Neutrogena Says Little About Panettiere’s Death
Actress Hayden Panettiere’s death reignited criticism of Neutrogena’s contract termination a decade ago, which surfaced earlier this year. The company responded minimally and may need to do more to quell the backlash.
Before the 36-year-old’s death, Panettiere said in interviews that Neutrogena “fired” her back in 2015-2016 after she spoke about her postpartum depression. She said the company pointed to a “morals clause” after the ten-year relationship. Since her death, fans are calling for a boycott, which analysts say may hurt in the short term but rarely has lasting negative results on sales.
When she made the claims, Neutrogena said nothing; now leaders saying little. An Instagram post reflects a minimal, clichéd crisis communication response: say you’re sad, acknowledge that you didn’t support her (the best part), and say it’s not who you are or what you stand for. Neutrogena also promises to invest in women’s health through a partner to be announced later and says it didn’t respond earlier “out of respect,” which feels dishonest.
The carousel message on Instagram is an odd choice. The additional two screens are easy to miss, and Neutrogena’s “on-brand” font seems out of place. As Rolling Stone reports, the company “stops short of apologizing,” and comments are turned off, as though users wouldn’t comment elsewhere.
Students may discuss what else Neutrogena should have done and can still do. They also may discuss the company’s responsibility. Some may believe the company is being unfairly scapegoated for a decision made a decade ago.
We also don’t know the whole story of the contract termination. We know Panettiere connected the decision to her speaking openly about her depression, but maybe Neutrogena had other reasons. Certainly the company shouldn’t argue the point now; nothing leaders could say would sway fans in their favor.
What might be best is to rise above the noise and focus on the tragic death of a talented, young mother. She tried to raise awareness about her struggles, which were real for her and are for many women.
Visualizing AI’s Effect on Bond Market
AI borrowing is increasing bond supply, which could push bond yields and borrowing costs up. Students can analyze a Vanguard chart showing corporate debt over time and another, wonky stacked bar.
Students might compare the Vanguard chart and the second one, from the Federal Reserve, showing capital expenditure over time for tech companies. With the comparison, the Vanguard rendition looks great. The purpose and audience differ for each, which students might identify. In addition, here are a few points about the visualizations, and students will find more:
The stacked column chart is useful to show parts of a whole over time.
On the Vanguard chart, the second Y-axis is useful but muddies the chart’s purpose.
Blue and green colors next to each other are hard to distinguish, particularly for people who are color blind.
The Fed’s multiple bars are dizzying. Do they represent quarters? Without x-axis date labels for all bars, the differences aren’t meaningful. A link to table data might work better for those interested in more detail.
Both charts lack data labels (at the tops of stacked bars), which would help with comprehension.
The Fed refers to Google, but Google stopped trading as a separate company in 2015, when it’s shares automatically converted to Alphabet.
As the Vanguard article says, this may be “the beginning of a multiyear shift in corporate bond supply.” The AI effect on the corporate bond market includes a higher weight of tech companies’ debt, longer bond maturities, and more private financing of data centers (meaning risk is harder to determine). We saw the impact on the economy this week; falling bond prices typically increase yields, which could make borrowing more expensive for consumers.
Students might create other graphics to show the potential impact on individual investors and consumers. For example, higher mortgage rates and borrowing costs have already affected housing starts. How can students visualize that relationship or trend?
Managing Interview Stress for Autistic Candidates
A Cornell University study offers tips for autistic applicants that may be useful for everyone.
The study identifies the job interview as the biggest barrier to employment for autistic individuals. The authors identify the issues:
An employer might think, “this candidate wasn’t professional, they didn’t have eye contact, they didn’t look like they were paying attention.” On the other hand, an autistic candidate might think, “I had trouble interpreting the intention of what they were saying,” or “there was so much going on in my interview environment, it was hard to stay focused.”
Many of the interview tips for job seekers apply to all applicants:
Take the time to prepare for interviews in advance.
Rehearse socially appropriate responses.
Rehearse answers to questions about teamwork and be prepared to give examples from prior job experience, or, if need be, from prior volunteer or club experience, to highlight your teamwork skills.
