will self image

The Wealth of Language

Will Self is one of Britain’s most idiosyncratic journalists.  Most popular writers would think twice before using words like rodomontade, juvenescent, irenic or febrillity in a 10-minute radio blog (Jan 15th). Think twice, and then delete them, substituting more common alternatives – bluster, rejuvenated, peaceful and feverishness.

The Wealth of Language

Journalist Will Self

And most popular writers would be right. Communication, especially in our hectic modern age, is all about reaching the largest possible audience in a form which is easy and pleasant to absorb. Spoken or written, it’s all the same.

The Wealth of Language: Keep it Simple

The advice most commonly given is to Keep it Simple – use common, everyday language, avoid complex terminology and grammatical structures, keep your sentences short.

Simple, however, does not mean dull, and we can learn a lot from Will Self in that respect. One of the pleasures of listening to him is enjoying the skill with which he deploys the enormous resources of the English language. He uses the breadth and depth of the language beautifully, with a wide range of better-known vocabulary and a wealth of cultural and political references.

English is an enormously rich language and if we want to keep our audience engaged and, when appropriate, stir their emotions, we need to use it imaginatively. So:

  • avoid repetitions of the same word. Use synonyms. If you have referred to “hens” a couple of times, try “chickens”, “poultry” or simply “birds”.  If you have already used “reform”, try “improve”, “upgrade”, “enhance”, “redesign”, re-make” – any number of alternatives.
  • steer clear of that bland, bureaucratic style of language whose over-use so irritates the general public. Address envelopes, not issues. Appeal to people, don’t reach out to them.
  • throw in references to events or people that all of your audience will find familiar.  Add richness to your message with a mention of Mozart or Julius Caesar, Beyoncé or David Bowie, Nine-Eleven or the Brexit vote, Lionel Messi or Tiger Woods, the 2008 Crash or the Greek debt crisis.
  • vary the tone. We always encourage you to illustrate any point you make with an example, usually involving individual people and often from your own experience. This is a good opportunity for a change of tone, make it personal, wield that most powerful of words – “I”.

If you or your team would like help with some of these elements or other ways to tighten up your grammar, enrich your writing style or lift your corporate writing from the mundane, the Media Coach can offer short, bespoke workshops.

There is always something that can be improved, even if we cannot hope to have you writing with the mastery of a Will Self, a writer who blends serious messages with a familiar, personal style that entertains while it informs.

Incidentally, it is important also to note that when he slips in words like recondite or factic, you can usually tell from the context roughly what is meant. He does not put them out in a vacuum. You may not get all the subtlety of a certain word, but you get the general drift.

To less talented writers – and that is virtually all of us – who are tempted to reach for the dictionary for some rarely used language, we simply say: “Don’t try this at home”.

Photo used under creative comms licence

Mitch

10 tips: what to wear on TV

What to wear on TV: is a question we are asked all the time.

Back in November I wrote ten top tips for women and promised we would also provide ten top tips for men. Just to reiterate: as media trainers, we think what you are wearing is one of the least important things to worry about if you are doing a TV interview. But we aim to provide the information our clients want. So here goes.

what to wear on TV

Normal business wear is a good principle to follow when being interviewed on TV

What to wear on TV: normal business wear

  • As with women, the overarching principle for professional people being interviewed on television is ‘normal business wear’. If you work for an NGO you will likely wear different clothes than someone running a funky design company. Whatever you would wear for work will probably work if you are being interviewed on TV.
  • Even men sometimes need make-up. We do understand that most red-blooded men baulk at the idea of wearing make-up but if it’s offered by a TV station we suggest you don’t turn it down. Many man have what we might diplomatically call a very high hairline. This can present a problem for the cameraman: a shiny pate will bounce light like a mirror and be very distracting.
  • Glasses on or off? The truth is it probably doesn’t matter. But it is not a good idea to take your glasses off just before an interview as you are likely to have an indent on the bridge of your nose which again, can be distracting. It is true that if you wear glasses on camera you can find studio or camera lighting is bouncing off the lenses and obscuring your eyes. However, this is the camera operators problem, not yours and they can easily adjust the shot to avoid the problem.

