Credibility Matters, feature

Credibility Matters to Most But Not All Interviewees

A client alerted me to an uncomfortable interview on Radio 4’s Today programme on Saturday.

New Transport Minister, Mark Harper, ‘took one for the boss’ and accepted an interview on Radio 4’s Today Programme, despite the fact that the media is awash with rumours about cancellations or delays to HS2. The boss, Rishi Sunak, was himself fielding questions about HS2 that he was refusing to answer, whilst dropping plenty of hints that he had other uses for the eye-watering HS2 budget.

The Mark Harper interview can be heard here at 1 hour 10 minutes and 15 seconds into the programme recording. It’s available until 27th October 2023.

Credibility Matters

This Today interview is uncomfortable because Harper, under very persistent though polite questioning from Mishal Husain, says again and again he will not speculate on rumours that the second leg of HS2 is about to be scrapped. He had to do that 11 times in five minutes.

I have always said that the hardest questions are the ones where you can’t tell the truth and you can’t lie. And that your only defence is a form of words that sounds credible.

Well, Harper had his form of words or reactive lines: ’We have spades in the ground’, ‘We are getting on with building the line’, and ‘I am not going to speculate on rumours in the media’. Sadly, none of it sounded the slightest bit credible.

Everyone knows something is afoot. Grant Shapps, former transport secretary, has been the most direct he said it would be crazy not to reconsider this very expensive project. 

No one wants to tell the truth (yet), presumably because it is being saved for an announcement at the Tory Party Conference, or perhaps because  the Prime Minister has decided the link between Birmingham and Manchester needs to be scrapped but he hasn’t yet persuaded the rest of the cabinet. Either way, for now, ministers can’t tell the truth and they can’t lie.

When I talk to clients about holding the line and not being bullied by journalists into saying something that they don’t want to have in the public domain, they all think of these awful political interviews that defy all logic and credibility. However, business interviews are rarely if ever so pointed.

The reality is that most business interviews:

  • Are less high-profile
  • Involve more credible reasons for not telling the whole truth
  • Have an audience with a less sophisticated understanding of what is actually going on (it would be less obvious what the obfuscation is about)
  • Have more choice about whether to do the interview or not

This Mark Harper interview is just the latest in a long line of examples where politicians have had to earn their stripes by proving they can survive a grilling and avoid answering persistent questions. Some fail to pass the test. For example, Jeremy Paxman’s demolition of Junior Treasury Minister Chloe Smith in 2012.

In these situations, all Westminster watchers know the game. No one from the government side cares about the credibility of that one minister or that one interview, because they have bigger fish to fry.

Personally, I feel that this is one ritual that damages democracy and our trust in politicians.. I think a more honest line would work better, for example ‘there will be an announcement on Monday, please wait’ or ‘it’s being looked at again because it is so expensive, but there is no final decision’.  I believe shredding the trust of your listeners, being blatant in your disrespect for intelligent questioning and failing to use a credible reactive line is disastrous in the long run. But for Mark Harper, on this day, credibility did not matter.

And, in the meantime, Mishal Husain proved she was a tough journalist and Harper proved he was a loyal minister and could take the heat.

 

 

 

seven-bin policy feature

Why the Seven-Bin Policy Was Doomed From the Start

In my view, the seven-bin policy – which we should all theoretically support – was never going to hit the mainstream. [If you are not familiar with this news story, check out BBC coverage here.]

seven-bin policy

And that is because of a simple but remarkably resilient rule: all lists should be three, at least in the theatre of public or mass communication.  The seven-bin policy broke the Rule of Three.

In another lifetime, I clearly remember a clever chap at the National Association for Gifted Children explaining why there were seven types of intelligence. I was briefly on the National Executive Board of this important organisation. Whilst I was interested in the list, which was based on the work of Harvard Psychologist Howard Gardner, I knew I would never remember all seven categories.

As a BBC and Reuters journalist, I cautiously advised my senior colleague not to try to run through the list during an imminent Radio 4 interview.  He was adamant it was essential. On the day, he tried, got as far as number three, and was interrupted with a pointed and unhelpful question.  He never got back on track. I pretended I hadn’t heard the interview.

