare question you absolutely do not want to answer?

If your gut response is I can't think of any questions I can't handle you are on the road to Interview Hell. That road is paved with landmine issues you won't navigate all that well and predictable issues you're complacently overlooking that you could identify in advance.

How can I be so sure of this? After over 20 years of prepping clients for all types of media interviews as well as a network news producer asking the questions, I can tell with you total certainty that there are always tricky questions that come up in an interview.

Whenever a client tells me with great confidence that they really don't have any tough questions they fear and/or they have all of the answers neatly figured out, I get nervous. Really nervous. Because that's not realistic. You might think you've got it all neatly covered, but what about a side-by-side competitive comparison? Are you going to start out by trashing your competition and spend practically no time talking about your product? How about pricing questions? As simple as they may appear to be, once I start probing clients, I invariably find out this particular question makes them very queasy when the reporter ignores their response sans actual price and comes back again for the specific number. Tough question? Maybe not for everyone, but if it sends shivers up your spine then it sure is for you.

So the next time you're prepping for an interview, don't just rely on the FAQ your PR, AR or IR teams have put together. Push yourself and honestly come up with the question or questions that are going to trip you up. That tiny little bit of extra effort very often makes the difference between a successful interview and one that you'll regret for weeks.

Answering Flakey Questions

2011-06-27T22:18:00.000-04:00

By now there has been the requisite analysis and pontificating about whether Chris Wallace stepped over the line by asking Michele Bachmann if she is "a flake" on his Sunday morning Fox talkfest.

Should he have asked her that question? Should he have phrased it in a different way? What was he after with the question in the first place?

To me the more interesting question in the Wallace-Bachmann inbroglio is the fact that this has all of the hallmarks of the classic TV "moment" as producers call it.

First of all, Wallace's question was "the money question" because it's the wildcard and the type of question almost always guaranteed to produce news. And, not coincidentally, he chose to ask it at the end of the segment.

Second, Wallace asked that specific question to make it part of the record and he thought he had nothing to lose. As long as he asked it, it was out there whether or not Bachmann chose to respond. He never anticipated the backlash that question would provoke. BTW, while his use of the word "flake" was not an ideal choice what Wallace was trying to get at was Bachmann's history of inaccurate and inflammatory statements, which is a legitimate question to ask of any declared Presidential candidate.

Third, Wallace knew it was a "squirm" question with at least a 50-50 shot she'd physically respond with fidgets, uhms or some sense of visible discomfort. Tailor-made for live TV.

To Bachmann's credit she maintained her composure throughout, stating her qualifications and experience and not rising to the bait. I must admit she surprised me because I did think some of her prior statements in the past year have indeed been flaky.

Could she have come up with a better response like broadening out her answer to talk about how any Presidential candidate these days will inevitably face "flaky questions" just like this one? Yes, but she held her own and that's the bottom line.

Ironically, Chris Wallace has perhaps the best money quote of them all with his post-interview assessment of what this type of question-answer scenario comes down to: ..."in the end it's really all about the answers and not the questions."

Wallace's statement is what you should care about and what you must think about every time you put yourself into the line of media fire. Do I know, really know, how I will perform when that weirdo question comes at me with a live television audience watching? There are three critically important components in this type of situation:

your body language
your tone of voice
what you say

All three of these must-haves constitute composure. It's what the viewers see and hear that formulates their opinion about you and that's the only thing you should care about in this situation.

Owning Your Soundbites

2011-06-14T19:49:00.000-04:00

We live in a soundbite-driven world. The demand is there to give the media what it wants - grabby, newsworthy and provocative quotes that can drive and frame a story.

Our most current "teachable moment" in the consequences of using and then waffling on a grabby soundbite comes from GOP presidential hopeful Tim Pawlenty.

There are two noteworthy media realities going on here. The first reality is that CNN moderator Jon King is pushing Pawlenty against the ropes. The media loves nothing more than a boxing match and reporters will find every opportunity to push you into the corner to defend your position, especially if it's a juicy headline grabber like "Obamneycare" which Governor Pawlenty went to great lengths to use over the weekend before this debate.

The second media reality is that reporters don't necessarily speak in soundbites but they do like to use the hot expressions of the moment. This year it's dialing back which is a variation on walking it back. Both mean the same thing - trying to explain away a position you took that now has you in squirming in the media headlights.

This may all seem painfully obvious now in the post-debate light of day but there is a worthwhile teachable moment here for any company spokesperson: if you go for the gusto with a super-charged soundbite you better be willing to stand up and defend it. Whether you're tempted to bury your competition with clever words and mashed-up phrases, remember that the media will take up your cause but not always to your liking. So it's always best to think about all of the consequences before it's too late.

What's Your Brand When You Answer Questions

2011-06-09T18:30:00.000-04:00

People are no different than companies and products when it comes to brands. We all have them and we communicate them in a variety of ways, from our appearance to what we say and how we say it.

