How Presidential Candidates Are Using TikTok

Students might be interested in a Financial Times article about the presidential candidates’ TikTok strategies. The article recalls that the 2016 election was all about Facebook. This time, it’s TikTok, particularly for rallying young voters.

With 6.2 million followers, VP Harris’s page includes a video with 4 million views. She talks on the phone to a man’s granddaughter, Evie, and President Biden (still handsy!) joins in.

With 12.4 million followers, Former President Trump’s page includes a video with 13.8 million views. It’s a compilation of people I don’t know but students probably do endorsing him in Las Vegas. The song is by Nettspend, a 17-year-old rapper.

Of course, I’m cherry picking just two examples here that aren’t representative of the candidates’ social media strategies or presence. Students can draw their own conclusions based on their views.

The FT article quoted a get-out-the-vote creator: “Harris’s TikTok strategy is ‘aspirational for any brand, let alone a politician,’ where Trump’s feels ‘less native’ to TikTok and closer to traditional campaign material.” Students might identify the implications for (other) brands—a relevant topic for business communication classes.

This chart shows numbers of views, with more for Harris, despite having half the followers of Trump. This is at least partly because Harris is posting 20 times the number of videos. However, like the polls, I’m not sure their strategies or this data tell us anything about who will win the election.

Comms Around OpenAI Exec Departures

Three OpenAI leaders—the CTO and two research executives—join several others leaving the company just as it shifts from a nonprofit to a for-profit model. Students might analyze a resignation message and CEO Sam Altman’s response.

Most significant is Mira Murati’s resignation, posted on X. Murati is OpenAI’s CTO who, you might remember, was interim CEO for a hot minute when Altman was ousted for a weekend last year. Students might note that her post is entirely positive: She demonstrates grace and gratitude and mentions no company-related reason for leaving. But the three resignations came within hours of each other, and the timing is suspicious.

For his part, Altman responded in kind—with only good things to say about Murati’s leadership and contribution to the company during the past 6.5 years. But when he answers a question about the resignations during Italian Tech Week, he seems uneasy and a bit clumsy.

A Wall Street Journal article puts it plainly:

Turning OpenAI Into a Real Business Is Tearing It Apart

Executives and researchers have left this year amid disputes over the company’s values and fights among its leaders.

Do students buy Altman’s enthusiasm for the staffing change: “I have not been as involved in the tech recently as other things, because there's been so much going on, I'm excited to do that”? Feels like a stretch. But he did well transitioning to the company’s “new generation of leaders,” trying to refocus on the future.

OOO Messages That Allow a Break

Out of office (OOO) messages are getting new attention, as people feel increasingly inundated with email and desperately need a break. Students can compare messages and draft one of their own.

Examples show how OOO communication objectives have changed. In the past, the main objective might have been be let people know we won’t respond in our typical timeframe; in other words, we managed their expectations while we were away. More recently, people want to manage expectations on their return; they won’t be responding to 1,000 emails on day 1. People also want to reduce the email they receive to avoid the onslaught when they do get back.

OOOs seem to be getting more personal too. In the past, we might read that someone’s “away" or “on vacation.” Today, it’s more likely to read what they’re up to, for example, why they’re away, where they are, and the importance of taking a relaxing break. These messages follow trends towards authenticity, including employees’ willingness to share more personal information.

I’m curious how these messages affect senders—and those away. Are fewer emails sent, or are they saved up for the person’s return? Or does someone (as I just did) write a long discussion thread post awaiting the person’s return? (My thinking is that it’s better to read one post than 15 emails. Right?)

Striking the right tone in OOO messages can be tough. Here’s one example:

I am out of the office having way more fun than communicating with you. I will likely forget to email you back.

Maybe students will have better ideas. Here are 100 examples, but students may want to identify their communication objectives first. If they want to ease the email burden before and immediately after their break, these need editing.

Crisis Comms Around Food Bank's Meth Candy

A New Zealand food bank unknowingly distributed candy with high concentrations of methamphetamine to local families. Students can analyze crisis messages from the organization and the candy manufacturer.

