Cracker Barrel Subordinates the Change and then Reverts to Old Logo
Following backlash from updating the logo, Cracker Barrel will keep “Uncle Herschel”—the man and the barrel. Students can identify business communication issues in the communication.
The restaurant has a rich history, with its first store, a restaurant with gas station, opening in Lebanon, TN, in 1969. Now 664 restaurants, Cracker Barrel maintains an old-timey, country feel: a menu of comfort food and farmhouse decor with antiques unique to each location.
The logo and decor change are hidden in a press release on August 19 titled, “Cracker Barrel Teams up with Country Music Star Jordan Davis to Invite Guests to Discover ‘All the More’ this Fall.” It’s as though the company leaders knew trouble might ensue. Note the placement in this paragraph, further subordinating the news:
Since 1969, Cracker Barrel has delivered heartfelt service, homestyle food and an unmatched dining experience. With nearly 660 locations nationwide, the brand remains a go-to for guests seeking community, comfort and special moments they can carry with them long after they leave. Its more popular menu offerings like farm fresh scrambled eggs and buttermilk biscuits even serve as inspiration behind the hues of a refreshed color palette featured in the new campaign. Anchored in Cracker Barrel's signature gold and brown tones, the updated visuals will appear across menus and marketing collateral, including the fifth evolution of the brand's logo, which is now rooted even more closely to the iconic barrel shape and word mark that started it all.
After years of subtle adjustments, the dramatic logo change hardly supports the conclusion, “now rooted even more closely to the iconic barrel shape and word mark that started it all.” The redesigned logo is rounder, but the most obvious change—omitting the man (“Old Timer”) and the actual barrel—is key and unmentioned. We might say the leadership lacks accountability for the decision, hiding behind positive/neutral news like a music partnership.
Try as it might to update the brand, Cracker Barrel is thrown back to earlier days. Brighter interiors with fewer, better organized items were meant to appeal to younger crowds, but fell flat. Instead, it felt like an affront to conservative values and became a political issue. As Americus Reed, marketing professor at The Wharton School, said, “If it ain’t woke, don’t fix it.” In the end, the logo redesign was deemed intolerable, as evidenced by the 7% stock price drop.
Social media backlash was fierce, and President Trump’s Truth Social post might have been the final straw. In a rare about-face post on X, the company said they listened and would change the logo back. Unfortunately, in the message, we don’t see the barrel on the X account.
The stock rebounded, and all is right again. Students might discuss lessons learned: get better feedback, make more incremental changes, stand behind your decisions or don’t make them, and perhaps, above all else, stay attuned to the political climate.
Name Change from MSNBC to MS NOW Gets Ridiculed
MSNBC is rebranding itself as MS NOW, short for My Source News Opinion World, but memes are drowning out the company’s enthusiasm.
Critics say “MS,” leftover from when Microsoft held part ownership years ago, is most commonly associated with multiple sclerosis, and they question why the letters remain. My Source News Opinion World seems a forced fit for the letters and makes little grammatical sense. Luckily, they probably won’t be muttered out loud.
Others say “NOW” is so yesterday sounding, and that the logo “looks like something you’d scroll past in a pile of poltical [sic] campaign logos from 2004.” Although the company statement confirms no change, the American flag could signal a more conservative slant.
The statement also conveys a self-importance that might not resonate with viewers:
For our viewers who have watched us for decades, it may be hard to imagine this network by any other name. We understand. But our promise to you remains as it always has. You know who we are, and what we do.
Students might have reactions about the change—or about other brand changes they have noticed. Here are two recent controversial examples:
Broligarchy and Skibidi Added to Cambridge Dictionary
More than 6,212 words have been added to the Cambridge Dictionary, the primary resource for English-language learners. Students might enjoy an all-slang video, and the new business terms are interesting
The ones that made headlines—delulu, tradwife, and most popular, skibidi—are funny sounding and/or have ambiguous meanings. No one seems able to define skibidi except to say it’s an “all-purpose,” “dump” word.
Here are a few business- and tech-related words (from here and here):
snackable: content for limited attention spans
digital decay noun: process by which online content disappears or becomes inaccessible
fast tech: cheap products that lead to e-waste.
technofossil: plastic and other products that last forever.
vibecession: a period when people think the economy is doing worse than it is.
cardboard box index: a way to measure economic growth by the number of boxes shipped.