Nowhere is this more evident than in how you answer questions, particularly difficult issues. You can give a great presentation and then blow it big-time by bungling your way through a Q and A session where you might appear nervous or uncertain or even flippant.

So how do you sound when you answer someone's questions? It doesn't matter if you're doing a media interview or you're addressing an issue at work? You will be judged on what comes out of your mouth and your demeanor. Do you sound tentative? Do you give longwinded answers? Do you sound arrogant, impatient or annoyed to be addressing that issue? Do you give one-word answers? Are you prepared and on top of things? Would your audience believe you? Should your audience believe you?

If you've never thought about these things then it's time to start. Every time you open your mouth to speak you give big clues about yourself. How you answer questions is a reflection of you, your character, your brand.

Let's use Congressman Anthony Weiner, already the brunt of many jokes, as a good example of how people give off overt and subtle clues about their character (or lack thereof). Listen in the clip below as he calls a reporter a "jackass" because he's in the midst of a reporter feeding frenzy over his lame handling of his Twitter fiasco.

Remember Weiner called the press conference to dispose of the issue initially, then Weiner spent a week trying to explain away the issue. So now he can't blame the media for salivating over the story. What's most interesting here is how Weiner starts to lose his cool when the only thing the media is doing is what they do - they ask questions. His let me explain and appear the victim facade is quickly replaced with anger, hostility, disrespect. He looks arrogant and he sounds arrogant.

So ask yourself this: if you're ever in the line of fire - either at work or in an interview - how will you come across? What's the brand you want to convey and how do you actually sound? Not sure, then ask some friends at work or a PR colleague for some candid feedback. The message you communicate is always important but so is the messenger.

Why Dumbing Down Is A Bad Strategy

2011-05-31T20:33:00.000-04:00

A media training client recently asked me for help in dumbing down a complex process he wanted to explain in a TV interview. His reasoning was the reporter as well as the audience wouldn't be able to grasp the concept.

In theory, his strategy for simplifying his ideas is a sound one. What's wrong with his actual game plan, however, is how he's thinking about doing it: dumbing it down implies the audience is too stupid to get it and therein lies a huge problem.

There is a fundamental difference between simplifying something and being simplistic. Simplifying an abstract idea is challenging because you need to strip it down to its essence without eliminating the core ideas you need to get across. But if you are simplistic, then you're guilty of being excessively simple and risk missing the point altogether as well as boring and potentially insulting your audience.

Simple is tough to do. Take it from Jack Welch who has one of the best quotes I've ever seen on the subject: " You can't believe how hard it is for people to be simple. They worry that if they're simple, people will think they're simple-minded. In reality, it's the reverse."

The art of simplification is a valuable communication tool that every executive would do well to master in these complicated times.

So substitute the verb simplifying for dumbing down the next time you need to navigate a complicated idea or issue. Your audiences will appreciate it and you will be happier with the results.

Being More Present In An Interview

2011-05-16T21:58:00.000-04:00

Media interviews are never one-dimensional. They involve more than the obvious dynamic of the reporter's overt questions and your responses. There are always verbal as well as non-verbal clues journalists give off that most interviewees miss because they are not fully present during the interview.

Being present doesn't mean some transcendental state. What it does mean is that you are fully tuned in to all that is happening when you're talking to a reporter. So if you are preoccupied with simply answering questions and trying to figure out what the reporter wants you to say, you won't recognize the wealth of information that is there for the taking.

If you are fully present and invested in your interview you will begin to hear and sense things in the reporter's behavior that you might otherwise miss. We're talking about valuable clues reporters give when they:

circle back every now and then on competitive questions, starting out broadly and then moving in for the side-by-side comparison with your Number One Darth Vader
stretch out a word that tells you their true state of mind as in "isn't this the second time you've tried to launch a similar product?"
shuffle papers and perfunctorily say "uh huh" while you're answering away on a phone interview
ignore everything you've said and ask no follow-up questions.

Those are great clues about the reporter's possible intentions and certainly good for you to know when you're talking to them. But you will miss them unless you are fully present and for that you need a solid gameplan so you can concentrate on that netherworld that is taking place right under the surface.

Your gameplan must include knowing your messages like you know your own name, being buttoned up on as many issues as you're able to identify and being fully confident that you know what you want the final outcome of your interview to be. Without all of those pieces of information comfortably at your disposal, you simply can't devote the level of attention to the interview that you really need to marshall.

Obviously, you can't know every question that's going to come your way, but if you are fully prepared you can be fully present. The glimmers of insight and clarity you additionally glean can make a difference in how satisfied you will be with the story that results from your media moment.

Best Strategy For Prepping An Executive

2011-05-11T07:52:00.000-04:00

Executives may have different agendas, preferences, foibles and personalities but they do share one thing in common: they are busy, busy, busy.

That time crunch comes into play in a big way if you're the one responsible for prepping an executive for a media interview. How do you get them to read all of the messaging, positioning, issues documents and fact sheets you've been laboring over for the past three weeks?

