When a journalist uses an emotive, negative word like "crisis" in a question, do not repeat it in your answer. Reframe it with a more neutral term like "issue" or "challenge" to prevent your soundbite from reinforcing the negative narrative.
Related Insights
Print interviews are uniquely susceptible to manipulation because journalists can strip away crucial context like tone, humor, and clarifying statements. By selectively publishing only the most extreme lines, they can paint a subject in a negative light while maintaining plausible deniability of misquoting.
Instead of waiting to be attacked for your weaknesses, preemptively address them yourself. By owning or diffusing the negative points first, you disarm your opponent, leaving them with nothing to say. This 'prebuttal' strategy seizes the narrative advantage by controlling the initial framing.
A simple AI prompt can transform your press release into a list of challenging interview questions from a journalist's perspective. This helps you anticipate and prepare for difficult lines of questioning that your internal team might miss.
To defuse conflict, frame your perspective as a personal narrative rather than objective fact. This linguistic tool signals vulnerability and invites dialogue by acknowledging your story could be wrong, preventing the other person's brain from defaulting to a defensive, "fight or flight" response.
Instead of stating a contentious view as objective fact, framing it as "my perception was..." validates your experience without attacking others. This approach acknowledges subjectivity, reduces defensiveness, and allows for authentic sharing even on polarizing topics.
Before giving feedback or answering a complex question, ask a clarifying question. This isn't just for the other person's benefit; it's a strategic tool to help you target your own response, ensuring it's relevant and concise.
Navigate disagreements with a four-step method: use uncertain language (Hedge), find common ground (Emphasize Agreement), demonstrate what you heard (Acknowledge), and frame points positively instead of negatively (Reframe). This prevents conversations from spiraling into negativity.
To broach a sensitive topic, Andrew Ross Sorkin reads a critical quote from another source. This technique shifts the focus from a personal attack ("I think you...") to a public concern ("Others are saying..."). It forces the interviewee to grapple with an issue they have likely already considered, leading to a more thoughtful response.
To stop a persistent negative line of questioning, use specific internal statistics. For example, responding to claims of poor quality with a five-star rating figure. Journalists are less likely to challenge hard data they cannot immediately disprove.
Instead of personally challenging a guest, read a critical quote about them from another source. This reframes you as a neutral moderator giving them a chance to respond, rather than an attacker. The guest has likely already prepared an answer for known criticisms.