The Auckland City Mission has a clear, short message on its home page:

The organization is also reaching out to the 400 or so people who received the candy, which was likely part of a drug smuggling scheme. Fortunately, the “candy” tasted so bad that people spit it out immediately; still, three people were hospitalized.

For its part, the candy manufacturer, Rinda, published a statement on its website (text below). The message meets its objectives, which students might identify as expressing sympathy, maintaining the company’s reputation, and distancing itself from the incident. However, the message is bare-bones, as these go. It sounds corporate, meaning I don’t read it as an authentic recognition of harm done—it protects the company primarily.

Beginning with “Statement from Rinda…” and “the safety and well-being of our consumers is our highest priority,” the message might cause immediate eye-rolling. “It has come to our attention” removes the possibility of any potential emotion on the part of company leaders and leaves us feeling as though they are checking a box—writing a statement after consulting with their team of lawyers. As they admit, they want to “protect the integrity of our brand.” Well, of course. No one faults them for that, but they don’t have to say it explicitly.

Instead, they could show a little compassion for people who are unhoused and food insecure, some of whom have addiction issues. These families seek support and care from the Auckland City Mission, which also suffered reputational damage. Can people trust the organization to give them food that’s safe? Maybe, in addition to upholding its own brand, Rinda could include a statement for the agency as well.

---

Here’s the statement text:

Statement from Rinda Food Industries Sdn Bhd

At Rinda Food Industries Sdn Bhd, the safety and well-being of our consumers is our highest priority. It has come to our attention through recent news reports in New Zealand that our products may have been misused in connection with illegal substances, specifically methamphetamine. We want to make it clear that Rinda Food Industries does not use or condone the use of any illegal drugs in our products.

We recognize the seriousness of this situation and understand the concerns it raises. We believe that the New Zealand authorities are currently conducting an investigation into this matter, we will work closely with law enforcement and relevant authorities to address this issue and protect the integrity of our brand. Our company is dedicated to ensuring that our products meet the highest safety and regulatory standards.

We encourage anyone with information related to this situation to contact us directly or to reach out to the appropriate authorities.

Yelp Exec on AI and Authenticity

An interview with Yelp’s Chief Product Officer offers an example of an executive positioning his company in light of AI advances.

Craig Saldanha begins with a clear objective—to focus on the core business success:

Just to set the table, our stated mission hasn’t changed. Our goal is to connect consumers with great local businesses, and that hasn’t changed over time. 

Then he achieves the following:

• Explains the company’s early adoption of AI (which any business leader will say and is true—at a basic level)

• Describes how newer (generative) AI improves the customer experience, particularly in parsing reviews and search

• Reinforces Yelp Assistant, a new voice technology to connect consumers and businesses (video of Saldanha here)

• Assures customers of human reviews and connection

His examples illustrate each point well. However, he claims they’re using generative AI to help people write reviews:

we are now using AI — and specifically Gen AI — to give you gentle nudges and prompts to help you remember what made your experience special. So as you’re typing, if you talk about the ambience, it will give you a little tag that says, “You’ve checked off the ambience, now you can talk about the service, you can talk about the food, etc.” We’ve rolled this out for restaurants, we’re rolling this out for other categories. That really helps with the depth and the quality of the reviews.

The support is minimal. I started typing a review, and yes, a little green box shows when I mention service, but that’s it. I don’t suppose that people want more guidance, particularly to avoid misleading, inauthentic reviews. But why mention it? Saldanha has stronger points, including upcoming features, for example, the ability to find a business based on a photo or video.

Overall, Saldanha does what we expect an executive to do. He represents the business well.

Proposed New Rules on Political Robocalls and Texts

The Federal Communications Commission is proposing tighter guidelines for AI-generated political campaign messages. Students can identify the objectives and assess whether they think the plan will work.

With the U.S. presidential election three months away, candidates are sending more robocalls and robotexts. According to FCC rules, these require consent, but messages sent manually do not.

New proposed FCC guidelines include the following areas:

The proposal seeks comment on the definition of AI-generated calls, requiring callers to disclose their use of AI-generated calls and text messages, supporting technologies that alert and protect consumers from unwanted and illegal AI robocalls, and protecting positive uses of AI to help people with disabilities utilize the telephone networks.

