Terry Gerton One of the most difficult communication challenges for folks in the federal government is talking to the public while something is still happening. We’ve seen it with war operations. We see it with all kinds of things. You’ve done some research on how people react when officials don’t have all the answers yet. Let’s start with what does the communicator most likely feel like they should do?

Brian Southwell I think in many of those instances, there is a sort of tendency for communicators to want to focus on just the facts and to not stray beyond that. But there are choices that we have in terms of what can be presented and communicated. And I think that’s something that we really took the time to investigate here was under a situation of uncertainty, how is it that can be presented and are there better or worse ways to do that?

Terry Gerton And before we get into the particulars of this, your experiment focused on health messaging. Why is it so important for people to trust those kinds of health messages or the flip side? What happens when they don’t, if we don’t communicate well about health risks?

Brian Southwell Yeah, I mean, if you think about it, you know, we all want to stay healthy, keep our families healthy. And in order to do that, there’s both behavior that would be useful for us to take, and it’s useful for us to pay attention to messages that are going to come out, you know, today and tomorrow. And so the extent to which, you know, people believe what’s what’s said, and then also are willing to act on that and are willing to have some patients to wait for information to come. All of that has implications for how long how well we get along together and for public health generally.

Terry Gerton So as you were testing your hypothesis, you crafted four different kinds of messages. How did you try to differentiate between those so that your respondents were actually receiving a different message?

Brian Southwell Well, it’s important to note here is that actually everybody, you know, got sort of the core basic facts. And in this situation, the facts were focused on a hypothetical foodborne illness outbreak that a local health department was investigating. And you know folks in the control condition and the simple facts only condition essentially just heard that in fact people in their community were getting sick and we’re looking into it. And that there was an opportunity to also go website, you know, to learn more information about the symptoms. But in the enhanced inversions, we used the opportunity to actually explain a little bit about what the investigation would look like, what the timeframe for that would be. There’s also acknowledgement of the discomfort of the uncertainty and the fact that that uncertainty was normal under these circumstances. And there was a pledge to, you know, a commitment to give an update in the future. And so there’s a lot in those enhancements that actually seem to be responsible for some of the effects that we found. But in all cases, people did get the same core message of people in your community are getting sick. The key is, what else are you able to offer in a succinct way to offer some additional assurance?

Terry Gerton And so then what did you find in the elements of those messages made the most difference in the listener’s willingness to trust and respond according to the message?

Brian Southwell Yeah, well, there were really two outcomes that we were interested in. One was the extent to which people expressed understanding, you know, that they understood what was going on, and we were able to actually enhanced that perceived understanding just by providing more information about the investigation and providing a sense of the timeline. But what also seemed to matter in terms of the other outcome of perceived trustworthiness was the acknowledgement that we were able to make for people of their relationship, frankly, to the institution and the commitment that the institution had to provide updates in the future. So I think this really gets at a core insight, I think, which is that trust is ultimately about much more than just expertise. It’s also about acknowledgement of relationship and about shared interests and about the sense that perhaps an organization cares whether or not a person lives or dies. And I think ultimately those elements seem to be the ones that were likely irresponsible for this enhancement of to trustworthiness, which is what we found in the most enhanced version of the message.

Terry Gerton Dr. Brian Southwell is a distinguished fellow at RTI International. Brian, this makes me think of something that Dr. Fauci has said about how they messaged around COVID, which is if he had it to do over again, and I’m certainly paraphrasing, he would have been a lot more transparent about what they knew and didn’t know and how they were moving forward to find out what they didn’t now. Is that at the core of what you’re finding in your experiment here?

Brian Southwell Yeah, I think, you know, really what seemed to be key was not only a distinct sense of here’s a timeline for when we may know more. But there is a sense of both what to expect and explicit acknowledgement that what we know right now may change. And we know from a variety of literature that that simple acknowledgement can be really helpful, folks. And so rather than just stating with absolute certainty all that’s known, there’s an acknowledgement of the fact that there’s aspects of this that we’re investigating. We may update this, and we will update you when we know more. So I think that’s certainly consistent with literature You know, it’s existed now for a little while, and it’s certainly something that we find in this study as well.