Follow the One Page Rule: everything gets whittled down to one page.

Multi-page binders and voluminous talking points are a turn-off to a harried resident of the C-Suite. I've been media training executives for 17 years and the ugly truth is they rarely look at your documents - the very documents that have consumed your life. They want one page. They want something they can glance at and take in all at once. Some may even list out those key points on their whiteboard for further review.

It's a bitter irony that the more effort you put into your prep documents - with resulting volume - the more your exec is not going to review them. So the workaround is the short, concise, go to document.

Does this mean you shouldn't give them the binder as well? No, they should still have all of the important information but in reality the only thing they will probably look at is your single page.

So now you've unfortunately got one more layer of work on your plate to weed through all of the information. You may even need to reach out to others to help you make the decision about what goes on that single sheet of paper.

The payoff can be huge: you get an exec who can hit their points more succinctly, consistently and conversationally when they are communicating those ideas in their interviews.

Perhaps the best payoff of all: you get a heightened sense of respect for giving your executive something he's probably never had before - a one-page briefing document that lives up to its name. Brief.

Getting To The Point More Quickly

2011-05-05T15:02:00.004-04:00

When it comes to must-have communication skills, the ability to get to the point quickly is right up there at the top of the list.

Unfortunately, it's not a skill that comes easily to many people. One of the areas that really trips people up is when they answer questions, especially questions from reporters who typically have zero patience for longwinded answers.

The first step in mastering the art of the succinct response is to time how long it takes you to answer a question.

If your answers run longer than one minute, you're going to wear out the reporter's patience. They're going to either interrupt you or zone out. You want to get to the point in 45 seconds maximum and that's pushing it. Ideally, 30 to 45 seconds is the window you're looking for in print and less than that for TV. Remember that the average broadcast soundbite today is seven seconds. The longer you talk the more they edit.

So here are the next steps in getting to the point: (You hopefully already taped several answers you delivered to questions at work and perhaps even at home or with friends. If not, this is the first important step).

Count up how many ideas or comments you delivered in the answers you taped.
If you could only deliver three of those comments, what would they be?
Go back and redo each of your answers with no more than 3 sentences in each answer.
Of those three sentences, which one of them is the "headline"?
Start your answer with the "headline" and keep paring down your thoughts until you hit 30-45 seconds. If you're doing a TV interview get the answer down to 20 seconds.
Then try to pull out one idea and get it down to less than 10 seconds. This works for print as well as TV interviews. If this is what you want them to use as a possible quote, the shorter the better.

Keep at it. Practice over time will make this more intuitive and a critical communication skill in your arsenal.

Final thought: think about "chunks" of information instead of long sentences. Research indicates we humans can't remember more than five chunks at one time. Cutting the fat out of your answers should become a best practice for all situations, not just interviews.

Fat Answers

2011-05-02T15:45:00.000-04:00

Do you have trouble getting to the point quickly when you answer questions? Are your answers long? Have you ever been accused of firehosing people with TMI (too much information)?

Then it's time to put your answers on a diet. They are too fat, maybe even obese, over-stuffed with details, facts and figures and who knows what else.

Since this is a media training blog we'll concentrate on getting to the point for reporters. But the guidance here is applicable for any situation where you are answering someone's question.

Long answers can result from a number of factors:

not sure of what you want/need to say so you keep talking
not paying attention to cues that your listener(s) have heard enough
nervous so you keep talking
you love the sound of your own voice (we all know people like this)

Most reporters have the attention span of a fruitfly. Drown them in rambling answers and they'll either interrupt you or just zone out. Either way you lose: print journalists aren't taking down what you say and if it's broadcast you'll end up on the edit room floor.

Getting In Shape

The first step to getting leaner answers is to know just how long it actually takes you to respond to a question. All you will need is a digital timer or a watch with a second hand and a voice recorder. For the next week here's what you do:

record a few of your answers to questions at work
record a few of your answers to questions at home or with friends
don't listen to them for at least 24 hours
play back your answers and time them
how long are they?
are your answers at work longer or shorter than when you're with family or friends?

If you feel self-conscious about taping yourself at work where other people might see you, then do it when you're talking on the phone.

So how long does it typically take you to answer a question? Are you starting to see any patterns in the types of questions that trip you up or specific situations? If your answers are running longer than one minute, it's time to get rid of the fat.

Look at it this way: if you have the discipline to do stomach crunches, then you can easily take on this challenge. And it won't hurt half as much.

In my next post: how to start firming up those answers!

Not So Quick With The Answer

2011-04-28T16:19:00.000-04:00

Have you ever struggled to find the best way to respond to a reporter's question and then, when the interview was over, come up with the answer you should have given?

This scenario happens all of the time and one of the primary reasons is because people jump into answering the question without taking a second or two to figure out what they want to say. They feel the pressure to answer immediately so the reporter doesn't assume they are thinking of ways to evade the question.