Dictionaries must evolve. As the Lexical Programme Manager of the Cambridge Dictionary Colin McIntosh says, "Internet culture is changing the English language, and the effect is fascinating to observe and capture in the dictionary.“ In addition, he explains, “It’s not every day you get to see words like ‘skibidi’ and ‘delulu’ make their way into the Cambridge Dictionary. We only add words where we think they’ll have staying power.”
A writer for The Times defends including slang words. Unlike the historian who criticizes dictionaries that have “surrendered to usage,” Oliver Kamm reminds us of a dictionary’s purpose:
Dictionaries record usage so we can learn the semantics, etymology and history of any given word. Sometimes these usages are slang, being the currency of particular demographic groups (especially but not only young people). I want to know what they mean; a dictionary that shuns them won’t help me.
In this fun video (start at 1:53), polyglot Arieh Smith (aka Xiaomanyc) delivers a speech entirely in “Gen Alpha” language. Students at Westtown High School in West Chester, Pennsylvania, go wild.
Columbia President's Resignation
Columbia University President Katrina Armstrong’s resignation statement serves as a worthy example for analysis. The political situation is extremely controversial, and she avoids direct references.
Her emphasis is on the “interim” nature of her position. In other words, she wasn’t planning to stay long, anyway. She mentions this early in her short statement and reinforces her “few months” of service at the end. She also emphasizes up front that she will return to her former role at the university.
Armstrong speaks well of Columbia and subtly refers to the controversy, using words like “healing” and “moving forward.” At the end, she hints at having a bigger voice: “The world needs Columbia University, and you can be assured that I will do everything I can to tell that story.”
It’s difficult to think of what else she could reasonably say, given the university’s precarious situation with the government and with all its many constituents. She may have said just enough.
This is one of those messages that could be classified as positive or negative news, depending on the receiver’s perspective. But appointing yet another interim president is not great, for sure.
Claude Wins a Writing Contest
A Washington Post reporter compared five AI tools and found Claude the clear winner. The prompts and analysis are interesting for a class discussion and activity.
The five prompts covered a range of communication topics: an apology to a friend, a CEO layoff message, a request to a spouse, a weird work proposal, and a breakup text. Five judges, “who have all written books and teach courses on communication,” rated the tools in this order:
Anthropic’s Claude
DeepSeek
Google’s Gemini
OpenAI’s ChatGPT
Microsoft Copilot
Judges found Copilot particularly “stilted” and “robotic,” generating the dreaded “hope you’re well.” That’s too bad because Copilot is built into all Microsoft 365 products, a popular choice for work.
I wish we could see all the writing samples and judges’ feedback, but the article includes only a couple of examples. But students could use the same prompts for a class activity and compare results.
We could ask students to put more effort into the prompt, with detailed context and a more thorough audience analysis. We also could give students more specific guidance for evaluating the results. Or, students could create their own prompts. With more instructions—both to AI and to students—students might rank the tools differently.
Comparing Stock Charts for Perspective
This was a bad week for the U.S. stock market, but graphics make the news look worse than it is. Students can compare charts to see how truncated axes affect perception.
Yahoo!’s monthly chart has a short range: 41,000 to 44,000 for this monthly line chart. With the red line and shading, the results look awful. Noting the 6.87% drop is helpful—it’s not great but not devastating either. For the 62% of Americans (varying largely by demographic group) who own stock in some way, their portfolios are unlikely to be invested 100% in DJIA stock, so their personal losses are probably smaller.
This one year chart, also Yahoo!’s, shows a more complete view of the market. Over a year, stocks were still in positive territory—green(!)—and the recent dip is in clearer perspective. Not that short-term investors and perhaps retirees shouldn’t be concerned, and we might be headed into a recession, but this chart recognizes the extraordinary gains in the past year as well as the recent losses.
Students can find longer-term charts to see an even fuller picture of U.S. stock market returns. They might also find, or need to create, charts with a Y-axis starting at 0.
As always, the data visualization depends on the audience and purpose. If your audience is television viewers, and your purpose is to engender fear, then short time frames and truncated axes do the trick. If you’re a financial advisor, and your audience is a client who is a long-term investor with a balanced portfolio, you would probably not show these charts at all and instead focus on their portfolio returns over time.