Why do threes work and longer lists work so much less well?

Perhaps because when things come in threes there is both brevity and rhythm. The three can often represent a beginning, a middle and an end, and three of something is so much easier to remember than four, five, six or seven.

Many articles and books have been written about the power of three, and there are many different explanations about why three is so powerful in this context.

My colleague, Eric Dixon, likes to evidence the robustness of the principle by reciting a list of children’s stories that are built around three: Three Billy Goats Gruff, Three Little Pigs, Three Blind Mice, Goldilocks and the Three Bears, etc.

I like religious references such as the Holy Trinity, the Three Wise Men, Peter denying Jesus three times and the simple: Holy, Holy, Holy.  I am told that three is also important in the Koran and in Jewish mysticism. All religions are – among many other things – about marketing a set of ideas.

But my personal favoured explanation for the power of three is one based on neuroscience. It suggests that the human brain is, above all, a ‘pattern recognition machine’ and three is the minimum number you need to create a pattern. Surely it is clear that even a simple ‘three’ – morning, noon and night; breakfast lunch and dinner; an Englishman, an Irishman and a Scotsman, for example– will provide a nice little dopamine hit!

Whatever the alchemy, the Rule of Three is easily observable in everyday life and you ignore it at your peril.

Whilst seven bins would make recycling much cheaper, few households were ever going to work with seven bins. Three is the limit.

Now if you wanted to get crafty you could have:

  • 3 bins
  • 3 things that should never go in a household bin but should be taken elsewhere (compost heap, charity shop, fabric recycling collection point, for example)
  • Top 3 ways to reduce, reuse and recycle

But that is 9 things on the list I hear you say! And it is… but it is also a ‘3 x 3’, another magic formula in the art of teaching and communication.

If you would like help preparing for a media interview call us on 020 7099 2212 or email enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk. All our training is bespoke and we are happy to talk through exactly what you need and suggest ways to teach this quickly, efficiently and memorably.

 

SEXI or Pyramid Communication Feature

SEXI or Pyramid Communication?

I know which I prefer.

SEXI is apparently a mnemonic device used by university debating societies. I only know this because someone pointed out to me that this had featured in a recent Guardian article by Simon Usborne entitled:

Don’t steamroll, and go easy on the stats: how to win an argument – without making things worse

I have been unable to find many references to this but SEXI is helpfully explained at the end of The Guardian piece.

SEXI or Pyramid Communication

Nottingham University Debating Society

Make a Statement (S), offer an Explanation (E), then an eXample (X). And then detail the Importance (I) of what you’re arguing.

For example: “We should spend less time looking at our phones (statement), because it’s eroding our mental health and ability to connect with people in real life (explanation). Excessive smartphone use has been proven to increase anxiety (example) and this matters because poor mental health among adults can have an impact on everything from workplace productivity to interpersonal relationships (importance).” 

In my mind, the way one prepares for a debate, a panel or any free flowing exchange of information such as a media interview is all pretty much the same. You need an engaging, easily understood, compelling argument.

As many of my readers know, at The Media Coach we have our own way of teaching these things; and although I think SEXI is a clever mnemonic, this doesn’t satisfy me as much as our admittedly somewhat similar, but in my view superior, message-building formula:

Sizzle – Numbers – Example

To begin with, for us the sizzle is more than a statement: it is a statement made in a fun or engaging way, usually using a metaphor. We strongly argue that this opening gambit should be something more than just a statement. If you are dealing with the media you want it to be quotable, but even if you are debating, you want it to be memorable. To repurpose The Guardian mobile phone example, we might suggest:

Mobile phones are eroding our mental health…

Mobile phones are a curate’s egg: Many benefits but also some very serious costs…

The damage done by mobile-phone addiction, is just beginning to be understood…

Is your phone hacking your brain?