Of particular interest to the FCC are technologies used to mislead, for example, voice cloning and caller ID spoofing, which falsifies a caller’s origin.

Citizens can eliminate (or maybe just reduce) unwanted calls:

• Reply “STOP”

• Forward texts to 7726 (or "SPAM")

• Silence unknown callers

• Report texts as junk

I’ve been doing the latter on political texts to no avail. I imagine that robotext comes from a different source, so my efforts are equal to deleting each without the “report junk” part.

Students might have other ideas and their own experiences to share. Do they get a barrage of messages? Are they concerned about election misinformation?

Image source.

Google Pulls Gemini Ad

Google's decision to pull its Gemini ad offers lessons for how students might interact with LLMs. The big question is, Does the girl need help?

In the ad, which is still on YouTube but no longer runs during the Olympic games, a father asks Gemini (formerly Bard) to help his daughter write an appreciation letter to U.S. hurdler and sprinter Sydney McLaughlin-Levrone.

Professor of Advanced Media Shelly Palmer's blog post explains the many issues with the Gemini ad. The post itself is an argument students can analyze. To me, his most influential point is the overstatement of LLMs' ability to convey human thoughts and feelings—and a lack of confidence in a young girl's ability to express herself without the help of technology. As Palmer says, "Give me a heartfelt message over a grammatically correct, AI generated message any day."

In response to controversy, a Google representative said, “We believe that AI can be a great tool for enhancing human creativity, but can never replace it. Our goal was to create an authentic story celebrating Team USA,” and “While the ad tested well before airing, given the feedback, we have decided to phase the ad out of our Olympics rotation.” We don’t hear a lot of regret, apology, or learning from this response. I wonder how the disconnect happened between the ad testing and public response. That is one lesson Google could take away from the incident.

Ingrid Andress's Apology

Country singer Ingrid Andress promises to go to rehab after her off-key national anthem rendition at a Major League Baseball event. Are her apology and commitment enough?

Andress’s statement came quickly on Instagram. Looking at the criteria for apologies, students will see that Andress hit many of them—briefly: showing remorse (for example, saying, “I’m sorry” or “I apologize” instead of “I regret”), accepting responsibility (for example, saying, “It’s my fault,” or “I failed to”), saying what you did wrong, explaining what happened, acknowledging the impact, offering to fix it, saying what you’ll do differently, and requesting forgiveness.

She uses conversational language, which is probably appropriate in this situation. A legalistic statement never goes over well, and Andress sounds authentic. However, “that wasn’t me” isn’t typically well received. In a sense, this is the classic crisis communication strategy of distancing oneself, as we saw Microsoft do in the CrowdStrike situation this week. We could say that someone inebriated “isn’t herself,” but this part weakens her apology.

In response to Andress’s post, we see the expected, mean comments questioning her singing ability without alcohol and criticizing her quip about rehab being fun. Does the joke at the end diminish the seriousness of her message? I don’t think so, but students may have a different view.

AI Tools Help (a Lot) During Interviews

A Business Insider article says we shouldn’t call it “cheating,” but using these interview AI tools seems like cheating to me.

Final Round AI will revise a resume, generate a cover letter, and run mock interviews. After an interview, it will summarize, follow up, and somehow—coming later this year—negotiate a salary. But wait, there’s more: Its Copilot product (no relation to Microsoft’s) will transcribe the interview and, in real time, provide sample answers to questions. Cofounder and CEO Michael Guan says, "It can prompt the candidates with the right thing to say at the right time. Like a magical teleprompter, using AI."

Although intended only as a meeting transcription service, Otter.AI is being used as a "proxy interview" tool. This could involve the candidate lip-syncing as someone else answers questions for them. Other tools, like Interview Buddy, provide sample responses or bullet points for the candidate, but Interview Buddy stops short of technical questions, which the CEO says would be "kind of crossing the line, where it's not actually in the interest of the candidate or the employer if they're getting information that they don't actually know."