What to wear on TV: jacket and t-shirt

  • For most of our clients, we would suggest men wear their jackets on camera. Ties are optional and really depend on the culture of the organisation you are representing. As with women, the jacket not only looks smart, covers any embarrassing underarm sweat marks but also gives the technicians somewhere to put the microphone.
  • If you do wear a tie please, please check the knot is right at the top before the interview begins. Also, ensure the tie is hanging straight. Small misalignments can make a big difference to the image and it is easy to give the impression that you are overly informal or don’t care.
what to wear on TV

A small misalignment in your tie can quickly leave the wrong impression

What to wear on TV: think of your socks

  • Give some thought to your socks! The vast majority of interviews are filmed as a ‘mid-shot’ which is the waist upwards or slightly higher. The problem is you may not know what the studio set is like and what shot they are planning to use. It is not something interviewees can have any influence over. If they put you on a low settee (think BBC Breakfast News) there is every chance your legs and socks will be in shot some of the time. If they are brightly coloured or worse too short you are again providing a big distraction to what you are saying. Three inches of hairy leg between sock and trouser bottom will be the main preoccupation of a third of your audience. I am aware that Jon Snow has been wearing highly coloured hugely distracting socks for a very long time but it is part of his brand and he is on our screens most nights which means there is no novelty value.

What to wear on TV: what colour?

  • People often ask ‘what colours can I or should I wear? The truth is it makes very little difference these days so long as you don’t wear checks. 20 years ago camera technology struggled to cope with black, white, bright red etc. Today, black and white are best avoided if possible but only because they can be unflattering in harsh light. Softer colours are more flattering. Pink and blue shirts are considered preferable to white but again it is marginal. However, as with women, one important rule remains; don’t wear high contrast checks. If you do the picture will ‘strobe’ making it look as though you have recently been standing in a nuclear bunker. While this is not a crime, it is distracting.
  • Check your hair. For women the most common problem is long hair falling across their eyes and either being distracting or being constantly flicked away which is also distracting. For men, this is less of a problem but the early morning cow’s lick is very common. It is often right on the crown of the head and not instantly seen when looking in the mirror but will show when you move your head around while speaking. It is not a crime but not ideal.
  • Please do also consider your posture. Sit up straight, don’t loll and consider the BBC rule – bottom in back of chair. Leaning slightly forward means you look interested and caring.
  • Finally, where you look during the interview is much more important than what you wear. Hold the eyeline with the interviewer as much as possible unless you are doing a ‘down the line’ in which case you will need to stare down the lens of the camera.

If you want to prepare for a television or radio interview why not book a session in our studio. We can realistically recreate the interview you are about to do and you can watch and critique your own performance as well as enjoying expert coaching. That means you are much more likely to get it right on the day.

What to wear on TV: other articles

Don’t just take our word for it. Here we share again an article about what to wear on TV.
We condensed it down to 10 top tips but here are 22 tips on what to wear for a TV interview.

Twitter and PR

Twitter and PR: Crisis, Trump and Trolls

Twitter and PR are now, in my view, inseparable. Preparing material on Crisis Comms for a major international organisation in the last week, I was struck by how my thoughts turned immediately to social media, and in particular, Twitter.

If you are in the public eye and something goes wrong, or you are criticised by a person or organisation that matters, our advice at The Media Coach is that the first thing you should do is assign someone to monitor Twitter.

Twitter and PR

In a crisis it is now essential that someone monitors Twitter

Twitter and PR: In a crisis it must be monitored

Twitter has many faults but it is searchable and it will pretty instantly give you a range of views that tell you how the public is reacting, and also how other organisations and players are reacting. This picture will start to emerge in a couple of hours or in some cases minutes.

Equally important, it will be the first port of call for the mainstream media; journalists follow Twitter the way they used to follow the news agency wires. I haven’t done an audit but Twitter seems to be mentioned in almost every news bulletin these days. For journalists there is no need to ring someone up to get a comment on an interesting development, just look on Twitter.

Of course, if you have a good Crisis Comms strategy, you will also be using Twitter and other social media to put your point of view across. But the idea that you would not consider checking Twitter before putting out your first statement is now frankly crazy.

Twitter and PR: Donald Trump continues to astound

And while on the subject, I cannot but mention President-elect Donald Trump. He did once say he would give up his Twitter account when he moved into the White House. We shall see. But meanwhile he continues to use it to rage at, provoke, criticise and some would say bully whoever he happens to be annoyed with today.

The Tweets pouring scorn on North Korea’s nuclear ability are such a departure from all diplomatic norms that they are astonishing, but I find Trump’s Twitter criticism of the US motor industry much more fascinating.

