Opposition Letter to Paramount-Warner Bros. Discovery Merger
An open letter signed by movie and TV professionals illustrates persuasive communication and a few sensitive issues.
Students can identify the major arguments in the letter, which are primarily around dangers of consolidation and reduced competition. They might also identify the strongest and weakest arguments. Here are a few examples:
The anti-trust framing is a strong argument, particularly with reference to only four remaining major U.S. studios and planned legal action mentioned at the end.
Discussion of reduced opportunities is a strong argument about the negative effect on jobs and those who rely on the industry.
The “collapse of the international sales market” claim is a big statement without evidence and could be interpreted as a slippery slope fallacy.
Missing evidence is also apparent in claims about the “severe strain” on the industry, although this might be obvious to insiders.
Also notable is the long list of signatories and, particularly, those selected for top billing. In boxes instead of the text list below them are “featured signatories,” and we might wonder how they achieved this status. Do they represent paid supporters, well-known names, or something else? Do those at the bottom know they won’t be featured?
Anyone can sign the Google form and provide a role. We see a few moviegoer, consumer, voter, and citizen” roles, so maybe those “featured” are culled actors and directors?
Regardless of the popularity of the letter, will it work? If the primary audience are the dealmakers, they might have already considered and rejected these arguments. Antitrust challenges may be more likely to determine the outcome.
Communication Strategies to Oppose U.S. Forest Service Changes
In addition to companies’ own messaging that students may compare, a website, SaveUSFS, illustrates a communication campaign to mobilize opposition against changes to the US Forest Service.
SaveUSFS: This website is a great example of a campaign with clear explanations, message examples, and calls to action. Students can identify the communication objective, which is primarily to get brands to speak out and pressure federal action. The site illustrates how to mobilize action by offering specific copy-and-paste language and ways to connect with brands. The clear organization and calls to action are most obvious in the site menu:
The Situation | The Stakes | The Brands | What To Say | Take Action
Patagonia: Not one to shy away from controversy, Patagonia published a statement with strong language:
We commented about this last Wednesday after the news broke, but we want to be clear on our stance about the recent news of the United States Forest Service, because protecting public lands is core to our purpose: Moving the USFS to Utah will gut the agency. By shutting down its research stations, culling its staff, and moving the headquarters to Salt Lake City, it will be surprising if USFS can effectively manage anything at all.
The only beneficiaries of the move and other rollbacks to public land policy from this past year are billionaires and extractive industries.
Patagonia will continue working with our Tribal and nonprofit partners to protect public lands and advocate for more funding for USFS and the Bureau of Land Management.
Conservation Alliance: Consisting of 190 member companies, this group focuses on “protect[ing] lands and waters for future generations” and “business resilience.” Notably, only 77 companies are “signatories” to the group’s statement (below). We are left wondering why others didn’t sign on, and students might guess why, for example, wanting to frame their own messages, time limitations, or concerns about consumer or political backlash, particularly for smaller companies or those dependent on government funding.
As businesses that rely on well-managed, accessible public lands, we expect the U.S. Forest Service to adhere to its legally mandated mission: ‘to achieve quality land management under the sustainable multiple-use management concept to meet the diverse needs of people’. The recent announcement to relocate agency headquarters to Salt Lake City, Utah and close regional offices and research facilities raises concerns about the agency’s ability to properly manage its 193 million acres and maintain decades of research and scientific knowledge needed to support them. Recreation on Forest Service lands currently drives $23.3B in economic output annually but local communities, visitors, businesses, and the outdoor economy stand to suffer if the agency doesn’t receive the funding, resources, and staffing that it needs through this transition. We are committed to working alongside the Department of Agriculture and congressional leaders to provide clarity on the priorities of our community, advocate for robust public engagement, and safeguard the future of Forest Service lands.
The Alliance statement is much softer than others and likely illustrates what happens when we try to get multiple perspectives onto the same page: We get a watered-down result.
Additional Brands: SaveUSFS compiled a list of additional brand messages, mostly on Facebook, for students to compare.
Instagram and the “PG-13” Label
Instagram is expanding its Teen Accounts and dropped the “PG-13” language. Students can analyze the communications about these accounts—and explore skepticism about whether these new safety tools work.
After losing two lawsuits about child safety, Meta’s Instagram focuses on Teen Accounts to reassure parents and appease European lawmakers. But the PG-13 label was contested by the Motion Picture Association as a trademark violation and potential cause of confusion.