Students should consider ethical issues of using these types of tools. Where does AI assistance cross a line so that students are no longer representing themselves, which raises questions of integrity and authenticity? How would students answer questions from the Framework for Ethical Decision Making (Chapter 1 of Business Communication and Character, Figure 7)?

From a practical perspective, are students setting themselves up for failure in a job? Guan says using AI reflects a candidate’s “ingenuity,” and he isn’t concerned about results on the job: "If they can use AI to crush an interview, they can for sure continue using AI to become the top performer in their daily jobs.” Can they? Any job? Maybe they can perform only the type of job that is increasingly rare because AI is already doing the lower-end work.

OpenAI CTO's Video Introducing ChatGPT 4o

On a small living-room stage, Mira Murati, OpenAI’s chief technology officer, describes the company’s latest products. Students can analyze the video, “Spring Update,” against principles for business presentations.

We see no sign of Sam Altman, which is probably a good choice given his more political presence. This presentation is about the technology and allows Murati to shine.

Structure

Murati starts right in with her main points: “Today, I’m going to talk about three things. That’s it.” A few people laugh nervously, and I’m not sure why. Maybe she usually talks about a lot more and for longer than this 26-minute video? Or maybe it’s just the way she said it. She could have restarted because it feels awkward. Regardless, for the life of me, I cannot list what her three things are.

Visuals

The slides look odd to me. They are black and white, which is a fine choice, but they are so bare. Also, the alignment on the first slide, shown above, causes me to read down: Mira Chief, Murati Officer. Then, as Murati reviews her three points, we see five items on the slide, at left, which could cause the confusion in her structure.

Other slides are tech-cool minimalist, but the eye GIF looks creepy, and others seem unnecessary. Instead, visuals should support the message. Also, when I pause the video, I’m hoping to see a screenshot, but the video reverts to two guys sitting at a table. Around 5:15, a full-screen slide appears—entirely unnecessary because we see it clearly enough on the visuals to Murati’s side. Maybe this covers something to edit out? Did Murati sneeze? Trip? It doesn’t appear so.

The setting looks nice: tan with plants. It’s appropriate as a background that doesn’t detract from the speaker. In addition, the audience serves as cheer team, with only the back of their heads showing at times. Again, the focus is on Murati.

Content

Murati reinforces key points throughout her presentation: easier, more natural, free, collaborative. She repeats these words several times throughout. She also repeats the “big news” of releasing ChatGPT 4o to cheers among the crowd, who already heard this during the agenda, so obviously, the team was sitcom-audience prompted (“APPLAUSE!”).

At times, I want to see more, for example, when, for the first and only time, we see actual content and color on slides. Murati gives a couple of examples of using GPT for custom solutions, and apps scroll by quickly.

At about 8:15, Murati discusses the challenges of safety and how they’re working with partners. It sounds like a throwaway couple of lines, a mere nod, before the live demo starts next. Now we see the guys from the video-still table. Mark Chen starts by addressing a potential question, as we teach students to do: the wire is for “consistent internet”—easily understood.

Scarlett Johansson (or someone else) interacts with Chen during a conversation demo. The voice cuts in and out, which no one addresses, hoping, I guess, that it will even out since it’s impossible not to notice. At this point, Murati purses her lips, possibly a sign of nervousness. Fortunately, the voice does smooth out, and the demo achieves the purpose, which Chen explains as, for example, the ability to interrupt.

The next demo is math help, obviously to disprove the common thinking that GPT is bad at math. The beginning is a bit awkward, with another audio cut, GPT ready without seeing the equation, and Murati touching her knees. Berret Zoph handles this well, joking that he hasn’t written anything yet. The demo is simple but works well, showing GPT’s ability to tutor math students. A more complex coding example illustrates GPT’s advanced abilities, including vision, for example, seeing charts. GPT 4o can create charts, which isn’t covered, but would interest our students.

The demo also illustrates interpreting facial expressions as emotion and language translation—an Italian example, which Murati speaks.

Delivery

Murati’s delivery style is natural. She doesn’t appear to be working off a script and neither do the two researchers. We don’t know how many times their presentations were rehearsed or whether the video was edited, but they seem comfortable, using an appropriate style for the company, product, and purpose.