Twitter and PR Donald Trump tweet

According to two stories in Forbes and Fortune magazines (among others), Trump’s ‘industrial policy by Tweet’ has already saved jobs in the US from going over the border to Mexico.  The idea is that ‘naming and shaming’ CEOs in 140 characters or less persuades them to reverse decisions to invest in Mexico and instead keep US jobs that would otherwise be at risk. Well maybe. I am no fan of Trump but I do find this new use of Twitter absolutely fascinating, if a little scary.

Twitter is now part of the mainstream. It is how we tell the world anything we want to get out there, and how we understand what other people are thinking about … well, anything at all. But it is not all good news. Trolling is widespread and for some, highly damaging. Worse, extreme political groups propagating hatred do effective and uncensored advertising on Twitter.

Twitter and PR: It is not all good

There have been a couple of articles in the last week or so showing former aficionados falling out of love with Twitter.

Lindy West – an American feminist writer – wrote a piece for the Guardian entitled “I’ve left Twitter. It is unusable for anyone but trolls, robots and dictators.”  And a response in Politico from former Hillary Clinton Foreign Policy wonk Emily Parker explained why she thinks Twitter cannot be fixed because it is simply reflecting human nature with all its flaws.

Meanwhile, if you are interested in Crisis Communications training or bespoke Social Media training for your organisation, please do get in touch. You can call the office on 020 7099 2212 or you can Twitter direct message me @themediacoach.

Twitter and PR

Articles about Twitter and Crisis Comms:

One from MTI Network, a specialist agency; Twitters Growing Importance in Crisis Communications.

Here is an LSE blog with some useful tips for searching twitter: Twitter and crisis communication: an overview of tools for handling social media in real time.

A short introduction, rather simplistic, from the writer of Twitter Marketing for Dummies: How to Use Twitter to Communicate in a Crisis.

A very interesting article written two years ago but still relevant. Using Twitter in Times of Crisis.

Post-truth era

Post-Truth Era: weaponising numbers!

Post-Truth era communications hold a particular challenge for companies whose marketing is based on some form of science or data. How should companies communicate in the Post-Truth era, particularly when it comes to the use of numbers?

For a re-cap of how Lindsay and I view ‘Post-Truth’ please see our previous posts here and here.

Post-truth era communications: case study

Post-truth era

As a case study, let’s look at the most famous Post-Truth number; the £350 million a week that the Vote Leave campaign continued to claim the UK sends to Brussels even after it was debunked as ‘misleading’ by the UK Statistics Authority.

Here are some lessons for communicators.

Post-truth numbers are not about factual accuracy

It didn’t matter and it didn’t hurt the Leave Campaign that the £350mn figure wasn’t true. By keeping it out there, the campaign intended to create confusion and crowd out Remain messages and arguments. Like its larger cousin (fully fledged fake news articles), the £350mn figure is part of a broad family of misinformation that is designed to muddy the waters. The Russians even have a military term for it- maskirovka.

Post-truth numbers are about forcing opponents onto the defensive

In his 2004 book Don’t Think of An Elephant, cognitive linguist George Lakoff argued that conservatives are much better at winning arguments than liberals because they use powerful language to frame their ideas (e.g. ‘tax is theft’) and then force their opponents to argue on that territory (as opposed to the ‘tax is investment’ argument ). The £350mn is the numerical equivalent of a linguistic frame. It forced the Remain campaign to come out and argue that the number wasn’t true, which kept the conversation going and also kept the idea that it might be alive in people’s heads.

Post-truth numbers link to a powerful organising story

The £350mn figure evoked powerful images associated with the deeply embedded Eurosceptic tropes of waste and a lack of financial control. Throw in the NHS (the ultimate British identity meme*) and the figure goes from being an example of hard data to an expression of the powerful and simple story.

Post-Truth Era communications

Paul Stephenson was Communications Director of the successful Vote Leave campaign. 

All three of these ideas are on the record in a recent article by Paul Stephenson, the Communications Director for Vote Leave:

“Of course, our campaign claim of the now infamous £350 million a week that Britain sends to the EU was not completely accurate … The Remain campaign couldn’t stand it. They constantly tried to rubbish these official statistics and accused us of ‘lying.’ These attacks were entirely counterproductive for them; it kept the debate focused on an area where we were strong: just how many hundreds of millions of pounds the U.K. gives the EU every week.”

So, the question still remains as to whether companies should engage in these kinds of tactics.

And quite simply the answer is no.

Donald Trump isn’t even in office and Brexit hasn’t yet happened, so no one knows what, if any, price will be paid by the members of the public who did believe what they were saying.  But organisations that have shareholders and/or regulatory constraints will almost certainly get clobbered for putting bad information into the public domain.

