Credentials
Nate Beeler, The Washington Examiner
Mitt Romney yesterday uttered the unbelievably quotable words: “I’m not concerned about the very poor.” He quickly moved to assert that those words were taken out of context, and that immediately after those words (which we will hear from his opponents repeatedly over the course of the presidential campaign) he said: “We have a safety net there. If it needs a repair, I’ll fix it.” Does it matter what he said in-context and what he said out-of-context? Maybe it used to matter, but not in 2012 and beyond – not in the age of the Communications Revolution. This new fact of life needs to be integrated into every component of an organization’s communications strategy and execution.
Way back in 1980 or so, one of my clients for investor relations was a Washington, DC-area based company that recently had gone public. I had a great deal of respect for the chairman of the company, who had a couple PhD degrees, spoke a number of languages and was generally considered to be truly brilliant. We worked together to craft the company’s earnings releases and analyst presentations. After we completed a version with which we felt comfortable, he had an assistant do something I never had heard of before, but it was a great move. He had the assistant print the release and then use a scissors so that, when done, each sentence of the release was on a separate slip of paper. Then he shook the mix of these slips of paper together and started pulling them out randomly, one-by-one, and reading each one out-of-context. Today, a computer can probably do that.
Everyone who knew of this practice realized how strange it was, but also appreciated how smart it was. The company chairman knew the power of statements taken out-of-context, so he took all precautions to defend against providing the kernel of a statement that could make an embarrassing quote.
Today, the problem of being quoted out-of-context is even worse. With the 24-hour news cycle, instant communications, and the tools for a friend or foe to make a statement go viral, the risk of being quoted out-of-context is dramatically high.
How do you mitigate those risks? I think the answer can be found in basic rules of public relations and communications strategy. Start with a value proposition and a clear vision of how you want yourself and/or your organization to be viewed by your audiences. Then develop a very few key messages that will combine over time, when repeated in appropriate language for the particular audience, into the image (the position) you want your audiences to have. Then: stay-on-point! That is, repeat and repeat and repeat your key messages. Don’t stray. If that means you provide only a limited number of statements that can be quoted by the news media, so-be-it. At least those statements will always be consistent with the goals of your communications strategy … and if one of those statements is quoted outside the context of everything else you said, it is still a message that advances your image consistent with your goals rather than becoming a quote that can come back to haunt you. And if others say you are too scripted or rehearsed, ask yourself this question:
Would you rather be criticized for being too rehearsed or be crucified for a statement you made that was quoted out-of-context and became viral?
Pingback: Mitt Romney: Romney Gives Us The Slip?
I agree with this treatment of communicating messages where there is substantial liklihood of adversarial responses, or exploitation by others. However, if you are careful, and the effectiveness of your message is too important for compromising, by preventative wordsmithing, then let ‘er rip.
Interesting point … in short: let the integrity and importance of your comments trump your fear of being misinterpreted. Let’s mull on that for a while. I think if you run out the logical extension, this becomes a question of the power of the passionate over the studied. Maybe there’s a template — some examples — of an approach that combines the two. Good issue to think about. Thanks.
That is the funny thing, When Romney says it there is no difference between in context and out of context. In context is only slightly less offensive then out of context and once you combine it with the republican agenda of tearing apart the safety net it may be more offensive in context then it is out of context. Makes you wonder what “I will fix it” really means. That statement can be taken 2 ways and we all know what way the pubs would like to “fix” the safety net, they would like to “fix it for good” as the saying goes.
Joe, Republicans are people that love their Country, Love their Families, and give to the poor more often then Democrats. No one wants to tear this country up more than Barack Obama. It’s so sad that you can’t see the forest for the trees. Mitt Romney is a very decent christian man who believes in American and what she stands for, He believes in the Constitution and what our forefathers went through to make her the best country in the World. If you would listen you would know things have to be fixed. Romney knew that the poor will always have a Doctor and a Hospital to go to and the taxpayer will foot the bill. Some things need to be changed but we do not need a government take over in this country and that is exactly what is happening. And a second term for this President spells Disaster for our freedom.