All the words here in italics are metaphors. Metaphors are a common way to get a quote. You may recognise some recent ones:

Rishi Sunak spoke in July about ‘rip-off degrees’

António Guterres, also in July said ‘the era of global boiling has arrived’

Last week Keir Starmer promised to repair the bridges the Tories have burnt’

Of course, these metaphoric phrases all needed explanation but people don’t need reminding to do that bit.  I do have clients that have a special section in the messaging template for the explanation, but I find it unnecessary.

What SEXI dubs eXample, I would replace with hard evidence. I am all in favour of story, anecdote and example but not at the expense of some facts and numbers. Arguments without evidence quickly begin to sound hollow.

The phrase ‘Excessive smartphone use has been proven to increase anxiety’ for me is very weak. I want to know which authoritative source says so and if possible, what the numbers are.

As for leaving the bit on why the argument is important, until the end of the message, my journalistic training would make me want that much higher.

Stories, anecdotes or examples, told with some colour (by which I mean some tangible detail) and some context, are hugely influential and should definitely be included. They fit neatly at the end of a narrative but also at the very beginning. Almost every self-help book starts each chapter with a story. Almost every TED Talk starts with a personal anecdote. It is a successful and influential formula worth borrowing. We often suggest people start presentations with a story. But whether they are used at the beginning, in the middle or at the end, these stories should be prepared, crafted, shortened and rehearsed.

Our message-building formula is adapted from Pyramid Communication which I have written about before here. For a media interview, I tend to recommend three messages which I frame with a Message House. It is easy to remember and seems to work like a charm.

So, I vote pyramid over SEXI.  However, the important thing is that those constructing an argument prepare more than bland statements and include explanation, evidence and substance. However you do it, it takes a bit of thinking about.

If you would like help from The Media Coach team with your Message Building, sexy or not, just get in touch either by ringing 020 7099 2212 or by emailing enquires@themediacoach.co.uk.

 

Photo credit: Matt Buck, CC BY-SA 3.0

You but on a good day feature

How to Perform on Camera: The Berocca Way

Working with The Media Coach and other Mediacrews clients, I often find myself coaching people on how to come across well in front of a video camera. Everyone needs both energy and confidence or as Lindsay often explains,  ‘Warmth, Authority and Animation’. To do that on camera requires an unfamiliar set of skills.  

You but on a good day

David Gridley, Mediacrews

When you perform on video, the technology tends to ‘flatten’ you, making the playback appear uninspiring and rather dull. For this reason, I tell people that to compensate, they must add extra energy to their delivery. Our fellow trainer, Eric Dixon, often uses the analogy of the energy drink, Berocca, whose tagline was “You, but on a really good day!” This is what is needed. 

Think of it as adding an extra 30 per cent to your delivery and you will be getting somewhere close to the kind of energy you need to throw at the camera lens, to come across well. The downside of adding extra energy is that most people naturally speed up their delivery – they start talking too fast – and that makes it harder for the audience to follow. The crucial trick to master is: energy up, speed down.

In the beginning, this will feel strange as the natural tendency is to lose energy when you speak more slowly.  But what TV requires is the opposite. Mastering the technique of slowing your pace while at the same time upping the energy, is the key to unlocking many of the other techniques that will improve your overall delivery style. Things like: emphasis, signposting and adding light and shade to your performance are all only really possible once you get to grips with the energy/speed conundrum. But once you do get the hang of it then all things are possible and your on-screen performance will improve massively. And then it really will be “You, but on a really good day…”

If your job requires you to speak to camera, and you want coaching to improve your performance call or email The Media Coach on 020 7099 2212 or enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk.

Merope Mills

Merope Mills: A Brilliant Interviewee with a Terrible Story

A moving account of the death of a 13-year-old in an NHS hospital aired for 22 minutes on Radio 4’s Today Programme on Monday morning.   The teenager who died was Martha Mills and her mother Merope Mills is spearheading a campaign to change NHS rules so that calling for an urgent second opinion is the right of all patients. A right that has been called Martha’s Rule.

The full version of the interview (as opposed to the clip above) starts one-hour-30-minutes into the show (the 7:30 am slot) and can be found here for the next 28 days.