Given the pressure-cooker environment of doing an interview, it's safe to assume that the better answer will almost always come to you when the heat is off and you have more time to collect your thoughts.

Breathe, Think, Speak

That said, you can still get a bit of an edge with this strategy I always recommend in my media training sessions: Pause before you answer. Just take a (silent) deep breath, collect your thoughts and ask yourself what you're trying to say in response to the question. And then answer. If it's a print interview, you've got an easy 4-5 seconds. For live TV interviews, you still have a couple of seconds before you need to open your mouth. Just remember that pausing only on the killer question doesn't work because it's too obvious.

Pausing is more effective than trying to buy time with statements like "could you repeat that again," "I'm not sure I understand your question" and, my all-time favorite, "that's a great question." You can get away with these once during an interview and beyond that they're a dead giveaway you're stalling.

The other thing that happens if you start answering before you know where you're going is you're just going to ramble until the light bulb goes off in your head and you figure out what the actual answer is. By that time the reporter may well have zoned out or interrupted you with their next question.

The ultimate danger with this type of talking and thinking outloud at the same time is you will inadvertently serve up some dishy information you'd never intended to divulge because your mind is overwhelmed.

I know those extra few seconds don't sound like much but they do help to get you on focus. And they will also prevent you from repeating negative ideas from the question that can become nightmare quotes.

So practice counting to three and then answering. It takes discipline but it's a behavior that you'll be glad you took the time to master.

Watch Out For This Interview Trap

2011-04-24T18:31:00.000-04:00

There are a number of ways reporters can solicit information from you and going silent after you've answered their question is a powerful psychological tool they use handily.

Maybe you've lived through this experience already. They ask a question, you answer and then they stare at you. Stone cold silence. It doesn't matter if it's in person or on the phone. They say nothing.

If you're like the majority of people, you're going to squirm, feel very uncomfortable and begin to wonder if you should continue talking. And then you talk, often giving up more information than you'd intended. Because they're not saying anything. Some people even go so far as to internally question the quality of their response, figuring that if the reporter isn't saying anything their answer must somehow be deficient. And the reporter has their gotcha moment.

I had a client who experienced seven seconds of dead air on the phone with a prominent print reporter. We knew the reporter hadn't left to grab a ham sandwich because we could hear her breathing on the phone. She just wanted more information from the executive and decided to psych him out with the Silence Trap. It didn't work, btw, because we'd covered this ploy but he was extremely uncomfortable as you can imagine. And, finally, just as he was getting ready to ask her if she had another question, sure enough, she asked something else.

Reporters resort to the silence tactic when they're not satisfied with your answer, especially if they sense you are a talker. Or if they've already asked the same question a few times and you're not adding anything else, they will clam up and hope you give up more of what they want. It's more common in print than in live broadcast but it will happen in taped interviews. This was one of my favorite strategies when I was a news producer and interviewed anyone who seemed tenuous or liked to go on and on.

Rule of Thumb: If you're done talking, STOP TALKING. The ensuing pause might get uncomfortable, but the reporter will inevitably ask their next question, because they know they've only got a limited amount of time with you.

Is Media Training A Cure For Arrogance?

2011-04-19T11:30:00.003-04:00

Media training has become a broad term which sometimes raises unrealistic expectations about what a session or two can actually accomplish.

It's a great benefit for getting executives on target with their messages and their issues before they go into the media limelight.

But media training will rarely result in a personality transplant when you have an arrogant executive.

I recently had a conversation with a client - a PR Manager - who has an abrasive executive scheduled to do interviews for a major product launch. Unfortunately, the exec likes to play with his Blackberry while he's talking to people and it doesn't matter who they are. Staff, other executives in his company, reporters. She wanted to know if I could convince him not to do this because he won't listen to her.

In theory it sounds fixable, doesn't it? Put him on camera, show him how rude and unsympathetic he's going to appear on live TV and in his print interviews. Then, he should mend his inconsiderate ways, correct?

If only. In this instance, it turns out this guy plays with his Blackberry with a variety of audiences including customers. He also doesn't mince words in telling customers their questions are stupid. So one or even two sessions of media training are not going to exorcise his behavior because it runs deep.

So what do you do if you're this beleaguered PR pro?

You can try media training but please go into it with the expectation that there's an iffy chance it will work and certainly not in one or two sessions. If anyone tells you differently, find another trainer.
Is there someone at the company who can talk to the exec and get him to listen without putting you in a compromising situation?
Can you use another exec for the interviews since arrogant executives typically see talking to the media as a waste of their time anyway?
Tag team the executive with a more personable peer who can ameliorate the dynamic.
Show him videotapes of other execs who have been eviscerated by the media (although some execs might see this as executive victimization).

It's a difficult position to be in because there really isn't a panacea if management doesn't do something about the problem. I just don't want folks getting over-inflated expectations about what media training can and cannot "fix."