Post-truth era communications: a commercial case study

Equally damaging is withholding information that could contradict the powerful story which a company uses to justify its ‘social licence’. Like many others, I have been gripped by the downfall of Theranos, the ‘revolutionary’ US blood testing company founded by Elizabeth Holmes, a 19 year old Stanford dropout who managed to convince the stalwarts of Corporate America (including Rupert Murdoch and Henry Kissinger) to either invest or be on her board. Worth an estimated $9bn by the age of 32, Holmes’ built the notoriously secretive company’s brand on an emotion-drenched-story which lacked the transparent data to support it. The image was shattered when the Wall Street Journal started digging around for numbers and discovered that the supposedly ground breaking blood testing technology was in fact deeply flawed.

Companies are right to see storytelling and emotion/issue based campaigning as a way of engaging the public around the issues they care about. And planting memes and tropes* over a period of years can be incredibly helpful for shaping public opinion around core images and ideas (particularly if supported by a willing media).

But when it comes to hard numbers they should never weaponise them. Handled badly they can go off on in the wrong hands and cause injury, not just to the public but also to the user.

For the record here are a couple of definitions:

*A meme is an element of culture (it can be a video, an institution, or a type of behaviour) that is shared, copied or mimicked by lots of people.

A trope is a figure of speech, a metaphor and sometimes a cliché. It’s a shorthand for something the audience will instantly recognise. It has a slightly different meaning in politics, literature and TV drama.

As those of you that read this blog regularly will know, the Media Coach team don’t just teach people where to look and what to wear on TV. We offer a broad range of bespoke media and presentation training workshops and message building sessions – all run by  experienced communications professionals. If you need help building or refining messages just give us a call.

Media training basics: don’t shoot the messenger

Media training basics include understanding that interviews with journalists are an opportunity rather than a threat.

Sure, there are potential pitfalls and problems that you might encounter in the course of the conversation, but the key point to realise is that you have been selected as an opinion leader, with a chance to influence what others think.

With this in mind, it would be madness to criticise the very broadcaster that is providing you with the interview opportunity. Nevertheless, a surprising number of interviewees seem to forget or ignore this and waste time shooting the messenger.

Media training basics: case study

Media Training Basics Don't Shoot the Messenger

Peter Bone MP used an interview on BBC Radio 4 PM programme to criticise the ‘pro-EU’ stance of the BBC

Take Peter Bone, for example – a politician since 1977 and an MP since 2005. The Conservative member for Wellingborough is a prominent Eurosceptic and has been through countless interactions with the media. He was invited onto a recent edition of Radio 4’s PM programme to discuss comments made by Brexit secretary David Davis that day, suggesting the government was not ruling out paying into the Brussels budget in exchange for access to the single market.

Presenter Eddie Mair asked Mr Bone what he thought of what had been said – a gentle, easy opening question that should have provided him with an opportunity to say almost anything he liked on the subject.

Media training basics: why waste easy questions?

But within his first answer, Mr Bone had dismissed the story as people “clutching at straws” who were “desperate for any news”. This is never a good tactic. Journalists hate being told what constitutes a story – and from the listeners’ point of view, it’s reasonable to assume that anyone agreeing to be interviewed believes there is something to talk about.

Then when Eddie Mair pushed him a little harder (“forgive us for listening to what government ministers say and trying to interpret them on behalf of the listeners”), Mr Bone responded, “It is the BBC, of course, and I know you’re terribly, terribly pro-EU.”

Suddenly the debate switched from discussing access to the EU single market to the manner in which the BBC was covering the issue:

Peter Bone:  “There you see – there we go again: BBC – pro-EU hat on, you just can’t see reality…”

Eddie Mair:   “Is it easier to bash the BBC than to deal with the question?”

Peter Bone:  “I don’t have to bash the BBC because it’s unmitigating (sic) pro-EU…. I mean, it’s just the way you start these reports…”

Eddie Mair:   “Have you seen reports in The Telegraph posing the same questions?”

You can hear the interview here until the end of December 2016.

Listeners on both sides of the debate will resent this approach – especially as the only other interviewee on the subject was fellow-Brexiteer Mark Littlewood, the Director General of the free-market think tank The Institute of Economic Affairs. What’s more, soundbites introducing the article had come from Michael Gove, Priti Patel, Nigel Farage, David Davis and Ian Duncan Smith – not a Remainer in sight.