Democrats love their country also. But they don’t demoralized women to make their point. When you get someone who wants to do a way with Medicare,SS ,Medicaid that isn’t caring about the poor. If you think your freedom is gone now,don’t think you will have any extra freedom if a Republican becomes President. We saw what the last Republican so called President did. The Republicans want us to return back to Iraq, bomb Iran,do away with planned parenthood,Medicare and etc. With all the back flipping that Romney does,it is impossible to know what he thinks. They don’t have an answer for health care,they just don’t want Obama not
to get credit for it. If the Republicans and the Supreme court,who are one in the same,don banish the health care,ACA will be killed with a mandate that the Republicans put into the bill. And they don’t have a health care bill to replace it. Their only concern is that the wealthy get more tax cuts. That doesn’t sound like helping the poor. In fact Romney said he doesn’t care about the poor. He isn’t getting elected any way. The latinos don’t like him,a lot of women don’t like him and it will be fun to see the rich man in debates with Obama. He will be so flustered and Obama is cool and calm.
Out of context, Willard Windsock? Waaahhhh. You should know after the hatchet job on the President. This “very poor” quote is more a case of your saying what you really mean, by accident.
That’s the risk of being quoted out of context — whether you meant it or not, or how you meant it, doesn’t really matter as much as the reaction others may have to what you said. If enough people think the quote really represents what the man believes, then the damage has been done, at least with that group of people. Romney has compounded his problem by saying so much sort of like the quote about the poor (e.g., his comment about making so little off of speaking fees, when it was in excess of $350,000/year, etc) — the consequence is that he has built an environment about himself that allows more people to believe that these statements represent some core beliefs. Again, I have no personal conclusions about what Romney really believes in his gut when you wake him up at 3:00 AM. But i do think he and his handlers have been far from the great organization it has been positioned to be. With all the money, all the infrastructure, all the advisers, all the years of running, why hasn’t he locked this nomination up against a fringe Libertarian, a former Speaker who has been maligned by just about everyone who has ever been in politics, and against a guy who has virtually no staff and no money (in comparison) and has managed to become a viable alternative? Why hasn’t Romney locked it up yet with all thise brains and all that money? Here’s a possibility: those brains aren’t as good as they have been promoted to be.
Romney’s problem is not that he is being quoted “out of context.” Romney’s problem is that his pattern of thinking causes him to say things that are “out of touch.” If your true mentality is that poor people don’t matter, that unemployment is something to joke about, and that corporate profits and manager bonuses are more important than jobs, then you will tend to say things that inadvertently unveil your real thinking. If I were Romney’s handler, I would forbid him from ever, ever being in a position in which he might say something he really believes.
Love the punch line. Thanks.
Pingback: Langston Hughes Quotes | WoodlawnPost
Out of the abundance of the Heart The Mouth speaks, (paraphr) from the Holy Bible. Just as Michelle Obama utterred , ” We just came back from my husband’s country”, after a trip to Kenya.
No single political viewpoint or status in life has exclusive rights on saying the wrong thing and whether it is in context or out of context in the final analysis may not matter.
But comments by Michelle, Biden, Pelosi, and Obama’s are soon delted from the news and are forgotten. Only their enemies, such as Romney, are fair game forever!
…and John Lennon said the Beatles were more popular than Jesus…
I believe Ralph Waldo Emerson said “A word is a crystal thought” so as we speak our thoughts are expressed. Should we listen with filters deciding what the intent is of the speech? that is a lot to expect of a listener. Some filters have to be put on the speaker, too. And this is all communication. We may miss the hidden agenda, nuances, lies, and truths…but we do get the message even if it is interpreted for us by the media, as if we can’t draw our own conclusions.