Overall, the video is a good example of a business presentation with a demo. The company certainly achieved its objective of conveying significant updates for GPT. Comparing this to Apple and Facebook demos from years ago could inspire a useful class discussion.

Discrimination Against Black Names on Resumes

Many studies have shown that employers are more likely to offer interviews to white than to Black applicants. New research may help prepare students.

Students have difficult decisions to make about how to present themselves in employment communications. In Chapter 13 of Business Communication and Character (11e), I wrote:

Applicants have a difficult choice in deciding whether to downplay their race and other affiliations. Some students choose to do so to avoid bias—to increase their chances of getting hired when they are at a disadvantage in the selection process. Others downplay their identities for a different reason: if an employer does want to increase diversity, they don’t want to be hired to “fill that quota.”

I reference an Administrative Science Quarterly article. This new research identifies companies by name, with some companies, for example, Kohl’s, Lowe’s, and Hilton, not discriminating, but AutoNation and GPC coming out at the bottom. This study also tested age and LGBTQ status and found low penalties for those over 40 and applicants with Black names who mentioned affiliations with LGBTQ groups, although the penalty was larger for applicants with white-sounding names.

The resumes in this study seem to be for lower, service-level jobs. It would be interesting to evaluate the effect for professional- and management-level jobs for which our students might apply. I’m cautious about assuming the same results.

Kate Middleton's Health Announcement

After weeks of silence and the predictable conspiracy theories, the Princess of Wales announced her cancer diagnosis in a video. Students can analyze the message and discuss issues of privacy and integrity, which I raised last week.

Kate Middleton likely chose a video message instead of the typical written statement because of rumors about her failing marriage and death. Royal family PR experts view the message positively, a way to take back the narrative. In part, her message explains her silence:

As you can imagine, this has taken time. It has taken me time to recover from major surgery in order to start my treatment. But, most importantly, it has taken us time to explain everything to George, Charlotte and Louis in a way that is appropriate for them, and to reassure them that I am going to be ok.

Where are the lines between privacy and public responsibility? We might see an analogy to U.S. Defense Secretary Lloyd Austin’s reluctance to disclose his health issues. Like most analogies, this one is imperfect. Secretary Austin has, dare I say, clearer job responsibilities with greater potential consequences than does Kate Middleton. The royal family’s silence seems to hurt only themselves, similar to the situation when Princess Diana died. Still, they are all public figures, paid by taxpayers.

Yet speculation about Kate Middleton has been brutal, and no one deserves that. Her appearance takes speculators to task. She demonstrates vulnerability as a strength, owning her illness and asking for what she and her family needs:

We hope that you will understand that, as a family, we now need some time, space and privacy while I complete my treatment. My work has always brought me a deep sense of joy and I look forward to being back when I am able, but for now I must focus on making a full recovery.

Her request is reasonable and, now that she has broken the silence, should be respected, but we’ll see.

Problems with Medical "Professionalism"

The challenge of what professionalism means and how definitions affect different groups has met the medical profession. The topic may interest business communication students, who will see similar issues in their own fields.

Professionalism as a work standard has been criticized for some time for its vagueness and disparate impact. Ideas about professionalism, for example, focusing only on work and not bringing personal (non-work) issues into the workplace, vary by culture and may be unevenly applied to women and men. Others think of professionalism as sameness or conformity and lash out at the inherent privilege and impact of demands about “image, dress, politeness and emotional regulation” on the working class. Some view professionalism as a racial construct, for example, in the legal profession: “While professionalism seemingly applies to everyone, it is used to widely police and regulate people of color in various ways including hair, tone, and food scents.”

A retracted article illustrates the issue in the medical profession. The October 2019 Journal of Vascular Surgery article, “Prevalence of Unprofessional Social Media Content Among Young Vascular Surgeons,” was retracted in August 2020. The retraction notice includes this explanation:

In addition, the methodology, analysis and conclusions of this article were based on published but not validated criteria, judging a series of behaviors including attire, alcohol consumption, controversial political and religious comments like abortion or gun control, in which significant conscious and unconscious biases were pervasive. The methodology was in part predicated on highly subjective assessments of professionalism based on antiquated norms and a predominantly male authorship supervised the assessments made by junior, male students and trainees. The authors did not identify biases in the methodology, i.e., judging public social media posts of women wearing bikinis on off-hours as “potentially unprofessional.” The goal of professionalism in medicine is to help ensure trust among patients, colleagues and hospital staff. However, professionalism has historically been defined by and for white, heterosexual men and does not always speak to the diversity of our workforce or our patients.