Have you had a similar experience? What strategies have you utilized?

Five Common Interview Mistakes - Part Five

2011-04-14T22:24:00.000-04:00

If you knew you could increase the odds in your favor when talking to reporters would you take the necessary steps to make that happen?

Of course you would. So it's surprising that many people commit the avoidable mistake of not prepping for an interview. Winging it is not a strategy other than a sure-fire way to stack the deck even more in the reporter's favor.

You can't go into an interview without a clear idea of what you want to say, what your story is and how you're going to answer the tough questions.

Without an agenda and a defined goal you'll simply be answering questions. And that gives you even less control over the outcome.

So how should you prepare? For starters, spend more than five minutes glancing at your three messages. What's the story you want the reporter to write incorporating those messages?

Practice answering all types of questions. Practice your answers to the easy questions. Practice your answers to the ugly questions. By the way, have you outlined the top 10 nasty questions you definitely don't want to hear during your interview?

Now practice again. And put yourself through the paces one more time for that extra dose of insurance. Don't memorize any of your answers but do figure out what the appropriate messages are that belong in each of those answers. Now it's time to answer those questions outloud so you can judge how you sound. Credible? Rambling? Defensive? Did you miss an opportunity to bridge to a message?

Ask your PR or marketing colleague to throw you a few zingers to vet your responses and give you candid feedback. And if you're the PR professional supporting a harried executive, please exert all of your persuasive abilities to get them to talk things through before they do any interviews.

Being spontaneous is a recipe for disaster.

Five Common Interview Mistakes - Part Four

2011-04-11T07:36:00.000-04:00

You can't control an interview. You can't control the questions the reporter or blogger will ask or the shape their final story or post will take.

What you can control, however, is Number Four on this list of avoidable mistakes: assuming the reporter understands what you're talking about.

Assumption is the mother of all screw-ups. I've cleaned this up a bit from the more direct manner it was hammered into me when I was a fledgling TV news producer. Never assume the viewer gets what you're talking about. Don't assume they care, understand or see the relevance to their lives. Extremely valuable advice.

So let's flip this around now to your role as the interviewee.

Don't assume the reporter cares, understands or sees the relevance of what you're talking about.
Don't use acronyms and jargon and assume they get it - phrases you make up inside your company or even industry terms.
Don't use statistics that sound powerful to you - like four new customers for a brand new technology - when it sounds pitifully small to the reporter without explaining to them why that's so significant.
Don't assume the reporter sees the relevance of your new product without bringing in examples that showcase how your product is relevant to your target audience.
Don't even assume they understand your product area or business even if they're writing for a trade publication in your industry.

Assume nothing, nada, zip and you'll be a lot happier with the end results.

In my next post we'll cover the fifth most common interview mistake - so avoidable it's shocking to even need to mention it.

Five Common Interview Mistakes - Part Three

2011-04-06T10:20:00.000-04:00

Media interviews demand your full attention if you are the one answering the questions. Every interview requires a laser-like focus on your content as well as your communication style.

That's really tough to consistently maintain so people often slip into unconscious behaviors that can subtly undermine the interview dynamic.

In Parts One and Two of this mistake list, we examined how easy it is to forget to smile and the devastating visual of nodding your head in response to a nasty question.

This third mistake is the Kiss of Death which will put your interview into a tailspin: saying no comment. Ouch. No way you won't sound guilty or uncooperative or possibly hiding something. And maybe you're even giving the reporter what they want - carte blanche to quote you saying " no comment" which is equally damaging in print or on TV.

How many times have you seen someone say "no comment" and come away from the print or TV interview thinking they were victimized by the reporter?

Unless it is a cardinal rule in your company to say no comment, think about other ways to say I'm not about to answer your question. Use phrases like I can't discuss this and it always goes better if you can explain why briefly:

It's in litigation
It's company policy not to discuss rumors
We never discuss hypothetical scenarios

I've seen seasoned spokespeople get thrown every now and then by an off-the-wall question or some other tactic designed to evoke an immediate knee-jerk response. And it's at exactly those times
when the unconscious urge to say no comment becomes overpowering.

So remember the saying that "forewarned is forearmed." Take steps now to consciously eliminate the words no comment from your vocabulary.

In Part Four I'll share the best advice I ever got as a producer which will help you avoid a really big mistake most people make when talking to reporters.

Five Common Interview Mistakes - Part Two

2011-04-04T07:58:00.000-04:00

There’s a lot at stake whenever you talk to a reporter so it’s important to be conscious of not just the words you are communicating but what signals your body is simultaneously sending out.

In Part One, we examined why it’s important to remember to smile which is something that trips up a lot of people.

This second item on our interview mistake list is subtle but potentially lethal: unconsciously nodding your head when you’re listening to a challenging question.

You may think you’re signaling that you’re paying close attention to what the reporter is asking. In reality, however, the reporter is seeing you agreeing with the issue.