Certainly, all applicants should prepare in advance and rehearse answers. The second point may require more preparation for someone with autism, particularly rehearsing more possible questions and answers and being interviewed by more practice interviewers.
Similarly, advice for employers interviewing autistic applicants could apply to all employers:
Conduct interviews one-on-one instead of with a panel.
Give a tour of the workplace before starting the formal interview.
Share interview questions in advance.
Ask for specific information rather than open-ended questions.
A panel interview may be stressful for anyone and is unnecessary unless it simulates an experience an applicant will have on the job, which is unlikely.
Giving a facility tour and asking for specific information is good practice for everyone. In addition to the facility tour, I would include meeting prospective coworkers. Peers may speak more openly, ask each other questions hiring managers wouldn’t ask, and get an idea of what it might be like to work together.
Sharing interview questions in advance—perhaps with everyone—opens the possibility for AI coaching and memorization, which might be difficult for an interviewer to detect. But interview questions are almost always tied to competency requirements and are usually easy to predict. Perhaps giving a bank of possible questions is a good compromise.
One final recommendation, to “educate recruiters and interviewers about the business case for hiring autistic workers,” makes sense and applies to other neurodivergent employees.
Coke “Font Nerds” and Cigarettes
Amateurs believe the new Coca-Cola font is just like the Marlboro font, but “font nerds” know better, and comparisons to another addictive substance are easy meme fodder.
Announced in a frenetic video emphasizing Coke Zero, the company shows off the new font as iconic, unified, and authentic.
At a glance, Coke’s new font and Marlboro’s may look similar. Both are bold, upright serif typefaces, with high stroke contrast (large differences between thick and thin parts) and sharp wedge serifs (small pointed endings rather than blunt rectangles).
Of course, both brands use similar red and white colors, so the likeness isn’t a stretch. But maybe the graceful little serif lines look old-timey, as in, all old things look alike.
The fonts are quite different. Coke’s lowercase r ends in an arrow, while Marlboro’s ends in a circle. Also, the Coke r’s foot is angled at the bottom, while Marlboro’s is a right angle. Looking at the lowercase a in each, Coke’s stroke begins with a pointed edge, while Marlboro’s is rounded; the foot is rectangular, while Marlboro’s is round. For what it’s worth, the Coca-Cola typeface is custom, while Marlboro uses Neo Contact.
One article, “Everyone's saying the same thing about the new Coca-Cola font” (ad populum), describes the likeness as an “awkward resemblance,” as people refer to Coke as a “fridge cigarette.” An X post is funny: “Love that they just leaned into the fact that soda is the new cigarettes by just straight up doing the Marlboro font.”
Students might discuss whether Coca-Cola, its branding agency, or the type designer should have been more careful to avoid the association. In defense, the designer explains the history, which builds on previous fonts for the company.
Confusing Cyclospora Lettuce Comms
Confusion abounds from both Taylor Farms and the U.S. Food and Drug Administration about lettuce contaminated by Cyclospora, which has sickened thousands of people. Students can analyze communications and identify failures of accountability.
The FDA and CDC traced the illness back to Taylor Farms de Mexico, but lab tests created what the FDA refers to as a “false positive.” Although one test came back positive, that didn’t prove the source of outbreak. However, the false positive didn’t change the epidemiological conclusion.
Here’s one opportunity for students to revise communications. The statement could be clearer, perhaps explaining terms like false positive and epidemiological.
Students also might question why the FDA communicated results before obtaining more evidence. That would avoid the agency’s need to backtrack with a statement like this:
Due to the complexity in detection of Cyclospora, FDA laboratory experts re-reviewed the sample results and have concluded that the finding does not represent true amplification and should be considered a false positive.
Otherwise, the recall is typical, stating which lettuce people should avoid eating, what symptoms to watch for, and how to get refunds.
Taylor Farms Statements
The company has a dedicated page with a notice and link on the homepage. It also posted a typical recall message, mirroring the FDA’s, but it includes more information.
Most recent as of today is the “Summary of Facts”:
We understand that there is significant confusion over outbreak communication. We want to provide a summary of the critical facts for your health:
On July 17 we voluntarily recalled all iceberg lettuce grown in central Mexico that was identified as the potential source of the Cyclospora outbreak.