The first half is an account of the tragedy; a thirteen-year-old girl, in hospital after being injured on a bike ride, caught sepsis and went downhill.  Her parents were at her bedside throughout the final days and constantly sounded the alarm. Despite being in a children’s ward at Kings College Hospital, one of the top London hospitals, the parents were ignored and opportunities to save Martha Mill’s life were repeatedly missed. It is such a calm, vivid account, that the interviewer, Mishal Husain, barely interrupts with a question.

The tragic story makes the call for Martha’s Rule instantly relatable. But what we also hear is a brilliant spokesperson, calmly weaving a personal story that is beyond compelling.

In the second half of the interview, the focus shifts from what happened, to what needs to change. Again, Merope Mills is a superb interviewee. She is working with the Demos Think Tank and it may deserve some of the credit for the detailed work that has been done to prepare for the launch of this campaign. But it could not have found a more articulate champion.

Mills speaks slowly, she uses examples, she provides evidence, she uses the correct names and she lists other places in the world that have the ‘right to a second opinion’. She even has the details of how many calls are made on these systems. And all this is delivered in a way that is slow, deliberate and crystal clear. She is never shrill, although she is often passionate.

I have no way of knowing whether Mills was coached or whether she is naturally highly articulate. But this was a standout ‘performance’ and that, of course, is why she was given a barely interrupted 22 minutes on Radio 4’s Today programme, to make the case for Martha’s Rule.

Photo: From BBC Radio 4, Today Programme

half-hearted apology feature

A Half-Hearted Apology is a Kiss of Death

‘The Kiss’ has dominated news headlines around the world, sadly overshadowing the remarkable and laudable victory of the Spanish Women’s football team in the Women’s World Cup.

half-hearted apology

As ever, we comment on the media lessons rather than the rights and wrongs of an argument.

And the media lesson from this debacle is as old as the hills: if you are going to make a public apology you have to be contrite and make it credible, otherwise, you are simply throwing fuel on the fire of public outrage.

On 21st August Luis Rubiales the Spanish FA President, put out a video in which he appears contrite and in which he apologises – sort-of – for grabbing and kissing player Jenni Hermoso on the lips, in the moments after the Spanish Women’s Team won the Football World Cup in Sydney.

An Apology Of Sorts

It is quite difficult to find a full version of that apology video, but the Daily Mail provided this clip with a helpful translation.

As we can see in this early reaction, Rubiales says the words ‘I was surely wrong’, but then goes on to say ‘it was spontaneous without bad faith’ and that he has ‘no other choice but to apologise’. He also eventually says, ‘I am sorry because this has tarnished the celebration.’

It is an unscripted, rather rambling video, and while the tone is somewhat regretful, the words clearly seek to mitigate and minimise the offence. And in the end, he apologises for tarnishing the celebration of the victory, not for the kiss itself.

You do not need to be a PR genius to know that this apology will not draw a line under the affair, but instead will give it another round of frenetic news coverage.

Had it been a full genuine apology, with the explanation of being carried away in the moment, there was a chance the storm might have passed.

Car Crash Press Conference

However, Rubiales’ next public move, an extraordinary press conference in which he speaks for 30 minutes, ensures this story will run and run. In front of a large and apparently mostly embarassed audience, the President of Spain’s Football Association explains the moment of euphoria that prompted him to kiss Hermoso, but in the next breath launches an attack on ‘false feminism’. He says he has been accused of sexual assault and that he will defend himself in court. Then after 17 minutes of what again seems a rambling and self-pitying monologue, he says that he is being ‘hunted’ for something that was consensual. With incredulity he reports he is being asked to resign, despite having delivered the best management in the history of Spanish Football! And then we get angry repetition of ‘I will not resign’, followed by reports of social assassination and (presumably metaphoric) murder.

Everything in this press conference tells the world that there is no genuine apology. Luis Rubiales does not believe he has done anything wrong and, what is more, he is prepared to turn on the woman he grabbed so publicly, in order to distract from the storm. A car crash of a speech.