Terry Gerton One of the things I thought was interesting though, was that there was a point at which too much more information was too much more information and it was sort of a too long, didn’t read response. How should a communicator think about what is necessary and important and helpful and what’s just too much extra?

Brian Southwell Yeah, that sense of what’s too much does vary by person, of course, but we also have to acknowledge the fact that many people are getting information in social media posts or in other short formats, and of course there are limits to that. And we’ve got to acknowledge that too. Professional communicators have a very difficult job. They don’t have an unlimited amount of space to be able to provide all the content. So it’s really more a matter of just thinking whether there is any indication of some of these elements rather than and letting people know where they can go for more information. You know, we have lots of ways to signal that and that’s something that can be really important.

Terry Gerton So what does this also then tell you about what people are expecting in terms of accountability? If a communicator is saying, here’s what we know, here’s, what we don’t know, here’s we’re investigating and we’ll be back with more information. What is the public expecting then to happen?

Brian Southwell Yeah, well, I think that there is a. A sense of an ongoing dialog and a sense of there being updates, you know, per se. And I think there’s a sense of understanding that the purpose of communication is to reflect the relationship that audiences have to organizations and not necessarily just to limit liability. And I that’s something that is really important. I think increasingly all kinds of communication, you know, discussion is focusing on the fact that we need to listen more and not necessarily just pronounce. I mean, we need to think about the ways in which our communication practices reflect relationships with audiences. And I think ultimately, there’s a lot that can be changed. I’m really actually hopeful and optimistic because this suggests that some of what we worry about in terms of perception that we’ve somehow lost trust in each other, a lot of that can repaired. I mean, it’s just a matter of doing the good and hard work of actively communicating and acknowledging the interests that people have.

Terry Gerton There was a little phrase that snuck into that last response that I want to come back to, which was limiting liability. And a lot of times, certainly at the government level, we get very concerned about that. We don’t want to say anything we’re not certain about lest we create some liability. Again, how do professional communicators and their lawyers get around that?

Brian Southwell Well, I think about, you know, in this particular study, we didn’t offer anything more than what was true in terms of those additional statements. And so that’s something there are sometimes things that can be said that are taken for granted that can make a difference. And that’s different than necessarily trying to stretch the truth or to somehow get into a complex version of facts. Sometimes it’s just a matter of acknowledging this is normal. This time frame is normal for looking into this. We do plan to schedule an update one week from now. Saying that versus not saying that can make a big difference. So what is it as a communicator that you have in front of you that you can actually acknowledge? And that’s, I think, can go a long way. I think that’s really part of the message here, which is in a matter of this being incredibly complex, but rather looking at what tools you have to offer some reassurance to the audience and taking advantage of those when you can.

Terry Gerton Again, your research here was specifically focused in a public health space, but any government official anywhere could extract perhaps some lessons here. What do you think are the most important things that you’d want any program manager or anybody who might find themselves behind a mic to keep in mind?

Brian Southwell Yeah, I think at the end of the day, it’s important to remember audiences are human. Um, you know, we have difficulty, you know, dealing with uncertainty, uh, we have emotions that’s part of our humanity. And I think finding ways to just acknowledge that and to approach any communication situation, um, from the perspective of us all being in this together and doing what we can to sort of acknowledge people’s humanity. I think that’s, it might sound simple, but I think it really does matter. And I think that’s something that was really emphasized here. And I, I think, that generalizes across all kinds of domains, recognize the uncertainty that people are facing, recognize the discomfort that that causes them, see what you can do to alleviate that and, and commit yourself to providing updates when you have them.

Terry Gerton A little compassion and empathy goes a long way maybe.

Brian Southwell I think that’s right. And I think it’s consistent with leadership, I think, to offer that kind of compassion.