New AI Copyright Ruling and My Book Guidance
Students may want to know about the U.S. Copyright Office’s new ruling: AI-assisted works can be copyrighted if enough human creativity contributed to the product.
With 207 citations, the 52-page report clarifies what AI output can be copyrighted, challenging previous thinking that no output can carry the protection. The ruling is most relevant to people in creative fields who use AI to produce music, film, artwork, etc., but has implications for all of us. The National Law Review summarized the latest:
The Office reiterated its position that copyright protection may currently be available for: (a) human-created works of authorship used as inputs/prompts that are perceptible in AI-generated outputs; (b) creative selection, coordination, or arrangement of material in the outputs (i.e., compilations); (c) creative modifications of the outputs; and (d) the prompts themselves if they are sufficiently creative (but not the outputs created in response to the prompts).
The last point is perhaps the most relevant: prompts alone do not constitute human intervention into AI results. Additional human creativity and authorship are essential.
With a reference to Paula Lentz’s article on ethical authorship, here’s what I included in the upcoming 12th edition of Business Communication and Character on the topic:
Regardless of how you use AI, you are always the author of your work. Maintain your own authorship, including your authority and authenticity, over your writing—in other words, yourself. You want your writing to represent you and your character—not whatever content GenAI generates from existing sources; that output isn’t necessarily original work. Depending on the task, think of AI as a collaborator, an assistant, or a coach—but never a replacement for you.
With this guidance, AI output can certainly be copyrighted. For example, inputting a curated dataset or rearranging or changing results could be enough human creativity. But what is sufficient to reach this threshold remains to be seen.
Lyft and Apple Updating Terms of Service
A useful class activity would ask students to analyze how companies summarize changes to user agreements. Lyft and Apple Pay sent emails this week, but details about the changes aren’t clear.
Lyft’s email includes these major changes:
Terms of Service We're making updates related to the arbitration agreement between users and Lyft, restricted activities on the platform, insurance coverage for certain rides, and user eligibility requirements. These updates will apply to everyone who uses the Lyft Platform, including drivers, riders, and those who use bikes and third-party services.
Privacy Policy As part of our commitment to respecting your privacy – and explaining how we're complying with new state privacy laws – we're adding information to our Privacy Policy. This includes more detail about the data we collect and why, how we use it, and how we may share it. It also includes updates that reflect new initiatives, such as rider verification. Plus, we've added details about our privacy tools and options to help you better understand your rights and the choices you have related to our data practices.
Apple Pay & Wallet summarized these changes:
We have simplified our Terms and Conditions for Apple Pay and Wallet so that your review and agreement of these Terms and Conditions is effective across all of your Apple devices.
For our US customers, Apple Pay is a service provided by Apple Payments Services LLC, a subsidiary of Apple Inc.
Our Terms and Conditions now include standard assignment provisions.
Lyft’s changes seem significant. Maybe not the privacy policy changes, but all the terms of service changes sound like restrictions. If the changes mean stricter arbitration requirements, less platform functionality, reduced insurance—and who knows what about user eligibility, that could affect a user’s rights and experience.
Lyft’s entire Terms of Service (with the URL tag “preview,” so the link might change) is, according to ChatGPT, about 8,500 words, For such a long document, students might consider a company’s responsibility in communicating changes. Are the email summaries sufficient? I find myself wanting to see documents marked up to show the textual changes. Maybe they could show before-and-after tables?
Weighing in at a mere 5,000-6,000 words, Apple Pay & Wallet’s Terms and Conditions covers simpler transactions and relationships than does Lyft’s. The first two bullets in the email reflect administrative changes, and the last is legal-jargony, at least to me. Here’s the relevant last section, which comes after the ALL CAPS liability section.
8. Assignment
You may not transfer or assign any rights or obligations you have under these Apple Pay & Wallet Terms. Apple and Apple Payments Services may each transfer or assign these Apple Pay & Wallet Terms or any right or obligation under these Apple Pay & Wallet Terms at any time.
Is this new? Is this important to students? Should Apple have written more about this in the email?