And yet, while the scissors thing is fascinating, yet how could anyone ever tell the truth following this strategy? Romney was making an important point that needed to be made. It’s only those who never wanted to acknowledge “anything” he says — because they are his political opponents — who make an issue of the wording. In context, not only is it plain that he does care about the poor, but that he is trying to keep the entire nation from sinking into a Great Depression Era poverty.
The scissors idea is great as a form of creativity. To isolate words into small bits to discover pithy meanings might lead one into writing forceful poetry or lead to compelling epigrammic statements. Great! But the nuances and the plain but detailed truth need telling also.
There’s no remedy for combating forces whose only interest is winning at whatever cost using any convenient form of deception. After all, distorting a speaker’s words is deception. And if one form of deception doesn’t work, other forms are available. Like lying. An opponent can always simply lie.
To tell the truth you have to take risks. But the truth has a way of peeking out since it accords so well with reality. If Romney (or any man) gives voice to ideas that anyone can figure out for themselves using their own logic, then it doesn’t matter ultimately what the opponent does because sooner or later Reality reveals her hand.
In communicating, you have to believe there’s a parallel universe of truth in the other person’s mind to which you can make appeal. And while I like scissors for editing as much as the next person, I like the Truth even better.
When a reasonable person hears Mitt’s statement he doesn’t come away thinking Mitt doesn’t care for the poor, but we’re not talking about reasonable people, we’re talking about the press.
If people are intersted in some insight as to what romney is all about read the book of mormon and compare that to what the bible says in the last vs of revolation.
Yes Fred, the last book of Revelation says that this book is not to be added to. But if you knew your history you would know that other books of the Bible were written AFTER Revelations. That quote just means that nothing is to be added to the book of Revelations, not the entire Bible. The Bible did not even exist as one book at that time. The Bible was compiled much much later by the members of the council of Nicene. They decided which books would make it into the Bible and which wouldn’t.
The Book of Mormon is a second witness of Christ given to the prophets in the Americas at the same time the Bible was being given to the prophets in the old world. The Lord gave the same gospel to his “Other Sheep which are not of this fold’ that are mentioned in the Bible, who were here on the American continent. He does not discriminate between his children. As the Bible says he would write on two sticks and they would become one in his hand. Those two sticks are the Bible and the Book of Mormon. It is only called the Book of Mormon because Mormon was the last prophet who quoted and abridged the words of the prophets in Ancient America. Anyone who reads it with it with faith and prays about it will gain a testimony of the truthfulness of the book.
What we would like to know is what did he meant when he said “We have a safety net there. If it needs repair we will fix it.” Fix it to what? To oblivion maybe? To forget them altogether? The problem with politicians is that they speak with fork tongues. You will never get a straight answer to their promised solutions to problems. Why? Because there is no honesty in their message, they think we are all idots that can be bought by money and empty promises…..God bless us all……
Meg- Ok, Marie, Romney meant that that the elderly already have Medicare, Medicaid, and are already getting the healthcare needed, but if something else needs to be done to make it better, he would fix it. This country has been completely ruined with all the ” gimme ” programs, and too many just want to sit back and let taxpayers take care of them. My husband and I are 87 years old, he has Alzheimer’s, and I am taking care of him. He worked 32 years on a job, not making a whole lot of money, and I drove a school bus 25 years, and we draw our little retirement. We have been blessed to be able to get by with what we get, by being careful and doing without a lot of things. We have health insurance from his job, they pay some and we pay the rest. We don’t have Medicare, and have never depended on the government. And income tax is stilled held out of what little we draw, to help pay for all those dependent on the government. We get under $40,000 a year. Obama has done nothing but lied since he has been in, but now lying more, hoping so many will overlook his lies, and elect him again. How sad. By the way, we don’t own a home anymore, and we rent a small liveable one bedroom apt. and pay bills like so many others. People can make things work, if the desire is there. Government
can take away our free agency, if we aren’t careful.
Mitt Romney,
giving the ability to decide my health care back to the States” is stupid.