Meta’s attempts to restrict teen content literally cannot be “guided by” or “aligned with” the MPA’s PG-13 movie rating because Meta does not follow this curated process. Instead, Meta’s content restrictions appear to rely heavily on artificial intelligence or other automated technology measures.
At issue is the degradation of the rating, which is determined by parents who watch the movies. In updated language, Meta said it was “closer to PG-13 movie standards—which parents already know.” In this latest communication, titled, “Instagram Expands Teen Accounts Inspired by 13+ Content Ratings,” Meta refrains from “PG” language entirely, instead saying the “revamped Teen Accounts” are “inspired by 13+ movie ratings criteria and parent feedback.”
Students may have a lot of opinions about the announcement and Teen Accounts. They might explore criticism about age verification and content screening to assess whether parents can trust this classification. They might also assess Instagram’s “Tips for Parents” and “Manage Your Teen Account Settings” for kids.
McDonald’s CEO Leans Into Viral Video
McDonald’s CEO Chris Kempczinski explains his mini-bite viral video and other challenges facing the company.
Kempczinski boldly agreed to a Wall Street Journal video interview, and he handles the discussion well, at times laughing about the viral video. Directly addressing why he took what looked like a tiny bite of the new Big Arch burger, he explained:
I blame it all on my mom because she said, don’t talk with your mouth full, and I think probably, in that case, I should have said, you know what, to hell with it, I’m gonna talk with my mouth full.
His explanation makes sense, and he does speak with his mouth full during the WSJ video after taking a human-sized bite of a French fry.
However, for the original video, he obviously didn’t think through the possibilities of editing (which, as I pointed out, removed a crumb from his lip). A too-full mouth of food could have been omitted.
Kempczinski takes a personal approach now, mentioning that he first learned about the viral video from his kids. As in his other videos, he sounds authentic—like his genuine self—and speaks about the competitive market and rising costs as we would expect of a CEO.
New Research About Expressing Emotion and Implications for Students
Business communication faculty have long taught students that emotional appeals—for example, eliciting anger—are persuasive, and that still holds. But new research published in a monograph, “Emotions on Our Screens,” shows that expressing our own emotions online may not change others’ minds. We see parallels with delivering bad news.
Six studies assessed posts about climate change and found that, when people expressed emotion, for example with a sad-face emoji, users viewed the post as “less appropriate and inauthentic.” Talbot Andrews, professor of government at Cornell University, explains, “I think you’re crying crocodile tears to make me feel bad about this, and I see through that ploy.”
I’m reminded of layoff meetings during which managers would cry. These meetings require a delicate balance: neither indifference nor emotional spillage that some employees perceive as performative and attention-seeking—similar to the climate research examples.
From the research about online displays, Andrews clarifies:
Emotional expression can serve an important role, helping people find a community that cares about their issue. Even if it doesn’t achieve any influential goal—persuading others or building your social media clout—expressing emotions often makes people feel better. The takeaway is not that people should keep their feelings to themselves, but that such expression won’t always be taken at face value.
As we might expect, emotions in text messages were found to be more authentic than those on social media. Public posts seemed more like “virtue signaling” or clickbait.
Students might evaluate their own texts and social media posts for displays of emotion. What might they change if their goal is to persuade?
Brands Having Fun
The stolen truck carrying 413,793 packages of KitKat bars launched memes and jokes from Nestlé and other brands. The situation is another example of companies embracing mishaps.
KitKat took full advantage of the incident:
We’ve always encouraged people to have a break with KitKat—but it seems thieves have taken the message too literally and made a break with more than 12 metric tons of our chocolate.
Then other brands got into the game. Pizza Hut claims a new KitKat pizza, DoorDash suggested people add 500-600 KitKats to their order, and RyanAir posted a plane with a mouth full of KitKats. This Del Taco one is cute.
We saw similar brand responses during the McDonald’s mini-bite incident. McDonald’s humbly poked fun of itself, and other brands pounced. The art is responding on-brand and quickly. Some of the KitKat responses are repetitive and feel like copycats. Student could analyze them to see which are most and least effective. RyanAir’s stands out for its weird silliness—definitely on brand.
I expected to see something on the KitKat website. But under “latest news” are progressive muscle relaxation and box breathing videos, perhaps overdoing the “have a break, have a KitKat” slogan. Student will have opinions on this too.
Business Communication Lessons from Meta/Google Trial
Business communication students can learn from the KGM v. Meta and Google case for their own presentations and messages. Three examples are emotional appeal/storytelling, concrete visualization, and document discovery.