Bone should have known better and kept his powder dry. When landing a key message should be your strategic purpose, it’s a waste of ammunition to target the media instead. Doing so frustrates interviewers who spend time dodging the bullets, and alienates the audience who are left wondering what the battle was all about.

Expecting a radio interview opportunity to come up in the near future? I and the team of trainers at The Media Coach have years of broadcast news experience; we can prepare you for a radio or TV interview and ensure you avoid making such basic mistakes.

Photos used under creative comms licence

Public narrative: case study from Tim Farron

Public narrative: case study from Tim Farron

Public narrative is right at the top of our agenda here in Brussels. It is a really effective way to build a compelling message if you are working for the public good.

It is no secret that people who work in politics, campaigning, and media often use storytelling as a way of communicating their values and reinforcing those of a particular target audience. Done well, it is an extremely effective technique for building empathy, inspiring a community to act and appealing to a set of values which many identify with.

On Thursday night’s Question Time UK Liberal Democrat Leader Tim Farron gave us one such example.

Public narrative: case study from Tim Farron

UK Liberal Democrat Leader Tim Farron

In fact, he gave us three.

Asked by an audience member whether he felt Nigel Farage would be a good or ‘terrifying’ British Ambassador to the US, Mr Farron used his 1 minute 20 answer to outline a form of public narrative. This is a communication technique pioneered by former Civil Rights activist Marshall Ganz, in which the speaker links the personal with the political through a short speech or story.

Farron’s story followed this three-layer, interlinking narrative structure:

  1. A story of me
  2. A story of my people
  3. A story of my country

To analyse each part in turn:

Public narrative part 1: A story of me

Early on Mr Farron (by his own admission) plays the working class card (he’s the only working class political leader in the UK). He goes on to say that while his constituency voted to ‘Remain’ he’s from a ‘few miles south in Lancashire’ and knows many people who voted to leave the EU on 23rd June. By painting a visual picture of his local roots, he establishes his credibility and authenticity, thus pre-empting accusations that he is one of the out of touch pro-EU ‘elites’ who don’t understand the concerns of the working class, particularly in relation to Brexit. The message from this story is: I understand why people voted the way they did.

This sets the audience up for the next part of the tale.

Public narrative part 2 : A story of my people

Perhaps counter intuitively for some Mr Farron then chooses to talk about the 52% of the people who voted to leave the EU (many of whom live in constituencies close to where he grew up). He describes them as almost all ‘outward looking, decent, tolerant people who just happened to disagree with me on 23rd June’. The buzzwords will always make a liberal base purr but in this case they were designed to separate British values from Brexit and create a strong contrast between Farron, the people he knows and Nigel Farage, who is identified with ‘stoking racism and division’. By concentrating on common values rather than common interests, Mr Farron then sets up the final part of his story.

So the message here is: my people may disagree with me but they still share my values more than Nigel Farage.

Public narrative part 3: A story of my country

This is the climax.  Farron asserts that Nigel Farage ‘does not speak’ for the majority of British people whether they voted ‘Leave’ or ‘Remain’.  By repeating his earlier tricolon that ‘the British values’ he wants to see projected around the world are those of being ‘outward looking, decent and tolerant’, he links the local story of people in the North of England with  the principles by which the UK should be known and perceived around the world. A stern reprimand (accompanied by a finger jab) in the direction of an audience heckler that ‘he (Nigel Farage) may speak for you but he doesn’t speak for the overwhelming majority of British people’ or ‘the Britain I know’  injects some passion and anger into the story, ensuring it ends on a high note.

This was one of the strongest pieces of pro-EU identity-based messaging I have seen throughout the Brexit debate. Judging from the audience’s reaction they were not only in agreement with Tim Farron but many also felt that it was their own story being articulated back at them.

And all in 1 minute 20 seconds.

If you would like help building a public narrative message for yourself, for a group or for an organisation we can help. This week we piloted a specialist Public Narrative Workshop in Brussels and would welcome a chat with anyone who thinks this might help their organisation.

Presentation Tips Prime Minister Speaks at the CBI Conference 2016

Presentation tips: lessons from the PM

Presentation tips can be quickly garnered from watching someone else present. I was fortunate enough to hear Theresa May speak yesterday to the CBI Annual Conference and despite the fact that she must be one of the most experienced speakers in the country, and a great deal more experienced than the business people we train, she made a few mistakes.

Person

Prime Minister Theresa May spoke to the CBI Annual Conference this week. Lindsay Williams was there.