This recall has been completed with products removed from the marketplace.
No Taylor Farms branded products are involved in this recall.
We are no longer sourcing iceberg lettuce grown in central Mexico for the remainder of the growing season.
We currently have experts on site in central Mexico investigating all potential sources of contamination.
We are committed to working closely with health officials during this ongoing investigation.
We remain deeply concerned for the health of those who are ill and will provide any updates relevant for your health.
Of course, the company employs the crisis communication strategy of distancing itself as much as possible, emphasizing products “grown in Mexico.”
This part is confusing and matters primarily to the company: “No Taylor Farms branded products are involved in this recall.” Students might flag this statement as a failure to take responsibility, and it is unlikely to inspire consumer confidence in any Taylor Farms products. A clearer approach might be to show pictures or list products unaffected.
Company leaders probably took great pleasure in these statements:
Yesterday, FDA informed Taylor Fresh Foods that one of its iceberg lettuce products from central Mexico tested positive for cyclospora. Today, we were informed that FDA made a mistake, and this was a false positive. To be clear, at this moment, FDA has not identified a single positive product test result for Cyclospora.
Based on initial information provided by health officials, in an abundance of caution, we completed a voluntary recall of iceberg lettuce from central Mexico. Recalled product was limited to iceberg lettuce grown and processed in central Mexico.
That statement leans into the FDA error and fails to convey the full picture. Company representatives also tried to delay the recall by appealing to the White House through a lobbyist. The executives wanted more evidence, which is somewhat understandable given the FDA’s missteps, but still demonstrates the company’s failure to take responsibility.
As we would expect, this “apology” is nowhere to be found in FDA communications. Also notable: Taylor fails to mention the epidemiological work; all roads led to Taylor’s lettuce.
Meanwhile, videos and memes on social media are hilarious, promoting diets of only processed foods for health and safety.
AI Adoption Visualization
Boris Cherny, the creator of Claude Code, developed a table, “Steps of AI Adoption,” a good example for students to analyze. To show a lot of information in stages, the table is a good choice, but it may be too dense for some audiences and purposes.
Here are a few ideas for classroom exercises:
Create an infographic based on the content.
Create an interactive tool for organizations to assess where they are and to identify requirements for getting to the next level.
Revise the content for an audience who is less technical, for example, senior leaders who are averse to or wary of AI.
Focus on one aspect of each step, for example, bottlenecks, and create a visual to illustrate that aspect.
Simplify the information for an oral presentation: perhaps a slide deck to accompany a webinar or in-person presentation.
Students might have other ideas for using the table content in different contexts.
Messaging Around Wendy’s Meme Stock
Alan Greenspan might have called this week’s build up of Wendy’s stock irrational exuberance. The situation illustrates persuasive communication principles and company response.
Taking a page from the “OG” GameStop meme stock, Redditters on WallStreetBets promoted the narrative “Save Wendy’s” and taunted investors with “YOLO” and by showing a $350,000 position in WEN. The rhetoric tempts watchers with a “rescue narrative” and with Robert Cialdini’s influence principles of social proof and scarcity:
“We need to save Wendy's before it's too late!”
“$WEN to the moon – 350K YOLO.”
“Not if, but WEN!”)
“To the moon” also exemplifies insider language and inspires feelings of belonging.
The push worked, temporarily, lifting Wendy’s stock 42% until trading was halted. It closed at 25.7%, but as Vanda research company said, “[O]ur data confirms that today’s surge in WEN has indeed been driven by abnormal retail buying.” Redditers might dispute the “abnormal” characterization.
Wendy’s communicated little during the day except to announce a new CFO. What is there to say when your company becomes a meme stock? Probably nothing.
Comms Around Dad with Daughters in Bathroom
A viral video and the response illustrate the challenges of parenting and demonstrate how a “girl dad” handled a confrontation with grace.
A father was traveling from Florida to Oklahoma with his two daughters. Tyler Brodsky chose the women’s room at a QuikTrip in Alabama over the men’s room, which he said was dirty. (Police later said bringing the girls into the men’s room would have been equally problematic.)