Considered a landmark case that opens paths for other suits, KGM v. Meta and Google (Instagram and YouTube) found companies negligent, citing defective product design causing addiction. The plaintiff’s attorney, Mark Lanier, has a reputation of theatrics in the courtroom, which we see in these first two examples. Students need to balance ethics/credibility and effectiveness for their own presentations.
Emotional Appeal/Storytelling
At the heart of this case is how kids are affected by social media, and storytelling was key. Families brought photos and a large banner with names and ages of children who died, blaming social media companies. Plaintiff attorneys also showed a large poster with hundreds of selfies KGM posted of her when she was a child.
These strategies humanized the plaintiff and contrasted Mark Zuckerberg’s stoicism. As NPR reported:
At one point, the family's lawyer brought out an internal document about how Meta's staff has pushed Zuckerberg to be more empathic and relatable and more human in public appearances and, you know, not to be fake and corporate and cheesy—these are their words—you know, during events like court appearance. And Zuckerberg responded by, you know, showing some human vulnerability. He said, quote, "I think I'm actually well known to be very bad at this."
Concrete Visualization
In legal terms, “demonstrative evidence” or a “demonstrative exhibit” “explains or illustrates” testimony; it’s not direct evidence. In persuasion communication, we might call this type of evidence examples rather than, for example, data. We also encourage students to make large numbers concrete.
Lanier illustrated these strategies:
As the punitive-damages phase of the trial got under way in court on Wednesday, the plaintiff’s attorney, Lanier, revealed a jar of M&Ms—415 of them. Each one represented $1 billion of the $415 billion in total stockholders’ equity of Alphabet Inc., he said. As he removed M&Ms one by one, Lanier noted how the jar barely registered a change, symbolizing how inconsequential even a ruling of $1 billion in damages would be to a company of Alphabet’s value.
This type of illustration gets attention and does clarify points but might seem cheesy in business presentations.
Discovery
Once again, this is a good opportunity to talk with students about the legal discovery process, which makes any internal emails, texts, reports, Teams content, etc. public. Perhaps the plaintiff’s strongest evidence was Meta’s own documentation that demonstrated how leaders exploited—actually, built—platform features to increase addiction.
Instead of a lesson warning students about what they put in writing, we might teach them to act with integrity. If social media executives hadn’t build systems that are now proven to be addictive, they wouldn’t have had to censor what they put in writing.
Both Meta and Google are appealing the case. They will not accept responsibility. Together, the companies will pay $6 million in compensatory and punitive damages. That’s .6% of one M&M. How could students visualize that?
Viral Staples Videos
Staples has an employee turned social media star with fun viral videos. The “Staples Baddie” Kaeden Rowland somehow makes office products look interesting.
In this video with 5.7 million views, she explains how to make a signature stamp.
Rowland says she’s autistic and wanted to show her work as a print specialist:
I was like, How can I make people really feel, not just see, the passion I have for these stationery office products?
Staples leadership supports her authentic videos, which we might expect given her following. User comments include, “You are single-handedly saving staples,” and “omg are you the staples baddie i saw someone do a presentation in their class about????” The Staples social account engages on some videos, as you see here.
An engaging class project can ask students to develop a video series relevant to a brand that could go viral. What might make the videos take off? How would they ensure that the series aligns with brand values? What are the risks and challenges?
McDonald’s Video Recovery
A McDonald’s video caused embarrassment and left the company vulnerable to competitors. But the company’s response follows advice about embracing negative reviews.
The video of McDonald’s CEO admiring and tasting the new Big Arch wasn’t a bad idea. Chris Kempczinski sounds authentic and has built almost 100,000 followers on Instagram. But viewers criticized the video, primarily because Kempczinski twice called the burger a “product” and took a small bite while asserting, “That’s a big bite for a Big Arch.”
Interestingly, we see that the video was edited. After the fated bite, Kempczinski has some food on his lower lip, which vanishes in the next shot. Did the editors not notice that the bite looks small and doesn’t match his speech? Or is the bite not really that small and is only exaggerated by the social media response?
Going viral slowly, the video got more attention when Burger King’s and Wendy’s leaders made videos of their own. This might be filed under “no press is bad press.” Although that no longer holds in all cases, a spokesperson said, “We’re glad the Big Arch has everyone’s attention, including competitors’. Early sales are beating expectations.” Students can analyze other companies’ video responses and comments on social media, including those here.
Smartly, McDonald’s stayed engaged in the conversation, posting this image and the comment, “can’t believe this got approved.” The strategy follows guidance about “reappropriating the insult” (embracing a negative comment and turning it into humor) and “stealing thunder” (revealing negative information about the brand before others do)—related ideas about controlling the narrative.