The Lessons

So my takeaways, for anyone unfortunate enough to have to make a public apology are as follows:

  • Make the tone of any apology contrite
  • Use a script, don’t allow yourself to ramble and get carried away
  • Keep it short
  • Do not seek to dilute the apology or the offence
  • Resist the temptation to blame everyone or anyone else
  • Put away the arrogance that allows you to think you are so clever, important or successful that the offence does not matter. If you have to apologise in public it does matter.
  • Don’t show your anger

Last week I wrote about a different Press Conference Playbook. This Press Conference had no playbook. Or if it did the key speaker tore it up. It could not have been more disastrous: for Mr Rubiales, or for The Spanish Football Federation. I am not sure I have witnessed a more public car crash.

The Fallout

That same day, August 25th,  81 players declared they will not play for Spain again with Rubiales still in post — including all 23 players in the Women’s World Cup squad.

The following day Rubiales was suspended for 90 days by the international body FIFA. On the 27th the Spanish FA announced an internal investigation and on 28th Spain’s top criminal court announced an investigation into whether the kiss amounted to a count of sexual assault. And just for good measure Rubialis’ mother began a hunger strike. At the time of writing there are a few more chapters to play out but the conclusion appears inevitable.

Photo credit: YouTube

 

 

 

New Press Conference Playbook?

Have you Spotted the New Press Conference Playbook?

Playing with one of the generative AI apps last week I put in: how to run a good press conference. In a few seconds it generated a creditable if bland 500 words which basically covered be prepared, maintain your composure and be respectful to the journalists.

Three protocols that were exactly the opposite of what the Australian Rugby Coach Eddie Jones did at an informal press conference as he departed Sydney airport for the Rugby World Cup last week.

When this came up on my newsfeed I was really puzzled as to why someone leaving for a major competition should break the rules so spectacularly and unnecessarily. It did not seem to me that the journalists were being even the slightest bit provocative.

Asking around, I got a couple of insights from friends who follow sport more closely than I do. One said:

“Eddie has always been a feisty devil and their results have been poor since he took over. I think he is using the press conference to build a siege mentality and try and unite the squad against the press!”

And another:

“Jones is an increasingly curmudgeonly figure who after a previously successful career has had a string of bad results in the past few years. He’s shooting the messenger. Whether that’s a conscious attempt to establish esprit de corps – or populist politician style – isn’t clear. I suspect he’s just a misery guts who is losing the plot. “

Both my commentators, it seemed, thought the combative tone may have been planned.

The reference to populist politician style sent me back to my new toy and I asked what is Donald Trump’s Press conference style?  And got this list:

– Combative tone
– Lack of decorum
– Dominating the spotlight
– Informal – Trump’s press conference style was freewheeling and casual
– Attacking both journalists and adversaries

Pretty much exactly the style adopted by Jones. It seems there is an alternative Press Conference Playbook out there, and the Eddie Jones presser was just evidence that this is gaining ground way beyond a few populist politicians.

If you would like training for your spokespeople on how to handle a formal or informal press conference, call 020 7099 2212 or email us on enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk. All our sessions are bespoke, so we will design a training specifically to fit your organisation’s requirements.

Media Interview feature

First Media Interview for a While? Our Basic Checklist

‘I have been media trained but it was a long time ago. The trouble is I only talk to the media once or twice a year. I have forgotten most of the do’s and don’ts.’

We hear this all the time and while, of course, you would be better off having a quick media training refresher session (we can do 2 hours online, often at short notice), here is a list of things to bear in mind.