I hope Obama Healthcare Laws Continues forever. I was one of the millions of Americans that was uninsured and I am grateful for what those Obstructionist Republicans Call “Obama Care” . The things that the rich find so despicable like affordable healthcare act are safeguards to help poor people the rich like Romney and the Pill Moguls who make millions of dollars see the poor and sick as a way to make more money. The Ryan budget plan is a plan to take America back to the place where the poor could spend their to dismantle medicare
Meg, Marvin you surely have your head in the sand so deep, until you haven’t a clue as to what is going on. It is the rich and those in between that is providing your Obamcare for you. It comes from taxes that are paid by those you are throwing off on. Wake up. Try to make our country a little better by contributing, if at all possible. Obama is killing our country, and you’ll get your healthcare if needed, if you help get Obama out, and you’ll be a lot better off. Are you going to enjoy the government telling you when you can go to the bathroom, what to eat, etc? God help you if you do.
A quote from Thomas Paine I believe is true:
Reason obeys itself; and ignorance submits to whatever is dictated to it. I think of the majority of the news media today puffing their biased beliefs instead of truth onto the masses of their listeners who seem to be devoid of using intellect or common sense. They seem to prefer, following like sheep, believe everything they hear. How can we learn anything except by using our own core intellect or better still the truth that comes out from past experiments or experiences. Has not our government already shown us the mistakes? Unfortunately, we cannot predict which way our president will go. I would like to see someone with high principles instead of the need for power and fortune.
A person’s true opinions, thoughts, and core values are displayed to all to see if you get them to talk enough. The strategy of only speaking in pre-rehearsed “sound-bites” is a dispicable one when you are talking about someone who could become our next president. We need to know what’s really inside their brain. Our future depends on it. Get the candiate to talk, a lot. A great president is articulate, and every sentence that comes out of his/her mouth is a true reflection of his/her core values. We need to know!
It’s pretty sad when all the Republicans have is that they “love their country and their family” like Democrats don’t. How soon the out of context the Romney campaign crys about, but wasn’t it good old Mitt himself that used the Obama quote of John McCain totally out of context and his response was that what came out of Obam’s mouth. ? Double standards or Mitt just taking both sides of an issue as always?
I agree that what Mitt Romney’s campaign did — in their very first TV ad against Obama — was not only to take Obama’s words out of context but did so KNOWING that Obama was quoting McCain. That’s worse than taking words out of context: that is deceptive and disgusting.
A photo is worth a thousand words, but both can be manipulated! Actions! Actions shows a persons ways. We have enough good public speakers, we need those that have successful experience in building, not demolition. But the world is run by the media, so even actions for good are suspect if you are against them. (Being swayed?)
Confusion seems to be working.
The real question is this; In order to build a better future must we first tear down (destroy) the current? Many tear a building down to it’s foundation before rebuilding, while others make a few changes, upgrades and build off of what they have, both seam to work well. One costs allot more than the other, but both reach the goal. So, what is the goal? The GOAL is what matters most, isnt it?
(Please forgive any spell and gram errors, I am a victom/product of gov run education.)
I am not certain who the “we” is that is doing the tearing down and the building up. I think that “we” are in the midst of a fundamental revolution in the way humans live and our world view, which I’ve discussed before, including in my analysis of the communications revolution: http://tinyurl.com/7yy8laa. I further believe that these significant changes (as was the case with all similarly significant changes in history) will be accompanied by substantial turmoil that will last for years and will be generally misunderstood while it is happening. Thanks for the comment.
Why is everyone acting so suprise about what Willard Mitt Flip-Flop Romney said about the poor because he does repersent the republican party idealogoy. When a reasonable person hears Mitt’s speak you don’t come away thinking Mitt doesn’t care for the poor, but you come away thinking he doesn’t care about the middle class either but we’re talking about reasonable people, we’re not talking about the extreme GOP or the Tea Party. Obama/Biden in 2012! I am Just The Messenger?