If students don’t relate to the potentially discriminatory impact of a professionalism standard, they might feel the effect of their social media accounts being used to determine whether they measure up. As we encourage students to be their authentic selves, this story highlights some of the potentially negative consequences.

Image source.

Does a Brand Have a Soul? Does Starbucks?

Starbucks Founder Howard Schultz wrote a letter to Board about preserving the “soul” of the brand. Students can analyze his letter and discuss whether a company or a brand has a soul. Does Starbucks?

The context of Starbucks’ unionization efforts likely drove Schultz’s thinking. (All three Starbucks in Ithaca, NY, have come and gone because of unionization efforts, the company’s response, and local backlash. Costco may be a better role model for accepting and negotiating with unions. A useful project for students would be to analyze the effects of unions in the past several decades.)

Schultz writes that this definition of soul is from Webster, but it doesn’t match what I see in the dictionary listing, which is worth comparing. Here’s his list:

a) the moral and emotional nature of human beings
b) the quality that arouses emotion and sentiment
c) spiritual or moral force

Schultz then writes, “Webster did not anticipate the necessity to define soul in business terms for the very reason I am addressing it. It rarely exists, and it’s almost impossible to define.” Or, perhaps a business or brand cannot have a soul. Perhaps his view is an overreach, reflecting the exact arrogance for which Starbucks is criticized. After all, the company sells coffee. This is a cynical view, and students may believe, or feel, otherwise.

Also worth analyzing is the purpose of the letter. What are Schultz’s communication objectives? In addition to the Board audience, he forwarded the letter in an email to those of us on his former Schultz-for-president distribution list. After reading the letter, will the Board feel inspired, and if so, to do what, exactly?

Image source.

Jelly Roll Speaks Out and Demonstrates Character

Not often do we see a rapper turned country music artist in front of congress. Students might be interested in discussing Jelly Roll’s character and analyzing his persuasive statement.

With a history of addiction, selling drugs, and jail time, Jelly Roll is open about his past. His hit “Save Me” (and others), his inspiring speech when he won the Country Music Award for New Artist of the Year, and his tearful video when he learned he received two Emmy nominations demonstrate his vulnerability and gratitude for his new life. We learn more about Jelly Roll during a CBS Sunday Morning interview, when he talks about being in therapy and says, “I think it’s cool to think about vulnerability that way—that we can all grow together, and that it’s OK to not have it figured out. . . .” Correspondent Kelefa Sanneh also noted his authenticity, among other character dimensions: “Songs like ‘Song of a Sinner’ and ‘Need a Favor’ make fans feel as if they really know him and believe in him.”

In his testimony to encourage lawmakers to pass a bill to sanction drug traffickers, Jelly Roll uses several persuasion strategies we teach in business communication classes. With a tattooed face, Jelly Roll started with a joke about having a microphone for performing. Then he captures attention with data about the number of people who will die from drug overdose during his five-minute testimony. He uses other logical appeals, including this poignant analogy about the average number of people who die every day in the United States of fentanyl overdose:

Could you imagine the national media attention it would get if they were reporting that a plane was crashing every single day and killing 190 people?

Students may have a lot to say about the speech, which demonstrates credibility, logical argument, and emotion appeal. In some respects, he risks little. He is vulnerable, speaking of his wife’s addiction and a past he might prefer to forget, but his advocacy is unlikely to affect his career negatively: he’s getting positive publicity and his role might endear people toward him. Still, he demonstrates integrity by being consistent in his music and in his life. He is making “living amends,” as people do in Twelve Step programs: taking positive steps when apologies aren’t possible or enough.

Image source.