  1. Don’t wing it! Set aside an hour or two to work out what you want to say. If you have been trained by us draw a Message House and consider the content for each of the boxes.Media Interview
  2. If you have PR support, do not fly solo. Professional PR people know the journalists and the landscape. It is their job to make sure you are prepared and mitigate any risks.
  3. Ask who is the journalist? And who is he or she writing for, or broadcasting to? Once that is clear you should ask yourself what useful information or insight you can provide for that audience. Journalists are not there to do your advertising for you, but if you share useful insights, you and your company will win valuable publicity.
  4. Look for evidence for what you are saying. This is what PR people call the proof points. It may be facts and numbers, or it may be anecdotal evidence. Ideally, you will have both. For example, if you have spotted a new trend, have you got numbers to evidence the change, but also can you give one example or tell one story that illustrates it?
  5. Once you are clear on the substance of your interview, check the language. Journalists hate jargon and technical language. You will get better coverage and be invited back if you keep it simple.Media Interview
  6. Consider whether there are any likely difficult or unhelpful questions. Plan the answer to these. It’s important to consider the wider context: what else is going on in your company or your industry? Has your boss been fired? Has a competitor launched a new product? You may not want to answer these questions but you should at least consider how you will respond. Always be prepared to say (where appropriate) ‘That is not my area of expertise’ or ‘That is not a question for me’.
  7. Once you are in the interview, be on the lookout for journalists putting words into your mouth. It is best practice not to agree or repeat the quotable language they offer you.

Of course, this list is not exhaustive, and would not be useful if you are considering a particularly difficult or negative interview. But it is a solid starting point for most trade press interviews or similar low-risk encounters.

If you would like to discuss Media Training with us, either online or in-person phone +44 (0)20 7099 2212 or email enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk

the Urge to Gossip

A Journalist, a CEO and the Urge to Gossip

The fallout from the mishandling of the closure of Nigel Farage’s Coutts bank account is multifaceted and likely to continue for months. But the media training lesson is as simple as it comes and is included in even the most basic of media training courses. Don’t gossip with journalists. Don’t assume comments are off the record. Remember the mantra: always a journalist, sometimes a friend.

The Urge to Gossip

Former UKIP Leader Nigel Farage has been at the centre of controversy over debanking

In this case, the CEO of NatWest (which owns Coutts) sat next to the BBC ‘s business editor Simon Jack at the BBC Correspondents Charity Dinner on July 3rd.

While neither appears to have revealed the exact conversation, it is safe to assume he asked her what the real story is behind Farage’s debanking and she said something bland about it being a commercial decision based on the reduced amount of funds in Farage’s Coutts’ account.

the Urge to Gossip

Dame Alison Rose

Unfortunately for Dame Alison Rose, there were two problems with what I am sure at the time felt like a diplomatic and unsensational response. First, as we now know, it wasn’t the truth, (I suspect she thought at the time it was) and second she spoke about a named customer and about how much money he had in his account, breaking all the rules of client confidentiality.

The following day, Simon Jack published an exclusive story headlined Nigel Farage bank account shut for falling below wealth limit”. He quoted unnamed sources familiar with the Coutts move. But, in the circumstances, there was little question about where the titbit came from. Dame Alison Rose subsequently confirmed the information came from her.

It may be worth speculating about why someone as senior and as smart as Alison Rose might make this mistake.

First it was a social event, not an interview. She would likely assume there was off-the-record protection to their conversation. And in fact, Simon Jack did respect the circumstances by not naming her.

Second, I would speculate that Simon Jack, who I don’t know, is great company. On air he is self-effacing and with a slightly bumbling manner that reminds me a bit of Boris Johnson. From my point of view, he is an excellent business editor because he explains complex issues very clearly and without sounding as if he is a city insider.

(The reporting of some of his competitors – naming no names – often make them sound like they have membership of a rather superior gentleman’s club.)

Third, never underestimate the urge to show you are in the know. It is a strong human instinct. If someone asks you a question you know the answer to, it is ridiculously hard not to demonstrate your knowledge.

But the thing I always warn those I train is, journalists understand that human instinct, and they know how to exploit it. A lot of the stories told about modern journalism are around aggressive interviews, and they do happen. But most interviews appear friendly and mostly enjoyable.  Journalists are social animals who are good at getting people to talk.

I suspect Alison Rose, having been lulled into a false sense of security by a seasoned operator, succumbed to the very human urge to show she was across what was happening in her business.