Students can discuss whether Kempczinski should have posted something himself. That would have been riskier.
World Central Kitchen Video on Ukraine for Fundraising
In a World Central Kitchen (WCK) video about Ukraine, on the fourth anniversary of Russia’s invasion, students will see illustrations of emotional appeal, compassion, and themes for fundraising.
Here are a few points about the video for our students:
Starts with lessons learned. This approach is consistent with research showing better responses to LinkedIn profiles that balance the writer’s journey with outcomes. Describing learnings demonstrates humility and conveys what the study authors call “warmth,” a word used later in the WCK video. To contribute to a nonprofit organization, funders may want to be part of the journey—part of the story.
Emphasizes “long-term humanitarian aid.” From those lessons, the staff say they were able to adapt from emergency response to a longer-term solutions. They stress their commitment and the ongoing work involved, which requires funding.
Representatives speak Ukrainian. Of course, the spoken language is a practical decision so local staff can tell their own story, but it also conveys being “on the ground,” or as they say in the video, on “the frontline” and with “boots on the ground.”
Includes data. 40 kitchens opened illustrates reach, and 4,000+ vegetables seems like a lot, although that one is tough to comprehend without imagery or comparisons, as we teach for data communication.
Repeats the theme. A theme—”side by side”—shows how WCK staff work alongside those in need to provide not just food but emotional support. Images throughout emphasize this point—few talking heads, rather, people working together.
Showcases José Andrés. About halfway into the video, we hear from the famed chef, restaurateur, and WCK founder José Andrés: “We believe this is the future of humanitarian relief. This is the future of food relief. In the process of helping some people, don’t throw money at the problem; try to invest in the solutions.”
Stresses cultivation. Then we see people growing seeds, a greenhouse project—solutions for long-term self-sufficiency in addition to the hot meals WCK provides.
Balances imagery. We see several short videos of destruction in Ukraine, particularly bombed buildings, but we don’t see other realities of war. The prevailing message is of hope, and the focus is on people and food.
All this to say, WCK needs a lot of funding to achieve its mission. The work of being “on the ground,” working alongside people, and providing hot meals is expensive.
Students might analyze how the website images and text support these messages.
The AI Memo That Caused the Market Downturn
Students can analyze Citrini’s memo about AI to determine why it’s causing fresh concerns about the economy. Why was the memo so influential on the market, and why did it go viral? What are the lessons for students’ own writing?
A Wall Street Journal article summarizes the “doomsday” predictions: “AI coders create software price wars,” “payment companies and other intermediaries get hit,” “agents drive down prices everywhere,” and “a doom cycle in white-collar labor.” Here are a few points students might consider from the memo:
Author credibility: The WSJ article refers to Citrini Research’s “cult following” with its focus on AI and weight-loss drugs. Appropriately, the writers start with a caveat, which improves credibility:
What follows is a scenario, not a prediction. This isn’t bear porn or AI doomer fan-fiction. The sole intent of this piece is modeling a scenario that’s been relatively underexplored.
Futuristic approach: Dated June 2028, the memo reads like science fiction and draws readers in. We’re offered what feels like a peek into another world, and students see lessons in genre and creativity in business writing.
“Memo”: Without a defined audience and with several report features, this is like no memo we taught in the early 2000s. Memo has evolved to mean a written piece with gravitas—something weighty and important.
Conversational tone: Maybe more accurately, the style feels insider, illustrated with the above quote and continuing throughout.
Simple writing style. Students can count the number of short sentences that give the piece punch, particularly at the beginning, for example, “Traders have grown numb,” “The euphoria was palpable,” and “The headline numbers were still great.” These also serve as topic sentences for short paragraphs.
Clear organization: As always, descriptive headings improves comprehension and skimmability—although those interested would likely read it all.
Data: The message includes quite a bit of data for a futuristic piece; that is, the numbers are compelling but invented.
Inflammatory language: Without seeing into the future, we don’t know whether the language is appropriate for what’s to come, but students can identify words and phrases that could be inflated—or at least are provocative and emotional (for example, catastrophic).
Fear: Related to the point above, the memo identifies what some AI skeptics have raised about AI’s growing coding and agentic capabilities and may speak to broader brewing fears.
Compelling graphics: Graphics like this one show a clear before-and-after process. This one illustrates a simplified payment process without those pesky intermediaries like banks. (See Jamie Dimon’s response about JPMorgan’s strong position.)
