The Worst Phrase in PR: Why No Comment
No comment is a phrase that I find to be incredibly damaging in PR. You could as easily say “guilty” because this is the way it is often used. No comment is legalistic, and it should not be part of the PR vocabulary.
Newt Gingrich, the former speaker of the House and GOP presidential candidate, used these words last week in response to questions regarding his finances. This included a reported 500,000-dollar debt to Tiffany & Co. People who use this phrase do so because they’ve seen it on television or in movies, not those who had PR professionals directing every professional move since 1979!
It’s important to stay calm when answering hostile or negative questions. To help Gingrich and others, I’ve put together a list with 5 phrases that are better than “no comments”:
1. I have nothing to say
2. This is not the topic I am here to discuss
3. Use this only when your legal counsel has instructed you to not comment. Otherwise, you could be branded a liar. This is almost as bad as saying “no comment”.
4. If asked a question that’s not true, just reply “no”. If you were to ask Newt “Is it true you owe Tiffany more than one million dollars?” or “Newt would you like to comment on your Tiffany debt?”
5. It is best to smile and not say anything (this may not be a phrase but it is the most effective option). The media cannot repeat anything you don’t say.
Media Amplification
Media is always looking for stories. Inadvertently, a company’s or an individual’s refusal to comment can become a news headline. The media may take the lack of comment as a sign that there is a larger issue. This can lead to heightened scrutiny and sensationalized coverage. This can damage the reputation and make it more difficult to handle the situation.
Evasion Perception
It can be interpreted as evasive when a spokesperson or an organization says “No comment.” This is because it may seem like they are hiding something. This avoidance perception can increase speculation and curiosity in the media and public. No comment! can often worsen the situation by creating a vacuum filled with rumours and assumptions. This can be problematic, especially in situations with high stakes where transparency and clarity are essential.
Trust and Credibility Erosion
In any relationship between an organization or public figure and their audience, trust is essential. A company that refuses to comment risks losing this trust. Stakeholders–including customers, employees, and investors–may feel that the organization is not being forthright or transparent, leading to a loss of credibility. Maintaining and rebuilding trust in PR is a long-term and complex process. Starting with “No Comment!” can create a negative tone and complicate these efforts.
Missed opportunity for controlled messaging
Each communication scenario offers an opportunity to control the narrative and deliver a controlled message. When organizations choose to say “No Comment”, they forfeit the chance to lead the conversation and tell their side of the tale. They do not influence public perception; they simply leave it open to others who may fill in any gaps with information that does not match their interests or viewpoints.
This phrase is used too often, and we believe it opens the door to doubt. Transparency is essential in this age of social media and 24/7 news.
When you respond to a reporter’s question by saying “no comment”, you frustrate them and the news outlet. They are less likely to cover your story when you want to share news. Your media relations strategy will not benefit from this. You may lose control if you say “no comment”. It can lead a reporter to dig deeper and find out more. Reporters have expressed sarcasm or frustration when told “no comments” on the air, making the spokesperson seem uncooperative. This also encourages your audience’s suspicion and scepticism. They will think that you are hiding something. They will at best assume that you are not prepared for the interview, and they may question your professionalism.
There are other ways to manage public relations situations that are more effective than using the phrase “no comment”.
- Acknowledge The Situation: Even though the details may not be available, acknowledging the existence of a problem shows that the organization takes it seriously. Saying, “We’re aware of the issue and are reviewing the details” communicates the fact that the matter is under review without giving away too many specifics.
- Make a General Statement A general statement that details the organization’s position or commitment in addressing the problem can be helpful. As an example, saying “We are committed in resolving the issue and will provide additional information as soon we can” reassures the public that steps are taken.
- Provide a Timeline: By providing a timetable for when additional information will be made available, you can manage expectations and reduce speculative speculation. The statement “We expect more details within 24 hours” sets out a clear expectation, and shows that the organization has been working to resolve the issue.
- Direct to Relevant Resources When specific details are not available, redirecting inquiries to relevant resources such as a website or a point of contact can help manage information flow and provide additional assistance to stakeholders.
- Engage Directly In certain cases, engaging directly with the media, and public, or through a statement or interview, can be more efficient than not commenting. This allows the organization the ability to control the narrative and respond to concerns in a proactive manner.
This will hopefully give you some ideas on how to answer sensitive questions or those to which you do not have an answer. These responses avoid using the phrase “no comments” which is not acceptable to the audience or the journalist. Keep it short, genuine, and quotable. Next time you feel like saying “no comment”, think twice.
Conclusion:
It may seem that “No comment!” is a neutral or simple response, but it can often do more harm than good in the PR world. It can fuel speculations, increase media attention, undermine trust and lose the chance to control the narrative. Organizations can improve their public image by choosing proactive and transparent communication methods. They will also maintain trust and be able to handle crises better. Openness, strategic messaging and a willingness to address issues directly, rather than retreating in silence, are the keys to successful PR.
What do you think about this?