I almost always breeze past these notices and wonder whether students do the same. It’s a potential issue of the company’s integrity if the email summary downplays important information for users.
How to Introduce People via Email
A Financial Times article offers advice for introducing people by email. Students can reflect on their own experience introducing others or getting introduced.
Most important: Before introducing anyone, ask their permission. Otherwise, revealing an email address and setting an expectation that the person will respond could be awkward. If someone doesn’t want to meet, they’re left with a tricky decision of whether to go through with it anyway, ignore the email and a possible follow-up from the other person, or respond and decline the invitation, which could feel hurtful. For the latter, the receiver could cite deadlines, other pressing priorities, or something perhaps more truthful, for example, “It sounds like you have a lot of interesting work in progress. I find my own interests moving away from xx but wish you the best of luck with your projects.” Maybe students could talk about how they might react to that type of email—or draft their own polite decline, as we talk about in business communication textbooks.
The article gives an example of not asking permission: when someone knows the person very well and sends a thoughtful, complimentary email. Students might agree, particularly if they are looking for work and an introduction gets them close to a potential hiring manager.
The author raises the question of how long to keep the introducer on the email chain. I suggest including the introducer on one email from each responder. “Thanks, Jamie, for the introduction! Matt, I’m glad to meet you . . .” As the introducer (which I was recently, after getting permission from both parties, of course), I like to see that the people responded. But that’s enough. I don’t need to be involved in plans for a lunch to which I’m not invited.
Comms About the Internet Archive Breach
After a major breach, the Internet Archive founder sends casual bad-news messages.
The Archive, including the Wayback Machine, is home to more than 840 billion web pages. Last month, the BBC reported the Archive as a valuable and vulnerable resource, and this month, we’re seeing why. The article also describes controversy about the service offering books and other content for free, the subject of a lawsuit the organization lost in 2023.
Although user information for more than 31 million people was compromised, the founder’s message on X focused on what most concerned the public: the integrity of the content and when the site would be back up.
In addition to the message on X, I found only three short posts on Bluesky and Mastodon—all below and at right:
Update: @internetarchive’s data has not been corrupted. Services are currently stopped to upgrade internal systems. We are working to restore services as quickly and safely as possible. Sorry for this disruption.
A note on the website just says simply this:
Temporarily Offline
Internet Archive services are temporarily offline.
Please check our official accounts, including Twitter/X, Bluesky or Mastodon for the latest information.
We apologize for the inconvenience.
These aren’t the typical data breach emails from a CEO. Kahle doesn’t offer suggestions for users to, for example, change passwords, which others advise.
He sounds like someone who lives in a high-crime area and expects to be robbed: “Sorry, but DDOS folks are back . . .” Kahle says nothing about the group, but a Newsweek article reported that a "pro-Palestinian hacktivist movement” claimed responsibility for the attack. Kahle might be more cautious about accepting that claim—or might not want to give the group publicity, whether it is responsible or not.
FEMA Website and “Rumor Response”
As southern parts of the United States manage through two recent hurricanes, students might find it useful to analyze the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) website, including its response to criticism.
Students can start by identifying the audience and communication objectives for the website. They might identify the primary audience as people in immediate need and the secondary audience as other U.S. citizens. One main goal is to help people find assistance, and another is to encourage preparation. When I attended a New York emergency preparedness training a few months ago, the speaker was clear about the purpose: to build our confidence, with the theory that we’ll fare better in a crisis if we have some tools (e.g., a to-go bag, a LifeStraw) and a positive mindset that we can help ourselves and others.
On the upside, the FEMA website is kept current. Milton gets top billing, with Helene, just days earlier, on a second screen. I question the graphic choice on this home page. Do we need to see what a hurricane looks like? Two other photos on the carousel seem like better choices: people talking, presumably being helped by FEMA agents.
The next section shows ways FEMA can help. The icons and actions are all clear. Students might compare the current site with former versions at the Internet Archive (currently down because of a hack—another post on that communication is coming). Farther down the page, we see how people affected by Helene, by state, can apply for assistance. Soon, I’m sure we’ll see links for those affected by Milton.
Politicians have criticized FEMA’s response to Helene, and the agency defends itself on a separate page titled, “Hurricane Rumor Response,” a curious title that could also be, “Hurricane Response Rumors.” Either way, “rumor” is a clever framing, clearing some political muck by downgrading the issue to office gossip or a child’s bullying.