The video, now with more than 4 million views, shows Brodsky incredibly calm while a man is yelling at them and threatening to call the police. Melissa, the store manager, is kind to the girls, but students might wonder why she didn’t do more to deter the man or call the police herself to deescalate the situation and protect the family.
In a follow-up video, Brodsky explains what happened at the time and raises bigger issues. He talks about the difficulty for parents and grandparents in this situation and says the he doesn’t condone harassment of anyone involved. He also expresses gratitude to Melissa, the police who said he did nothing wrong, and others who have reached out.
Overstreet Properties, which owns the QuikTrip, posted a statement. The language is fairly generic (“does not reflect the values” and “quality service”). The leaders could have said more, for example, to apologize more explicitly and acknowledge the challenge for families. (A family bathroom would solve the problem, but that might be too much to ask for this company and property.) They did admit that the man was affiliated with Overstreet and took action by cutting ties with him. Students might rewrite the statement to demonstrate more accountability and compassion.
Comm Lessons from Alan Greenspan
Former Federal Reserve Chairman Alan Greenspan’s death at 100 is an opportunity to talk with students about two communication lessons: the power of his words and his choice to be unclear.
Words That Moved Markets
For decades, “his words moved markets,” but perhaps Greenspan’s most famous phrase is “irrational exuberance” from a 1996 speech:
We can see that in the inverse relationship exhibited by price/earnings ratios and the rate of inflation in the past. But how do we know when irrational exuberance has unduly escalated asset values, which then become subject to unexpected and prolonged contractions as they have in Japan over the past decade? And how do we factor that assessment into monetary policy?
After that speech, global markets opened between 2 and 4% lower, although they did recover quickly. Some analysts are drawing analogies between the dot-com bubble of the late 1990s, the housing crisis of 2007-2008, and the AI hype today, calling each irrational exuberance.
Intentionally Unclear Language
On a PBS News Hour segment, a reporter explained:
[He] would let his sentence sort-of go around with multiple subclauses, and it would just be incomprehensible. It was a tactic and a very successful one.
Greenspan acknowledged the strategy:
I have learned to mumble with great incoherence. If I seem unduly clear to you, you must have misunderstood what I said. (1987 to a Senate Committee)
One of the problems that surprised me when I got into public life was that open, clear talk is—often creates problems. (2007 PBS News Hour interview)
[Asked about “fed-speak”] It’s a—a language of purposeful obfuscation to avoid certain questions coming up, which you know you can’t answer, and saying—“I will not answer” or basically no comment is, in fact, an answer. . . . So, I proceed with four or five sentences which get increasingly obscure. The Congressman thinks I answered the question and goes onto the next one. (2007 CNBC interview)
A Forbes writer discusses fed-speak (aka “Greenspeak”) and the pendulum of transparency over time. In business communication, we talk about transparency as an aspect of integrity. Greenspan’s approach might be challenging for students to reconcile.
Meta Says Little About Outage
For a outage that affected hundreds of millions of Facebook, Instagram, and Messenger users, Meta executives have said surprisingly little. Students may analyze the company’s minimal response in this situation.
Meta doesn’t to have a page to provide status updates to the public. However, its business page, metastatus.com, acknowledged outages for ads products.
Other than that, Meta's VP of Communications Andy Stone tweeted only two posts shown here. Nothing appeared after: no company statement, no explanation, no apology, no plans for improvement—silence, as though it didn’t happen at all.
In this case, Meta may have skirted a crisis situation. The outage didn’t translate into outrage, and we may never know what caused the problem. Although the company didn’t follow classic crisis communication advice, they may have made the right decision to say so little.
UnitedHealthcare Ad Tries to Repair Image
Bruised by publicity around the murder of CEO Brian Thompson, UnitedHealthcare has a new ad focusing on employees. Students can analyze the ad as a strategy for repairing brand image.
With the title “Committed to Care,” the commercial shows a diversity of employees. They speak of their commitment to the company and to serving customers. They look like average people—like one of us—not polished executives in fancy offices wearing fancy clothes. They talk about the heartache and challenges in their own lives of being different and having family members with health problems. They (and their kids) get emotional.