Presentation tips: before I start

However, before I dissect the Prime Minister’s speech I should say that there are more important things in life than how you come across on stage. May became PM at one of the most difficult times in modern British history: steering the UK out of the EU in a way that doesn’t tip the whole ship over into a major recession or lead to civil strife is a heck of a project. So this blog is not really criticising someone who has bigger fish to fry. It is pulling out what us less experienced presenters can learn from it.

Presentation tips: Coaching Notes for the PM

That said here are my Coaching Notes for the PM.

  • Theresa May did not say ‘Hello, it’s nice to be here’ or in any way acknowledge her audience before beginning to read her prepared speech . This seemed very odd. A smile and a nod, and ‘hello’ seems the minimum to be polite.
  • It was a well-crafted speech and the messages were very clear. I would summarise them as ‘we support business but we all have to do things differently in the future’, and in particular, ‘we have to condemn bad practise that gives you all a bad name’. She wanted to put a ‘fairer society’ and ‘social inclusion’ on the business agenda as well as on the social agenda. On Brexit she said ‘I hear what you are saying but I cannot give you certainty ahead of the negotiations’.
  • She mentioned speaking at the Lord Mayor’s Banquet which could have been a nice anecdote but she added no colour and made absolutely no attempt to entertain with it. In fact that was true through out the speech.

The full script of the PM’s speech can be read here

  • As you would expect if you have experts to write your speech for you, May had some good examples: a longish list of recent announcements of investment in Britain from Nissan building new models here to 500 more jobs at Facebook.
  • Similarly, she had some good numbers to hand.

Presentation tips: it is rude to rush

  • But the whole thing felt rushed. People we train often find it difficult to speak at a slow enough pace for an audience hearing information for the first time. This is not an issue that Mrs May normally has – she was rushing because she was in a hurry. There were no gaps, no dramatic pauses. I felt this was rude and disrespectful of the audience. I have no doubt she is very busy but for the short time she is with the audience – they should feel as if they are special. Bill Clinton was famously brilliant at this, one to one or with an audience. (I have heard people who met him say he made them feel extraordinarily important, even if just for a couple of minutes.)
  • I would add that May shows little ‘warmth’ in public. She may be choosing to be the ‘ice queen’ for political reasons but it is not a tactic I recommend. On the whole, it is a good idea if the audience like you. A few small changes, the odd small, the odd self-deprecating comment would do the trick.
Presentation tips: from the PM

Theresa May is particularly prone to ignoring questions. We think she should at least acknowledge before moving on.

Presentation tips: at least acknowledge the questions

  • As I have noted previously, my biggest criticism of May is that she does not even pretend to answer a question. It was very easy to ignore a question in the formality of the CBI gathering, there is no follow-up question. But that doesn’t mean that the audience doesn’t notice. As we have mentioned before, even if you cannot give a full response to a question you can at least acknowledge it.
  • Finally, please can someone tell our new Prime Minister to stand up straight. I fully understand that it is a curse of tall people and particularly of tall women (especially those with shorter husbands); you want to make yourself a little shorter so you curve your body over ever so slightly. But she would look so much more authoritative, not to mention elegant if she pushed her shoulders back and stood straight.

Presentation tips: what was reported

Here are the comments of Laura Kuenssberg at the BBC 

And here is the opinion of the Independent 

The Daily Mail picked out the theme I spotted but the fact there is so much diversity in the headlines is evidence that there was not a stand out angle from the speech.

 

how to dress for tv

What to wear on TV: our 10 top tips

What to wear on TV is a question we are asked all the time. As media trainers, we think what you are wearing is one of the least important things to worry about if you are doing a TV interview. But we aim to provide the information our clients want. So here are our 10 top tips. We are dealing here with advice for women but will come to advice for men in the coming weeks.

What to wear on TV

Any sort of jacket is a good idea on TV, partly because it gives somewhere easy to attach the microphone