The rumors are so plentiful that FEMA apparently has a database searchable by text or topic (two hurricanes so far). Someone spent some time on this, and a worthwhile class discussion would ask students why. Officials have talked about rumors preventing people from getting available help they need—and about morale issues within the agency (which I’m guessing is already feeling beleaguered). It’s, indeed, a strange time when the agency deployed for a crisis faces one itself.
Perhaps writing them as positive actions people can take instead of as negative rumors would more likely achieve the agency’s purpose, as in this example:
Why not surface the second part first? I would hate for someone, reading quickly, to take away that “FEMA only provides loans.” The point is to get people to apply for assistance, not to highlight the rumor.
Reflections on Copyediting
I’m reviewing suggestions from a copyeditor on my new book (Recovery at Work: Using Twelve Step Principles for Professional Success—more about that later!) and have a few observations about the editing/proofreading process:
Editing is not proofreading. We teach students the difference, and this should be clear in the Business Communication and Character text. Still, what is called copyediting, at times, seems to include only proofreading. Not that proofreading isn’t important! But I’ve had to change my expectations about the type of assistance I’ll get during the copyediting process.
Editions change. The copyeditor for my book suggested I hyphenate email and coworker, which the Chicago Manual of Style stopped suggesting with the 17th edition back in 2017. Guidance for formatting references changed since then too.
Copyeditors can be wrong. In addition to the edition confusion, the copyeditor has different ideas about punctuation. Here are three “corrections”:
Do we “walk the talk” and “practice what we preach?"
What starts small, affects people in future generations.
If this is your introduction to Twelve-Step programs, you’ll see how they have helped millions of people not only get and stay sober but live more peaceful, productive lives.
The first two errors are obvious to business communication faculty. The third could be debatable but not if we follow CMOS guidance (see examples of “graduate student housing” and “high school diploma”). Misreading as 12 step programs is unlikely. I also chose to capitalize and spell out Twelve Step to follow program convention.
I have work to do. My annoyance and impatience about the copyediting process remind me to continue working on my humility and perfectionism. The copyeditor is an imperfect human just like me. A friend and colleague suggested I recognize that errors are likely in printed books. I’m trying to accept that.
Employees Unhappy After Amazon's RTO Message
Andy Jassy’s latest message to employees is a good example for students to see a CEO’s update—a mix of good news, bad news, and of course, persuasion. Employees aren’t happy with the part that most affects them: a return-to-office (RTO) plan.
News reports highlight that most signification part—requiring staff to work five days a week in the office—but the message starts neutrally:
Hey team. I wanted to send a note on a couple changes we’re making to further strengthen our culture and teams.
Jassy provides his goals and views of the company, and then lays out two points:
Two areas that the s-team and I have been thinking about the last several months are: 1/ do we have the right org structure to drive the level of ownership and speed we desire? 2/ are we set up to invent, collaborate, and be connected enough to each other (and our culture) to deliver the absolute best for customers and the business that we can? We think we can be better on both.
The first directive comes in paragraph 8:
So, we’re asking each s-team organization to increase the ratio of individual contributors to managers by at least 15% by the end of Q1 2025.
The second comes in paragraph 10:
…we’ve decided that we’re going to return to being in the office the way we were before the onset of COVID.
He acknowledges, “We understand that some of our teammates may have set up their personal lives in such a way that returning to the office consistently five days per week will require some adjustments.” To solve this problem, he says, the implementation date will be January 2, 2025, which doesn’t seem like much time for families to reconfigure their lives.
Several surveys show employees’ negative reaction to the news. About 75% are “rethinking” their Amazon careers or looking for a new job. Speculators say attrition is a goal of returning to the office. If that’s the case, then Jassy’s message makes more sense. Presenting the change as insignificant and providing little support for employees to make the transition could be part of the plan. Employees can sign on for full-time office work—or leave.
Students might imagine a different message, one that encourages employee retention. Paradoxically, the news might be frontloaded—presented as the main point, with details following about potential paths and highlighting the benefits of RTO. Would employees have more positive reactions to the news? I’m not sure, but the messenger might seem more compassionate and sincere.