Clearly, the purpose is to humanize UnitedHealthcare—to counter criticism, particularly about denying claims. Critics say the company relies on algorithms, so this ad emphasizes actual people and their feelings.
Students might identify primary and secondary audiences and communication objectives for the ad. They might cite specific objectives, for example, increasing enrollment and lowering cancellation rates, and broader objectives, for example, improving talent acquisition and ensuring executives’ safety.
Given the anger at UnitedHealthcare and support for Thompson’s alleged murderer, the company has a lot of work to do. Students might consider the timing of this ad, about 16 months after the shooting. That’s probably enough time to avoid criticism about reactivity and spin. With an immediate response, the company also might have appeared dismissive, lacking compassion for Thompson’s death. Yet not too much time has passed that the company has missed the moment—the opportunity to present another side of employees’ work.
Visualizing $1 Trillion
Elon Musk is the world’s first trillionaire, and SpaceX’s current valuation is $2.1 trillion. Students may use this example to find ways to visualize large numbers for their audiences.
The Wall Street Journal published creative, interactive graphics. The authors use three examples: a slider, scrolling down a page, and numbers of pennies.
The slider and scrolling are nifty ways to show how much more $1 trillion is than $1 million—one million times more. My guess along the slider was completely off.
The number of pennies creates a fun illustration, but a billion is too tall to show in this graphic. Also the comparison doesn’t seem to relate to a point. Instead, students may be challenged to think of other ways to visualize $1 trillion. Comparisons should support their communication objectives. Here are a few examples:
IPO success: Compare SpaceX’s valuation to Meta’s IPO valuation.
Market domination: Compare SpaceX’s valuation to that of established Magnificent 7 companies.
Global wealth: Compare Musk’s net worth to the net worth of all billionaires.
Income inequality: Compare Musk’s net worth to that of the average American citizen.
Concentrated wealth: Compare Musk’s net worth to a country’s GDP. (This is a common numerical comparison.)
Government spending: Compare Musk’s net worth to federal budgets for NASA, education, etc.
This exercise may help students translate other numbers in their proposals and presentations, for example, visualizing excessive spending. Of course, they may find ways to normalize large numbers, for example a capital expenditure, if that serves their communication objectives. For Elon Musk’s wealth, that might prove difficult.
Comparing Artists’ Statements about Freedom 250
Students might compare how performing artists communicated their decision to withdraw from a Freedom 250 event.
The same day the Great American State Fair concert on the National Mall was announced, several artists changed their mind about participating. Some said they were misled, believing the event wasn’t as non-partisan as initially described to them. Here’s the description on the Freedom 250 website:
Freedom 250 is the national, non-partisan organization leading the celebration of our Nation's 250th birthday. Working together with the White House Task Force 250, federal agencies, and the Commission, Freedom 250 serves as the official public-private partnership that connects, aligns, and amplifies national and local efforts to deliver the defining presidential moments of this anniversary year.
At its heart, Freedom 250 is creating a movement of citizens, organizations, companies, and leaders from across the country to honor our Nation's proud history, cherish our God-given freedoms, and build the Golden Age of Opportunity for the next 250 years. Other signature events include the Great American State Fair, Memorial Day Parade, and Evening Candlelight gathering, Sail4th 250, Salute to America (DC July 4), and the Patriot Games, among others.
Here are statements to compare and a few distinguishing elements. Links to full posts illustrate disconnections in some, jumping from the decision to a global statement without any substantive rationale.
Brett Michaels: Emphasizes concern for fan safety and failing integrity—inconsistency is messaging—of event organizers.
“Concerns have also been raised regarding the safety of my fans, band, crew, family and myself, including threats that are completely unfounded and unforgivable.”
“Unfortunately, what was presented to us as a celebration of our country has evolved into something much more divisive than what I agreed to be part of.”
Martina McBride: Also emphasizes integrity—in this case, consistency between her actions and her songs.
“It greatly upsets me that any fan who has been moved by my music may now feel like I’m abandoning the meaning behind those songs.”