New Slack CEO's Message to Staff

A friend suggested I post more positive examples, and I’m glad for the challenge. If you find others, please send them along. This one appeared on LinkedIn from Slack’s new CEO Denise Holland Dresser as a summary of “what’s top of mind.”

With cute but tasteful emojis, Dresser writes about her gratitude for the team, productivity tools of the platform, happy customers, work efficiencies, and the future. Yes, it’s a feel-good, promotional message, but Dresser is concise and grounded. Her personality comes through just enough, without spilling over the screen. Her subheadings aren’t quite parallel, but I’m picky. Students benefit from seeing examples of positive messages, and this is a good one to share.

Dresser left Salesforce in November, along with several other departing executives and laid off employees in the past year. Slack, too, has had its share of turnover: Dresser will be the third CEO in about a year. But none of that matters now. Dresser is all-in at Slack or, at least, that’s what her message says.

Words of the Year

Every year, Oxford University Press and Merriam-Webster identify a “word of the year,” arrived at in different ways. This year’s winners are “rizz” (slang for charisma) and “authenticity,” respectively.

Oxford University Press describes the word of the year:

The Oxford Word of the Year is a word or expression reflecting the ethos, mood, or preoccupations of the past twelve months, one that has potential as a term of lasting cultural significance.

Oxford University Press’s process is more extensive than Merriam-Webster’s. The Word of the Year website, which updated a couple of days after the word was announced, asked the public to “Help us choose the four finalists, before the final word for Oxford Word of the Year 2023 is revealed by our language experts.” About 30,000 people voted on word pairings, for example, “Swiftie” vs. “de-influencing,” and “rizz” vs. “beige flag.”

On an FAQ page, the organization answers the question, “How is the word chosen?”:

The candidates for the Word of the Year are drawn from evidence gathered by our extensive language research program, including the Oxford Corpus, which gathers around 150 million words of current English from web-based publications each month. Sophisticated software allows our expert lexicographers to identify new and emerging words and examine the shifts in how more established words are being used.

Dictionary editors also flag notable words for consideration throughout the year and use other sources of data to identify contenders.

We regularly take into account the many suggestions sent to us via social media.

The final Word of the Year selection is made by the Oxford Languages team on the basis of all the information available to us.

How Merriam-Webster chooses the word of the year is more data-driven and relies only on the dictionary’s searches, which we might expect given the source:

A high-volume lookup most years, authentic saw a substantial increase in 2023, driven by stories and conversations about AI, celebrity culture, identity, and social media.

After digging for more information about the selection process, I found a 2018 video titled, “Behind the Scenes.” An editor-at-large provides a little more detail: “Merriam-Webster’s word of the year is determined by our online dictionary lookup data. The word must show both high volume of traffic and show year-over-year increase in lookups at Merriam-Webster.com.”

With its multiple, nebulous meanings, authentic, or authenticity, would inspire questions. The increase in searches particularly makes sense given one of the runners-up, deepfake. But the selection process could be more “worthy of acceptance,” one of the dictionary’s definitions of authentic.

Musk Apologizes and Curses Advertisers

After losing major advertisers on X, Elon Musk illustrates communication lessons about apologies and rebuilding image. At least two parts of an interview with Andrew Ross Sorkin are worthy of class discussion.

Starting Around 8:15
The first relates to Musk’s agreement with an X post about a antisemitic conspiracy theory. Musk tried to backtrack by posting explanations, which he said were “ignored by the media. And essentially, I handed a loaded gun to those who hate me and to those who are antisemitic, and for that I am quite sorry.” Entwined in his apology is Musk as victim, which typically doesn’t play well in rebuilding image. Apologies focus on those affected—not the actor.

Another good lesson for business communication students is Musk’s regret. He said he “should not have replied to that particular person, and I should have written in greater length as to what I meant.” A leader should know that even liking a post, no less writing, “You have said the actual truth,” carries tremendous weight. Perhaps X, with its entire founding based on short posts, is not the best medium to discuss theories of race. [Side note: Musk clarified during the interview that “tweets” were more appropriate when Twitter allowed only 140 characters. He prefers “posts” now.]