Bud Light Ad, Demographics, and Visual
An AdAge article describes a new Bud Light ad and references a movie from the 70’s, raising questions about the target demographic.
The scene is a dean’s office, with a student being accused of plagiarism. The joke is that others admit to failings just to get a cold bottle of Bud Light.
The AdAge writer describes “a scene recalling Dean Wormer admonishing the Deltas in Animal House.” Although the movie is of my generation, I have no memory of that scene and wonder whether others do. It was a cult film at the time, but still, the cohort is in their 60s now. Maybe students know the movie—or think the ad is funny regardless.
Bud Light’s target demographic is younger, according to this report:
While among Baby Boomer beer drinkers Bud Light has a brand popularity score around 30 percent, it’s almost 40 percent among Gen Z consumers. Similarly, around 40 percent of Millennials have consumed Bud Light in the past 12 months, as compared to 24 percent of Baby Boomer respondents.
According to this Statista chart, Baby Boomers consume less Bud Light than the other demographic groups. Students might redesign the chart. To be fair, the main point isn’t about consumption but is about all key performance indicators (KPIs) of the brand. Still, one obvious problem with the chart is the similarity of colors, which makes them difficult to distinguish in the legend. We’re also missing the total, which is greyed out in the legend. In addition, students might question the order of the KPIs on the x-axis, which, at first glance, appear to be in rough numerical order, but that doesn’t hold when we see the Buzz group. Maybe a radar or bubble chart would work better—or at least a horizontal bar.
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.
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.
Delta Refuses to Use "You"
Students will easily rewrite this Delta Airlines message by applying business writing principles. Using “you,” tightening, clarifying information, and reorganizing would improve the email. Delta’s reputation suffered greatly during the outage, and emails like this one to customers don’t help.
Here are a few changes students might make:
Clarify the main point. The email subject was “Important Information About Your Upcoming Flight,” but the message has no information about the upcoming flight. The focus is something like, “How to Get Flight Updates and Rebook if You Need To.”
Sharpen the first paragraph. This is a slog to read, partly because of the language but mostly because it’s giving mixed messages. Maybe change to something like, “Your flight is scheduled as planned. But outages have caused cancellations, and here’s what you need to do if your flight is cancelled.” Maybe move the bit about the app to a separate line with bold type. That’s the first thing customers should do.
Use conversational language. Change “The operation of your flight” to “Your flight.” We know it’s operating—or not.
Use “you.” The writer seems to avoid speaking directly to the audience. Change “When rebooked travel occurs” to “If you rebook your travel,” and “customers may cancel their reservation” to “you may cancel your reservation.”
Eliminate bullets. Single bullets are not logical; bullets, like subheadings, divide something into multiple parts. A different visual design might be more appealing and more easily read.
Eliminate numbering. Numbers indicate a hierarchy or sequence. Again, a different visual design might help.
Clarify fares. That last bullet refers to “end of ticket validity,” which sounds confusing. Some tightening might help here too: Do we need “applicable fare difference”? Maybe better language for #3 is something like, “If you can’t rebook [why introduce “reschedule” here? Or is that something different?] within __ [define], don’t worry. You have up to one year to use whatever part of a ticket you don’t use for this trip.”
Skip the false politeness. Thanking customers for being patient or understanding assumes that they will be, which is unlikely in this situation. Maybe a sincere apology or an acknowledgement of the inconvenience (havoc!) would be better.
UPDATE: Contrast this message with a LinkedIn post from Shane Goronkin. He focuses on teamwork, sounds natural and sincere, and demonstrates compassion in the last two paragraphs (and defines IROP earlier):
Know that many of you have been impacted by this IROP and I am truly sorry. I heard countless heartbreaking stories over the weekend 😢. Really, really terrible.
We still have more work to do, but we will get back on track soon.
OpenAI and Johansson Comms
In what The New York Times refers to as a “lengthy statement,” actress Scarlett Johansson describes OpenAI’s use of a voice that sounds like hers. This situation offers much to explore with students, for example, integrity, brand reputation, voice recognition, deepfakes/synthetic media, and of course, writing.