Young MC: Also says he was misinformed, although students might question why he and others didn’t know the event was “Trump backed.”
“The artists were never told about any political involvement with the event. And despite the claims by the organizers that the event is non-partisan, SPIN magazine describes [it] as Trump-backed.”
Morris Day: Says little but posted this image with jarring colors, an outdated circle-slash, (likely) Cooper-Black font, and the caption, "It's A No For Me.”
The Commodores: Published a statement about their values, as others do.
"Our music has always been our voice, and we choose not to publicly affiliate with any single political party. We support the betterment of all Americans."
Students may find more posts and analyze them for their own illustrations of character as well as inconsistencies and reasoning gaps.
Matthew Perry Defendant’s Claims
The live-in assistant who administered the ketamine that killed actor Matthew Perry argued he “only did what his boss said." The case raises issues of character and could spark a class discussion about ethics.
Kenneth Iwamasa pleaded guilty and was sentenced to 41 months in prison, but his attorney argued that he was carrying out his job. Prosecutors identify financial benefits for Iwamasa, as they have for other defendants, including Perry’s suppliers: the so-called “Ketamine Queen” and the doctor-dealer, who said, “I wonder how much this moron will pay” and “Lets [sic] find out.”
Perry’s stepfather accused Iwamasa of not wanting to sacrifice his personal income and “living like a king.” He said, “You kept injecting him with more. You could have made the phone call, but you were living a pretty dandy life.” Character dimensions at play are integrity and compassion.
Demonstrating strong character often means putting others’ interests ahead of our own. This is perhaps the biggest failing of those involved in Perry’s death. Iwamasa’s statement about how he loved and cared for Perry seems to contradict his actions. The accusation was illegal drug distribution, and Iwamasa admitted to breaking the law.
In her work on Giving Voice to Values, Mary Gentile offers a class activity for students to identify times at work when they did and did not speak up when a situation conflicted with their values. Students identify circumstances that made it possible and difficult for them to speak up. The hope is for students to learn from their past and to have courage in future situations, regardless of an employer’s demands.
OpenAI Trial: “Stole a Charity” and Other Highlights
Elon Musk’s case against OpenAI CEO Sam Altman shows a clever framing and other issues about money and leadership.
Elon Musk repeated versions of the phrase “steal a charity” 17 times when he took the stand. Sam Altman may have made a classic crisis communication mistake by repeating it yet again:
It feels difficult to even wrap my head around that framing. . . It does not fit with my conception of the words '“stealing a charity” to look at what has actually happened.
The phrase seems to be missing a preposition, but it implies that the entire nonprofit organization has been under siege, co-opted for personal (profit) gain. Charity sounds folksy, as though the execs are stealing from the church collection plate or taking money from a food pantry.
Altman also struggled answering a question about his honesty. He was asked repeatedly whether he is honest and whether he lies. Students might analyze this part of the testimony (about halfway down the WSJ page). Altman can’t seem to say that he doesn’t lie. When asked, "You've been repeatedly called deceptive and a liar by people with whom you've done business, right?,” he answered, “I have heard people say that.” The exchange seems like a win for Musk, although he lost the $150 billion claim against OpenAI.
But OpenAI lost too. “Scam Altman” and “stealing a charity” may reverberate in investors’ heads during the pending IPO.
UCF Commencement Speaker’s AI Talk Got Booed
A real estate executive addressed graduating students at the University of Central Florida about the promise of AI and got booed. Her audience analysis, the student’s reactions, and her recovery are worth class discussions.
Gloria Caulfield said, “The rise of artificial intelligence is the next industrial revolution.” “Boo!” from the crowd. She is surprised and looks back at others on stage, asking “What happened?” She is shaken. When she continues, her voice is unsteady, and more boos follow. Cheers follow when she says, “Only a few years ago, AI was not a factor in our lives.”
Perhaps most relevant is the audience. She’s speaking to graduates at UCF’s College of Arts and Humanities and its Nicholson School of Communication and Media—students who have faced challenging job prospects for years and are greatly affected by AI today. As one student said, “Talking about artificial intelligence at a college for arts and humanities can be, you know, a bit rough because it kind of goes against the humanities part.”