What to wear on TV: normal business wear

  • As an overarching principle start with ‘normal business wear’. We are not talking here about dressing as a TV presenter or as a celebrity (they do not need our advice). But if you are being interviewed as a representative of an organisation wear something that would be appropriate to going to work for that organisation. This will clearly be different if you work for a tech company where jeans and a black polo may be the norm compared to running a bank where you will be suited and booted every day.  If you work for an NGO you will likely wear different clothes than someone running a funky design company. Whatever you would wear for work will probably work if you are being interviewed on TV.
  • Women need make-up. I remember seriously offending someone from a very politically correct NGO by saying this but my view is that it is a bad idea to go in front of the camera without make-up. Firstly, it is important to understand that TV lights are harsh and will be unflattering. Secondly, almost every other woman on the programme will be wearing lots of make-up and you will look odd if you don’t. Clearly, there are exceptions; if you are reporting or saving lives in a war zone there are more important things to worry about. [Orla Guerin MBE is a BBC journalist who reports regularly from the Middle East and is a legend in her own lunchtime. I don’t know for a fact that she never wears make-up but it certainly doesn’t look as if she does. But I totally make allowances as a viewer as she is usually wearing a flak jacket and interviewing distraught relatives of recent victims of some atrocity or other – and absolutely clearly has other things to worry about. But if she was in the studio doing an interview I am sure she would wear make-up and so should you.]
  • This does beg the question what sort of make-up? My topline advice is a good foundation and take steps to make your eyes stand out. Use blusher if you need it and normally wear it while lipstick is optional.
What to wear on TV

The safe wardrobe option for an interviewee is jacket and t-shirt, it is the outfit most often chosen by female television presenters

What to wear on TV: jacket and t-shirt

  • For most of our clients, the ‘safe’ outfit for a woman interviewee is a jacket and T-shirt or jacket and shift dress. The T-shirt should not be too low on the neckline – any cleavage is distracting so avoid showing it. Similarly not too high on the neckline: polo necks are very rarely seen on TV for good reason. They are too hot for a studio environment. Most female newsreaders stick to the jacket and T-shirt formula and it is a very safe one.
  • Having a jacket gives somewhere to clip on the microphone and saves any embarrassing need for wires up under a dress or pulling a delicate top out of shape.
What to wear on TV

Avoid scarves and overly large jewellery: simple lines are the least distracting

 

What to wear on TV: avoid scarves

  • Avoid scarves and overly large jewellery. I would advise trying to keep a clean ‘unfussy’ image and amazing jewellery will again only distract from your message. Dangly earrings are to be avoided as they will move and again distract from what you are saying.
  • The vast majority of TV interviewees are shot from the midriff upwards, something that is called a mid-shot. However, unless you absolutely know that is how the interview will be shot you may want to give some thought to the bottom half! Crucially, if there is even a remote possibility that you are going to be on a low settee – do not wear a short skirt. If you do you will surely spend the whole interview tugging at the hem at and worse being distracted by the amount expanse of your legs on show.
What to wear on TV

Jackets can be worn with a shift dress but if it’s too short you might be worried about showing too much leg

What to wear on TV: what colour?

  • People often ask ‘what colours can I or should I wear? The truth is it makes very little difference these days so long as you don’t wear checks. 20 years ago camera technology struggled to cope with black, white, bright red etc. Today, black and white are best avoided if possible but only because they can be unflattering in harsh light. Softer colours are more flattering. However, one important rule remains; don’t wear high contrast checks. If you do the picture will ‘strobe’ making it look as though you have recently been standing in a nuclear bunker. Whiles this is not a crime, it is distracting.
  • Hair off the face. If you have long hair consider tying it back. Viewers need to see both your eyes to trust you. Also, there is nothing more irritating than someone constantly flicking their hair back off their face.
  • Finally, where you look during the interview is much more important than what you wear. Hold the eyeline with the interviewer as much as possible unless you are doing a ‘down the line’ in which case you will need to stare down the lens of the camera.
What to wear on TV

TV lighting means it is a good idea to wear make-up if you are being filmed

If you want to prepare for a television or radio interview why not book a session in our studio. We can provide a realistic run-through and you can watch and critique your own performance as well as enjoying expert coaching. That all means you are much more likely to get it right on the day.

What to wear on TV: other articles

Don’t just take our word for it, here is an article about what to wear on TV.

We condensed it down to 10 top tips but here are 22 tips on what to wear for a TV interview.

Key Messages are magic

Key Messages are magic: you almost certainly need some

Key messages are something that when I was a journalist I would have scoffed at. I remember the BBC Radio 4 presenter John Humphrys saying that anyone who says you need three key messages to do a radio interview is talking rubbish. Now with more than 10 years media and presentation training experience, I am confident in saying he is utterly and completely wrong.

Key Messages are magic

A few hours with a trained journalist could save you days of frustrating email negotiation

Key Messages helped George

To illustrate let me introduce someone we will call George. George is an old friend of my family. I have known him since he was 12 and he is now in his late 20s. He is ferociously bright with a brain that is capable of holding huge amounts of detailed and diverse information. He has encyclopedic knowledge of geography, global politics and the railways of Europe (!). But when he went for his dream-job interview, he lost out. They gave him very specific feedback; he had bombarded them with too much information and too much detail and they had not fully followed his arguments. (My interpretation is they were not sure if they were dealing with a genius or a nutcase.)  So he came to spend an afternoon with me and we sorted out his messages: how he would describe his professional skills and how projects he had completed in other jobs were evidence of his knowledge and ability.