And if you’re doing a live or taped TV interview, the audience also sees you agreeing with the reporter’s vexing question. It doesn’t matter what you say after that. In this case, actions do indeed speak louder than words. Case Closed.

This is one of those nonverbal behaviors most people aren’t even aware they are doing. So here’s a Best Practice for all to adopt: eliminate the Bobble Doll routine completely – even if you only do phone interviews. Because one day you’ll nod your head at the wrong time - with a reporter in person or a customer or even your manager at work - and the nonverbal message will derail anything you say after that.

If you have any doubts about your inadvertent head nodding, ask someone at work for a candid appraisal. And ditto for PR and communication managers giving the thumbs down to their execs on the head up and down routine.

Coming up next in Part Three: two small words with venomous consequences.

Five Common Interview Mistakes

2011-03-31T19:02:00.003-04:00

Forget the old adage about “not sweating the small stuff.” When it comes to doing an interview, everything counts and, yes, that includes what you might consider the inconsequential and unconscious behaviors we engage in.

Part One of this laundry list of mistakes is so simple you’ll probably shake your head in disbelief: smiling or, more to the point, forgetting to smile.

Over the years I’ve heard seasoned CEO’s ask if they should smile on the first question when doing a live TV interview. Should they smile at the end? How much? Does this smile look forced? And what about the product manager who’s sitting on the phone being interviewed with arms crossed and a scowl plastered across her face? Does she need to smile?

Yes, you do need to smile. Whether you’re on camera for your video tour-de-force or meeting with a reporter or blogger in person, please don’t forget to smile. And the same advice applies when you’re on the phone. Smiles make you more approachable, likeable, human. A smile translates through the phone in the tenor of your voice and some reporters are quite astute at reading into people’s intonations.

Major Caveat: remember not to smile at inappropriate or nasty questions! In other words, don't just smile without thinking about it.

If you’re uncomfortable smiling, get a mirror and practice smiling. I wish I had a dollar for every time someone has told me how awkward they feel smiling on command.

Next up: Part Two, a/k/a unconscious body language sure to undermine your message.

How To Get More Results From Your Videos

2009-12-18T09:32:00.000-05:00

Have you seen this video yet?

Over 5 million people have already watched it on YouTube and it's not surprising. It's got spirit, warmth, it makes you feel good and it's for a good cause. A wonderful mix of elements to fuel its popularity. Best of all, it's done by a non-profit for not a lot of money (thanks to Elaine Fogel at MarketingProfs Daily Fix for calling this out).

But I'm left wanting more. Clearly the video is intended to generate Breast Cancer awareness. That's great, but where's the link to help people who have an urge to act when they're done watching? How about a visual at the end that says we do this to support Breast Cancer, what do you do? Do you want to help? To find our more, visit any of these websites.

If you've ever wondered about appearing to exploit good will by including that kind of appeal in one of your videos, remember there's a big difference between exploitation and explanation. People do want to help and explaining how they can do that makes sense in that context.

Why stop there? There are other possibilities for utilizing the video footage. What's the "backstory" on how this all came about? Interestingly, ABC World News did their own story on this and filled in the pieces. For example, there is the story about the manufacturer who came up with the idea for the pink gloves and is now donating the proceeds from those glove sales to fund mammograms for women who can't afford them. And how did Providence St Vincent's get involved? All we know is they decided to join in. There must be more to this story than that.

I'd also repackage the Providence video and include some of the outtakes where it didn't go just right the first time, sprinkle in a few quick soundbites with participants about why they're participating, maybe even their anxieties about dancing (as expressed in the ABC story). Another great video that would additionally showcase the humanity and spirit of that medical center. Hey, if I lived in Providence I'd want to make sure they were my hospital based on what their video conveys.

So here's a question for you? What other stories are lurking around the outtakes from your last video production that you can use to capture human interest, caring, ingenuity, a sense of humor or further product or service value?

There's never been a better time to tell a good business story. And you probably have a lot of them waiting to be told.

Don't Make This Fatal Mistake With Your Video

2009-12-03T20:03:00.001-05:00

This may be the year of Twitter but it's also the year of video. Well-known bloggers blog about it, professional journals dedicate whole issues to the topic and even Nielsen monitors the meteoric growth of online video. Yes, indeed, video is the killer app.

Maybe you've already started posting videos to YouTube, sprinkled them into your website or are using them as vehicles to distribute FAQ's and CEO conversations. Great, as long as you avoid a fatal mistake when you produce your videos: don't make them longer than five minutes. Go even shorter if possible.

Don't believe me? Think about it. You're asking very busy people, with limited attention spans and lots and lots of content options, to spend their valuable time watching your videos. Whether they're employees or customers, there's a good possibility they are now watching your video on a teeny-weeny smartphone screen. Even with larger laptop screen real estate, it's still a time commitment to sit and watch for longer than five minutes, uninterrupted. And, no offense, you're probably not offering them the kind of entertainment value that will sustain 10 minutes of their time.