Apparently, OpenAI CEO Sam Altman asked Johansson whether the new ChatGPT could use her voice. She declined, but the company may have used it, anyway. Altman seemed to confirm doing so in a post that refers to the movie Her, which starred Johansson as an affectionate virtual assistant. OpenAI agreed to pull her voice, and Altman tweeted, “also for clarity: the new voice mode hasn't shipped yet (though the text mode of GPT-4o has). what you can currently use in the app is the old version. the new one is very much worth the wait!”
A few days later, OpenAI published a statement about how voices are selected and explained that the likeness to Johansson’s was just that, a likeliness, recorded by an unnamed actor. Even so, Altman’s post seems to fuel the controversy.
I’m stuck on the NYT description of Johansson’s statement as “lengthy.” It’s 312 words. Business communication students can identify the communication objectives and decide whether they agree with this characterization. If it’s too long, what could be omitted? I’m not finding much fluff in her explanation of what happened and the significance.
Maybe the comparison is to Altman’s single-word Her, which might be enough to hit his own communication objectives. One writer’s view is that this situation illustrates OpenAI as ”a company with little regard for the value of creative work led by a scheming, untrustworthy operator.” The story may have raised the profile of ChatGPT but hasn’t helped OpenAI’s reputation.
Domino's Website About Tipping
A new tipping program at Domino’s illustrates reciprocity, one of Cialdini’s Principles of Persuasion, and students can analyze the webpage and functionality.
With the title “You Tip, We Tip,” Domino’s clever program gets at the heart of frustration with tipping since the COVID-19 pandemic. In exchange for a tip of $3 or more, customers get a $3 coupon. Of course, the company benefits by getting another order and can avoid paying workers more than the ridiculously low federal minimum wage of $2.13 per hour (higher in some states and localities). A website explains the program in three sections: How It Works, Videos (which includes only one), and FAQs.
Domino’s explains how the program works in simple terms on an interactive screen. Personally, I find the repeated clicking unnecessary on the last screen, which could show all four boxes under “How It Works” at once. The “gamification” seems overplayed.
The video is funny, including an officiant presenting a tip screen in the middle of a wedding ceremony. Anyone can relate to feeling awkward when seeing that screen.
For a simple program, the website lists a lot of FAQs. Also, almost all answers are only one or two sentences, so the content could be presented more efficiently. Each question is a drop-down, but answers could be incorporated into the question, for example, the one below.
Overall, the program is easy to understand, and the website is clear. But I find it overdone for the purpose, which could contradict and complicate the simplicity of the program.
U.S. Marines Change Outdated Dress Policy with Outdated Message
In a decision that feels so 1990s, the U.S. Marine Corp is allowing women to choose whether they wear hosiery with their long skirts. The announcement may sound strange for those of us outside the military and might interest both military and civilian students.
A spokesperson admits, “Within the spirit of common sense, our Uniform Board recommended a change to the policy that required women to wear hosiery with skirts. Hosiery is now optional." The message looks like what it is: a military communication. With what appears to be a typewriter font, the message uses no pronoun and scarcely an actor, for example, “Effective immediately, the wear of hosiery with skirts is optional.” The numbering, which we also see in legal briefs, is odd, with paragraphs lined up as though they have equal weight and no relation to one another. I wonder how this message was distributed.
Although we encourage business communicators to explain the reason for changes, I find this one a bit defensive and obvious: “When hosiery is not worn, shoe liners or no-show socks will be to be worn [sic] for hygienic purposes and to avoid abrasions or blisters caused by direct contact and rubbing between the foot and shoe.” For color guidance, no explanation is given and perhaps none is needed: “Hose, when worn, should harmonize with the natural skin tone of the individual.” Maybe “blend” would be a better word choice?
The Marines are the last to cave to such lax standards. In 2022, the Air Force made hosiery optional for women and softened other rules, such as allowing scalp tattoos (for men only, which seems inconsistent to me). In 2021, the Navy changed its standards (with photos!) in 2021. Students may enjoy comparing these messages.
The Navy photos, at right, look funny to me, something out of a 1960s Sears catalog. But they use “flesh tone” for color, which seems a better choice than “harmonizing.” I find the message format—showing a series of entire “deleted” policies and then the “added” policies—inefficient and confusing. A better choice would be simply showing the revised text highlighted or in another color (not necessarily flesh tone). Students will have other ideas.