In addition, recent Gallup research shows a steep decline in young people’s confidence in AI. As of now, only 27% of people ages 14 to 29 feel hopeful about AI, and 48% of working Gen Zers in the workforce “believe the risks of AI in the workforce outweigh its benefits.”
The boos made headlines and took Caulfield off guard, but looking at the video of the crowd, we see a mixed response, with some students silent as others cheered loudly. Caulfield referred to the “bipolar topic”; another word choice might have been better.
LinkedIn comments give students a window into how academics and industry folks reacted to the commencement scene with some saying students need to face reality.
Students can discuss how Caulfield handled the situation. Was it a misjudgment for her to talk about AI as she did? Should she have anticipated the response? Should she have avoided the topic entirely? She did preface that part with a pep talk about change, but apparently, it wasn’t enough. Perhaps a softer approach, recognizing students’ vulnerabilities and fears would have been better—and solutions or suggestions.
Insults Hurled with Kevin O’Leary in Data Center Fight
Like many communities, Box Elder County, Utah, is debating the development of a local data center. Two young women are in the spotlight, attacked by investor Kevin O’Leary. Students might analyze O’Leary’s claims and the women’s video approach as they attack back. The data center project, dubbed Wonder Valley (“Mr. Wonderful” on Shark Tank), mirrors a smaller Alberta, Canada, project.
On X, Gabi Finlayson and Jackie Morgan posted a video of O’Leary on Fox News. He accuses them of being Chinese operatives, and they interject by commenting on his flip flops and hat. They laugh and curse, and although the video shows many edits, they are authentic—unlikely Chinese shills.
Students may laugh too—the women are funny—but they have stronger arguments. O’Leary has more claims with little evidence. He discounts other protestors ("over 90% of the protesters are actually not people that live in Utah or Box Elder County” . . . “paid by somebody—I don't know who”).
In addition, one of his major arguments is the number of jobs the data center will bring, but Business Insider reports a discrepancy. O’Leary claims 10,000 temporary construction jobs and 2,000 permanent positions, but his own O'Leary Ventures CEO Paul Palandjian said numbers are closer to 4,000 for start-up, and USC Marshall researchers found ongoing jobs to be about 78% of that initial number.
He also dismisses environmental concerns by boosting himself: "I'm actually the only developer of data centers on earth that graduated from environmental studies, so I'm pretty aware of what these concerns are.” His Wikipedia page cites “an honours bachelor's degree in environmental studies and psychology,” which could mean just a few undergraduate courses.” Also, of course, knowing environmental concerns doesn’t necessarily translate into protecting the environment.
The X video did get 3.8 million views so far, so something worked. But students might discuss how else the women can respond to O’Leary’s attacks.
An Argument Against Canvas and Other LMS Use
The recent ShinyHunters Canvas hack exposed vulnerabilities in higher education infrastructure and ignited calls for educators to take protective actions. A blog post by the Digital Rhetorical Privacy Collective (DRPC) offers an example of a persuasive argument for students to analyze and includes recommendations relevant for business communication faculty.
Talk with Students about Data Ownership, Privacy, and Security
Lessons around digital citizenship and data integrity are certainly within our course objectives, although data privacy and security may be less so. Still, the breach is an opportunity to remind students about setting strong passwords, restricting personal information, and practicing skepticism to avoid phishing attempts.
Insist on Transparency and Responsible Technology Use in Classrooms
The DRPC suggests talking with students about what faculty can see and how we track student participation in an LMS. This is one of those situations when it might not be our responsibility, but we may be one of few (or the only) faculty who discuss the breach and LMS vulnerabilities with students.
Reduce, Rethink, Refuse LMS Use
Although well intentioned, blog post suggestions in these categories are rather broad. We might rethink how we use an LMS as we rethink our entire courses and pedagogy because of AI. But the recommendations to move assignments to other platforms and post the bare minimum may work for some content or some faculty but not others.
Students may have their own ideas about LMS use, including whether they would like to see more low-tech options and whether they want to manage new platforms that require separate logins.