Want more proof? Eighteen of the top 20 viral videos on Unruly Media's Viral Video Chart this week clock in at less than five minutes. In fact, over the past week that I've tracked their daily Top 20 video list, 27 out of the 30 Top Viral Videos ran less than five minutes. Obviously, this isn't the reason these videos became viral hit wonders, but it is an interesting common denominator nonetheless.

But what do you do if you need to go over that five-minute threshold? Maybe you have a 27-minute conference video you need to post on your website, so now what? Here are two solutions, one a little more involved than the other:

Edit the tape into shorter clips according to content. For example, a short video highlighting a customer testimonial, the CEO spelling out his vision, a partner talking about a Go-To-Market strategy. You can edit them in-house quite easily or use a local production house which can do the edits quickly and inexpensively
Simply give a brief bulleted list online of viewing times when these significant moments occur, i.e., @1:25 into the tape CEO delivers vision, @ 4:32 Partner X talks about GTM strategy, etc. This approach will at least enable your viewers to fast-forward to the sections that interest them.

Video is a powerful communications tool. It engages, it connects, it immerses, if you don't enage in overkill . To that end, here's one of the best pieces of advice I learned early on in my producer career: always leave them wanting more.

There's never been a better time to tell a good, tight business story on video.

You Got Their Attention Now What?

2009-11-23T08:12:00.001-05:00

If attention is the critical step in generating awareness, then relevance is the giant magnet that keeps people attracted to, engaged and connected with your company, your product and stories.

Being relevant is another way of saying your content is meaningful and pertinent, which is no easy feat these days. So, if you are lucky enough to grab someone's attention, can you hold onto them?

Yes, and one of the clues just might come from what's happening on the hyperlocal news scene.

You've seen the headlines. Hyperlocal and local are the new buzzwords, the new "it" kids on the uber hot web scene. While mainly focused on news initiatives, these developments are worth watching for any marketer and not just as another place to park ad dollars.

Hyperlocal and local information are targeted at readers and viewers where they live, work, play. Mashable has a great piece with lots of specific examples but here's what it comes down to: hyperlocal is very specific information marrying social media and news that's often crowdsourced and valuable because it is so pertinent to people's lives. Little league scores. The latest gossip about a stalled recycling project. Perhaps not setting your chimes on fire but very interesting to the folks who live in those communities.

And that's the link to you if you're in marketing or public relations. Hyperlocal is about delivering relevant information. It's the boring weekly community newspaper suddenly alive and very timely. True, advertisers have been micro-targeting their messages for years, but with the addition of social media, you have more opportunities than ever to consistently hit the mark in what you say and how you say it.

So what are they doing in hyperlocal that just might be relevant for you?

Timely - have you updated your website, included a new video comment from a pleased customer? Is your information fresh and current or the same for the past 3 months?
Context - does your customer really care about a new business process if you're talking to them through a Facebook page?
Crowdsourced - sure you can continue to use surveys but what about asking questions on Twitter so you get valuable feedback and input on what people really want to hear from you?
Mashing it up - are you relying on only one form of media or are you looking at multiple avenues of reach through traditional and new media? Are you only posting videos on YouTube?
Appointment media - have you built in enough motivation for people to consciously return to your content? After all, that's all you can ask isn't it, to attract people and then hope they come back again and again?

Here's the bottom line: the marketers who are going to succeed will need to more finely hone their mix of content with the context of where and how it gets delivered. So I'd keep watching what they do in hyperlocal for more clues on how you can engage through sustainable conversations.

There's never been a better time to tell a relevant business story.

What Sesame Street Can Teach Marketers

2009-11-12T13:44:00.000-05:00

What can a 40-year-old children's television program teach marketers? Plenty, especially when it comes to relevance.

So today's post is brought to you by the letter "R" from the folks at Sesame Street. They've kept their show relevant all of these years, even with increasing competition from video games, online activities and even new TV shows.

Let's see what the gang at Sesame Street did to reach their 40th anniversary with no signs of losing any steam.

Remain true to your vision. Sesame Street's ongoing mission has been to educate kids and they've remained true to their endgoal. No new visions, no new mission statements. They may have tweaked their style and tools from time to time, but they have consistently remained true to their core.
Know your audience. The Sesame Street gang is designed to draw on multi-cultural experiences and engage an audience of children from diverse backgrounds. And they have continued to expand that universe of viewers with shows in all parts of the world and in multiple languages. Sesame Street messages translate globally. Sweet.
Create a shared experience. Their goal was always to involve parents, to have them share the learning experience with their children. And it's worked, helped along, no doubt, by the clever pop culture parodies and double play on words that adults enjoy as much as their kids.
Humanize your messages. Sesame Street created a winning formula to teach kids and keep them engaged by using real emotions including humor and empathy and curiosity, to name just a few. How different it would have all turned out had they used a more pedagogical approach and failed to talk to kids like kids.
Use technology to enhance your message. At Sesame Street, it's never been about using the latest technology just to use the latest technology. Rather, it's about the combination of video, live animation, real human characters and website to deliver the most meaningful experience for their audience.