I see myself as a …

What I feel I would bring to this organisation is…

Etc…

We also worked out what he was going to say, if asked, about a ‘hole’ in his CV. There is a perfectly reasonable explanation but it was complicated.

And then we rehearsed.  Which is exactly what we do in Media Training.

Key Messages organise thoughts

It is understandable that John Humphrys would not see the necessity for this sort of preparation for either a job or a media interview.  After a lifetime as a journalist and broadcaster, Humphrys and his ilk need only to think about something to be able to articulate it as a simple argument. It is their professional skill. (Interestingly, journalists rarely recognise this as a skill. They assume everyone can do it despite daily evidence to the contrary.)

Let’s take another example. Imagine someone has spent the last five years managing clients and designing an ‘end to end process solution’ for automating the work of people who pick the items for your on-line order in a vast warehouse. What are the chances of that person being able to articulate the advantages of 3D barcodes or warehouse management software in simple language?

Absolutely zero.

This does not mean that particular professional is inadequate.  It just reminds us that experts often find it hard to articulate a helicopter view. Under questioning they often get lost in the detail and led down blind and unhelpful intellectual by-ways.

Key Messages are useful everywhere

I recently facilitated a meeting helping draw up the talking points for a new international strategy for tackling a specific set of problems in emerging economies. It sounds a long way from media and presentation training but actually is remarkably closely related.

This gutting of a detailed strategy document to identify a few easy-to-grasp core ideas is a task regularly faced in many different forms by all sorts of teams in business. But it can take weeks. Putting all stakeholders together with a former journalist will save hours if not days of frustrating email negotiation.

Back to George. I am delighted to report that George got the next job he applied for and is now being offered a promotion and a new role in another European country. Well done George. And another triumph for the magic of messaging.

If you know people who need help sorting out their messages give us a call.

 

Key Messages: online articles

There are plenty of online articles explaining the basics of key messaging. Here is a couple:

Clinton Trump Debate: public speaking lessons

Clinton Trump Debate: public speaking lessons

The Clinton Trump Debate this week was a brilliant lesson for the rest of us on how to deal with unreasonable questioning or sledging whilst speaking in public.

I find Trump a frightening and seriously unpleasant option for president. If I was an American I would be a Democrat but many others are better qualified to write about the politics than I am.

But this is my attempt to drag the lessons from the debate for clients who do speak in public.

Clinton Trump Debate: Hillary’s problem

Clinton’s problem throughout was how to respond to Trump’s accusations and sledging but also finding the time to land her substantive points.

And she did a brilliant job. She gave enough of an answer to each of her ‘difficult’ areas. And she also explained that she was not going to get overly distracted by all the factual errors that were coming from Trump instead pointing out that all that information was available on a special fact checker page on her campaign website.

She kept calm. She took her opportunities when they came. She criticised Trump forcefully and directly without being overly aggressive to him, or labouring the point. My favourite was ‘he lives in an alternative universe’.  She did not respond when he said she should be in prison.

Clinton Trump Debate: Townhall style

This was a town hall-style debate and while Clinton stepped back and sat down when she wasn’t speaking. Trump did not – he lurked behind Clinton trying to keep a poker-face and not succeeding. He was rarely out of the shot. Some people will think that looked ‘presidential’, others will be offended that he was trying to intimidate or distract from her. I think she did well to always step forward so that he was out of her eye-line, making it easier to ignore him.

Clinton Trump Debate: Trump lands punches

To the chattering classes, Trump is not credible. However, in this debate, he did land some damaging punches that will chime with people who are angry and looking for establishment figures to blame for injustices and unhappy lives. He repeatedly called Clinton a liar, he repeatedly reminded people that Bernie Sanders has said Clinton had ‘bad judgement’, he repeatedly said ‘it is all talk’, and he repeatedly said he was for cutting taxes and Clinton was for raising taxes.

However, to normal thinking people Clinton won this debate hands down.

Clinton Trump Debate: some other coverage

Huffington Post on Trumps ‘lurking’ during the debate

Forbes pulls out some of the key quotes

The Daily Mail thinks that Trump came off best

The Washington Post did its own ‘fact check’ on the second debate

Images from YouTube