UPDATE: Students might compare that blog post to a Chronicle opinion.
How Universities Communicate Community Engagement Projects
Connecting with local businesses and nonprofits is challenging for universities looking for community engagement (service-learning projects). Students can analyze a few examples and recommend improvements:
First, students might identify the primary audience (partners) and communication objectives for these pages. The primary objective is to encourage organizations to partner with schools for student projects. More specifically, they want prospective partners to understand the potential value of student work and identify projects that fit course and learning objectives.
Second, an audience analysis will tell them that these folks don’t have a lot of time or resources to spend learning about the program or partnership. The webpage is an indication of how much work they’ll need to invest—and it can’t be too much.
Then, students can develop a short list of criteria for these pages—the usual for audience analysis, content, organization, writing style, design, etc. For example, they might judge “you-focus” on the partner, including what the partner will get out of the partnership; clarity and conciseness of the writing; a clean visual look; examples of past projects; branding for the university or college; and a call to action with contact information.
Following are a few examples of webpages, with a couple of notes on each. Students might notice that many start with the program mission, which sounds like academic jargon—not a good choice for the opening of these pages for a partner.
Cal State San Marcos: Clear call to action with a form to complete.
Davidson College: Strong “you” focus in the first few paragraphs.
Florida Gulf Coast Service Learning: Also good “you” focus and clear design (although a lot of clicks).
Michigan State Community-Engaged Learning: Finding something positive from this page, which starts with “Criminal Background Checks,” is challenging.
NYU Wagner Capstone: Strong description of students and the value they bring.
Seattle Community Partnerships: Confusing with two separate sections, and link headings aren’t descriptive or organized in an intuitive way.
University of Nevada, Reno, Partner Resources: Welcoming suggestion to contact them up front, but the service-learning guidebook isn’t available—why mention it?
University of Rochester Community Engagement: Starts with clear “you” focus, but the writing sounds like academic jargon, and the organization mixes purpose and programs.
West Texas A&M Quality Enhancement Plan: Big points for the only video in this bunch, but we hear from students and faculty—not partners. If information is available for partners, it’s not apparent.
Customer Comm for Spirit Shutdown
Spirit Airlines has gone out of business, leaving passengers to scramble for refunds and other flights. Let’s look at the examples of bad-news messaging.
The website homepage(which redirects to spiritrestructuring.com) is clear enough with links for guests and vendors. The guest page says up front, “Spirit Guests Should Not Go to the Airport.” (Guests sounds quaint compared to other airlines’ customers or passengers.) Three links refer to what customers of a closing business might care about most: refunds, lost baggage, and lost found—items they hope to retrieve before it’s too late.
Refunds are guests’ primary concern, and the second section on that page addresses questions (some of which are about rebooking). FAQs further down also address rebooking, which includes no help from Spirit but links to other airlines. United, for example, has a banner notice:
Spirit customers who had tickets to fly between May 2 and May 16, 2026 can buy capped fares for most one-way flights to Spirit destinations. Visit united.com/specialfares.
Although customers might not know the term “capped fares,” they’ll probably get the point.
Articles like this one offer advice and contradict Spirit’s webpage, which doesn’t distinguish between credit and debit card payments—everyone gets a refund back to their card.
The full statement gives the bad news and, like the website, upfront discourages guests from going to the airport. The announcement explains part of the reasons for closing without directly blaming the Trump Administration, mentioning “no additional funding available to the Company” and the “the sudden and sustained rise in fuel prices in recent weeks.” Referring only to the “Administration,” the statement thanks Howard Lutnick and other agencies.
For “Spirit” Airlines, the statement is surprisingly dispirited—not that it should be upbeat, but it does ring flatter that we might expect. However, the statement is serving multiple audiences and perhaps doing the minimum for each, with guests as the primary audience. We would expect separate emails and meetings with staff.
The Instagram post (oddly, in reverse type on black) has a little more heart.
Google Search needs to be updated. That’s a tech step that was missed.
Overall, Spirit’s communications are clear for guests and others wondering what happened. We know the pressure low-costs airlines have been under, and recent world events was the final blow for this one.