Last but not least, Sesame Street has created a generation of enduring fans who now watch the show with their kids (and grandkids in many cases). That's real staying power. That's timeless relevance. That's one helluva great marketing lesson.

There's never been a better time to tell a good business story. How do you keep yours relevant?

Just Plain Stupid Messaging

2009-11-04T00:41:00.001-05:00

This one belongs in the what were they thinking category.

Kellogg is claiming their Cocoa Krispies cereal can help boost kids' immunity against the H1N1 virus. Yes, you read that right. Kellogg has taken the sugar-coated message and stretched it into new territory that defies description.

The message, on the front of the box, states: "Now helps support your child's IMMUNITY."

Critics, to no one's surprise, are in full battle mode, claiming the company is simply trying to capitalize on parents' H1N1 fears.

So, you have to wonder, what was going through the corporate brains at Kellogg when they came up with this message? Did they really think it would pass the test of credible and verifiable?

In their lame attempt at defending their message, Kellogg claims they developed the product in response to consumers asking for more positive nutrition. This includes boosting the amount of antioxidant vitamins A, C and E which are important contributors to the body's immune capabilities.

Junk science? Probably. Junk messaging? Most assuredly.

So what should we take away from this story?

Wanting to assert your relevance is a valid strategy but find a legitimate way to become a part of the conversation.
For every action, there is a reaction. Or to put it another way: your messages don't live in a vacuum. Strain credulity and suffer the consequences.
People infer other messages from the ones you put out. In this case, it might be that Kellogg is desperate to sell cereal.
You can't control your message after it's out there, but you sure can control it before it's out there.

What we'll never know is how this message idea got sold into management in the first place. Too bad they forgot there's no message re-do's when it comes to lack of credibility.

There's never been a better time to tell a good business story that's based on a truthful message.

Video Saves The FAQ

2009-10-28T09:40:00.005-04:00

Your company is in a smackdown with a partner now turned competitor. Do your employees know how to handle the issue when asked? Are they telling customers one thing and saying another to bloggers or partners, analysts and on their own blogs?

Nothing can derail a company faster than inconsistency. The irony is you probably have the FAQ's that address how to delicately position all sorts of topics. The only problem is that most people haven't seen them or they are buried in their inbox.

Video is the solution. Put the FAQ on video. Have someone conversationally deliver the salient points that need to be addressed in those tricky scenarios. There are four compelling reasons to do so:

Humanizing Effect. How much easier to listen to someone deliver a conversational response than to read a three-paragraph answer that no one can be expected to remember.
Stand Out Factor: The FAQ takes on a personality and moves beyond simply being a Word doc.
Consistency Enforcer: If it's easier to use....and find.... it's easier to get people to properly address the issues
Credibility Check: Now there's no excuse not to hear how corporate-speak the answers sound.

Obviously what you don't want to do is to have the FAQ become a 15-minute production. Keep it short and sweet and it will become a FWV (Frequently Watched Video) and, more importantly, a critical tool in helping you maintain a consistent story.

There's never been a better time to tell a consistent business story.

TV Interview Fail

2009-10-19T07:54:00.000-04:00

For many companies, getting the CEO on TV is still a great opportunity to tell the company or product story. Unfortunately, these stories don’t always have a happy ending.

One of the biggest mistakes that will torpedo a broadcast interview is not making your product immediately relevant for the audience. A recent example of this: Sir James Dyson, the debonair British inventor of the bagless vacuum cleaner, who was on the Today Show to pitch his newest creation - the bladeless fan.

To put it bluntly, Sir James blew it. Big time. He had two minutes of quality airtime with not one but three anchors. Even with their softball questions, he still didn’t make the case for why anyone should pony up almost $300 for his new cool product. Instead of talking about enhanced safety features and cooling efficiencies, Dyson went the tech route, ignoring the anchors' blatant clues to take a more practical direction.

Sure, you can say Dyson obviously has an upscale audience in mind for his fan. But he was speaking to Middle ‘Merica on morning TV, where it’s safe to assume the majority of those viewers are not the early adopter crowd. So, in my book, he failed.

Dyson's loss, however, is your gain. Here’s what you can learn from his fail:

Shiny new objects don't automatically translate into value without making that connection

You can’t fall in love with the Wow factor and forget to ask why anyone would buy your product

Listen to the questions people ask– sometimes they offer up accurate clues for how to connect more effectively

The major takeaway from this story: speak your customer’s language. It doesn’t matter if we’re talking about TV interviews or social media, the ability to connect your ideas and have them be relevant and meaningful for your audience is a must-have ability. Everything else is rapidly becoming table-stakes.

There's never been a better time to tell your business story.