I also suspect that Simon Jack wasn’t out that night to get a scoop, Rose wasn’t the target of a Machiavellian plot. He probably just did what he always does in company and got lucky with a titbit of information that sounded bland in context, but moved the story forward – and therefore gave the BBC a scoop.

If you think your team need reminding about the rules of engagement when dealing with journalists email us on enquiries@themediacoach.co.uk or phone 020 7099 2212.

Images Credits:
Nigel Farage: This image was originally posted to Flickr by Gage Skidmore at https://flickr.com/photos/22007612@N05/33149372715. It was reviewed on 28 February 2017 by FlickreviewR and was confirmed to be licensed under the terms of the cc-by-sa-2.0.

Dame Alison Rose: YouTube

 

Kuznets curse

Kuznets’s Curse and a Cautionary Tale about the Power of Simplicity

Simon Kuznets invented modern GDP, or the way to measure the health of an economy using Gross Domestic Product. To explain further, as an economist he found a way to measure the production or output of a nation and track it as it went up or down. He came up with this idea during the Great Depression of the 1930s because he was concerned to measure how the country was recovering from the bust that followed the boom of the 1920s. He was later awarded a Nobel Prize for his work.

The huge benefit of GDP as a metric was that it summarised, in one number, the economic strength of the entire nation. By the end of World War II GDP had become the standard metric used by economists across the globe, to measure the economic health of an economy.

Very clever stuff.

Kuznets curse

But there’s always a price to be paid for simplicity. Something is lost. Kuznets himself warned that GDP was of limited use as a policy tool because it did not measure the well-being of the workforce or society, and nowadays we might also add that it doesn’t account for increasing inequality, contribution to climate change or environmental degradation.

Despite Kuznets’s warning, the simplicity of GDP meant it became the dominant way to measure and compare economies and to assess the benefit or harm of any policy. Is a motorway good for GDP? What impact will paternity leave have on GDP? And with almost all government policies assessed against the economic output of a country …well that is Kuznets’s Curse. Policymakers targeted one measure above all others.

There is so much written about the limitations of GDP these days that we can expect it to wane in influence over the next 25 years. There was this article in the FT just this week entitled There is more to life and death than GDP. But there are plenty more. Here are a few:

The Guardian 2019: It’s time to end our fixation with GDP and growth

Harvard Business Review in 2019: GDP is not a measure of human well-being

Scientific America in 2020  GDP is the wrong tool for measuring what matters.

The Wire in January 2023 Sorry, GDP. There Are Other Ways to Measure a Nation’s Worth

And it would be remiss of me not to mention Kate Raworth’s 2017 book Doughnut Economics which discusses at length what might replace GDP.

So, while progressives are now counting the cost of Kuznets’s Curse, GDP as a policy-making metric has influenced almost every policymaker globally for almost a century. Its prominence completely eclipsed the person who invented or refined it.

So, what are the wider lessons from this for those of us in the communication game? For me, this demonstrates the power of simplicity. So many I work with are reluctant or unable to simplify. They feel it seems, that it is a little beneath them. So often it is referred to as ‘dumbing down’. And yet simplifying an argument makes it memorable and useable. It can also be a first step or a primer for a deeper understanding. And while we should be mindful of the consequences of simplifying, we should never forget that it is such a powerful ‘tool’.

We should all get better at simplifying.

And I do love a quote, so here are a few on simplicity collected by Margaret Molloy and published on LinkedIn.

“Making the simple complicated is commonplace; making the complicated simple, awesomely simple, that’s creativity.”
Charles Mingus

“Everything should be made as simple as possible, but not simpler.”
Albert Einstein

“A little simplification would be the first step toward rational living, I think”.
Eleanor Roosevelt

“Simplicity is the keynote of all true elegance.”
Coco Chanel 

If you need help codifying and simplifying your organisation’s messaging, give us a call.  It is something the Media Coach team can help with. Book one of our message-building sessions and bring along your key stakeholders. Together we will work on a simplified Message House that can be a foundation for your future media, marketing or public affairs engagement. Contact enquires@themediacoach.co.uk or ring us on tel: +44 (0)20 7099 2212.