Musk visited Israel, a trip he said was planned before the X post incident. Still, the visit looked like, as Sorkin said, “an apology tour.” Musk denied the accusation, repeating the phrase “apology tour,” despite what crisis communicators might advise. Musk posted, “Actions speak louder than words." Yes, they do, so the post itself is odd. People can draw their own conclusions about his visit to Israel. The Washington Post reported that few advertisers have been positively moved by his visit.

Starting Around 11:15
When Sorkin started speaking about advertisers, Musk interrupted to say, “I hope they stop [advertising].” Understandably, Sorkin looked confused, but Musk continued, “Don’t advertise. . . . If someone is going to try to blackmail me with advertising, blackmail me with money? Go f—- yourself.” Sorkin was speechless at this point, and Musk repeated the command and asked, “Is that clear? I hope that it is.” We hear titters in the audience, a mix of shock and embarrassment.

Where’s the line between confidence and arrogance? Students certainly will have opinions on that topic. In fairness, Musk gets quite philosophical later in the interview. He comes across as authentic and somewhat vulnerable, revealing his personal struggles as well as his commitment to the environment and his business plans. He also expressed disappointment about OpenAI, having named the platform, which he said “should be renamed super-closed source for maximum profit AI.” That got a genuine laugh.

Is Snoop Dogg Vulnerable or Self-Promoting?

Snoop Dogg’s November 16 announcement that he’s quitting “smoke” sounds as though he’s struggling with a marijuana addiction. But further inspection raises questions about his intentions.

Snoop Dogg has a few cannabis-related businesses. He owns the marijuana brand Leafs by Snoop and Uncle Snoop’s, which launched Snazzle Os, onion-flavored, infused crispy snacks. Other planned projects include virtual cannabis items “authenticated by non-fungible tokens [NFTs].” A partnership with Martha Stewart produced Best Buds Bags, fancy bags to hold the duo’s BIC EZ Reach lighters on the outside.

One day (November 15) before his giving-it-up announcement, Snoop was quoted about the bag:

“This bag’s got it all. From my favorite lighter, favorite color, and dime-sized secret stash pockets to stash my favorite herbs.”

On November 19, he announced that he’s partnering with a smokeless fire pit maker, Solo Stove:

I love a good fire outside, but the smoke was too much. Solo Stove fixed fire and took out the smoke. They changed the game, and now I’m excited to spread the love and stay warm with my friends and family,

Vulnerability is great unless it’s used for personal gain; then, it’s inauthentic and more like persuasion or manipulation. To be fair, he didn’t specify what kind of smoke he was quitting, but X replies indicate I’m not the only one who drew the cannabis conclusion. Maybe this was intended as a joke, but I didn’t find it funny.

Tools for Managing Through Interpersonal Conflict

As students protest across campuses, faculty can help them manage through conflict. Here are two tools from the text chapter, “Communicating Across Differences,” and a few thoughts about character.

This matrix, adapted from other sources (see below), shows students how to move from debate to dialogue—and through emotional involvement, my addition for more personal and community conflicts.

Students may practice reflection after presentations or activities, but reflecting “in action” is a way to zoom out and get perspective during an interaction that isn’t going well. Questions about emotional and physical reactions deepen students’ typical intellectual reflections in the classroom and encourage students to take action—even to support those who disagree with them.

Students also will learn from discussions about character. When they stand for their beliefs, they demonstrate courage, but changing their beliefs also takes courage (and humility). Protests also may veer from challenging injustice to self-righteousness, an extreme of courage that looks like moral superiority and absolute certainty.

Protesting demonstrates compassion for one side, but so does seeing the other side’s pain. In addition, students are vulnerable when they protest: they risk emotional exposure and being “doxxed,” identity exposure they might consider unbearable.

---

Figure 6 is adapted from “Creating Community Across Difference,” Intergroup Dialogue Project, Cornell University, 2018, which is adapted from University of Michigan Program on Intergroup Relations, 2008. Original source: Daniel Yankelovich, The Magic of Dialogue: Transforming Conflict into Cooperation (New York: Simon & Schuster, 1999). Adapted with Eric Clay, multi-faith and secular chaplain.