Storytelling: Interlacing quotes from fake news articles lends false credibility and brings life to the memo, as though news is unfolding as we read. In addition, the writers include personal stories, for example, “a friend of ours was a senior product manager at Salesforce…”
Hopeful: Despite the doomsday projections, the memo ends on a positive note: “The canary is still alive.” The writers give readers a vision of the future so we might be “proactive,” and “The economy can find a new equilibrium.” This could be false hope; we don’t know yet.
Walmart Tries to Engage About Olympian Wolfdog
Watching a wolfdog run with the Olympic skiers is great fun, and Walmart got into the action by commenting on Instagram, but the replies were not favorable.
The Walmart account manager tried to engage, which is what we teach students in marketing communications and as examples of positive messages. The comment—”I love an underdog story”—is funny enough, but the responses point to larger issues, particularly about wages.
Students might discuss the risk Walmart took and whether it was worth it. The situation has nothing to do with Walmart, which makes it both low stakes and potentially irrelevant. The company inserted itself into a cultural moment—a time for people to rally around.
But users might perceive all company comments, particularly those unrelated to the core business, as marketing opportunities. Also, the post starts with “I,” an attempt to personalize (anthropomorphize?) the brand. Sure, the poster is a human (we think), but the company name and logo overshadow the comment. The joke doesn’t feel authentic because it’s not. Students also might consider the challenge of creating “one, authentic brand voice” for a company of Walmart’s heft.
On another note, sadly, some commenters wondered whether the video was AI. It’s hard to know these days.
Tom Pritzker Resigns After Epstein Discovery
The list of executives resigning or losing positions after more Jeffrey Epstein files become public is growing. Students can read emails related to the latest: Tom Pritzer, Hyatt’s executive chairman.
Pritzer’s resignation letter to the board includes the following:
My job and responsibility is to provide good stewardship. That is important to me. Good stewardship includes ensuring a proper transition at Hyatt. Following discussions with my fellow Board members, I have decided, after serving as Executive Chairman since 2004, and with the company in a strong position, that now is the right time for me to retire from Hyatt.
Good stewardship also means protecting Hyatt, particularly in the context of my association with Jeffrey Epstein and Ghislaine Maxwell which I deeply regret.
I exercised terrible judgment in maintaining contact with them, and there is no excuse for failing to distance myself sooner.
I condemn the actions and the harm caused by Epstein and Maxwell, and I feel deep sorrow for the pain they inflicted on their victims.
The first line is performative and was omitted from most news reports. As an issue of integrity, good stewardship requires good behavior while serving in a role, not just when resigning.
Students might read the first and second lines as a push from the board rather than a true resignation. Either way, it explains what students often wonder about executive resignations for personal improprieties: they affect the company. At the same time, Pritzker’s were related to Hyatt business, with emails showing him facilitating travel and arranging an interview for “the girl from Romania.”
The second bullet illustrates classic crisis communication strategies of distancing and downplaying, as though “contact” were his only crime. We see a similar theme in all statements related to Epstein—little true accountability.
The third bullet reflects a false show of sympathy few would believe after reading emails like these, which were sent ten years after Epstein plead guilty for sex crimes in Florida and as accusations piled up throughout the next decade.
Students might discuss the best approach for these leaders. Another strategy is Lee Wexler’s. The billionaire and former CEO of Victoria's Secret said he “was duped by a world-class con man,” a tough claim to support.
Maybe this is one of those rare times when it’s better to say nothing at all.
The New York Times is tracking resignations and other fallout from the Epstein files.
Persuasion Principles for Stanford’s New Dating App
More than 5,200 of Stanford’s 7,500 undergrads signed up for Date Drop, a new dating app. Students might enjoy analyzing how the app operation and marketing illustrate Robert Cialdini’s Seven Principles of Persuasion.
Here are a few examples of each.
Reciprocity: People Repay in Kind
In effect, the app offers the gift of qualified matches to people who sign up and complete a detailed questionnaire.
Scarcity: People Want More of What They Can Have Less Of
”Dropping” matches on Tuesdays at 9pm generates excitement for that one time and encourages people to gather and share their matches then. Also, taking a page from Mark Zuckerberg’s original Facebook, the app was limited to Stanford students and is now offered to other schools, but only students within each school see matches, creating an exclusive service.
Authority: People Defer to Experts
The website encourages, “Take our psychology-backed compatibility quiz,” and boasts their success: “We've made 35,000 matches, and they turn into real dates 15× more often than Tinder's.” (Of course, part of that success likely is proximity.) In the FAQ, the founders explain how the matching algorithm works. (Founders of The Marriage Project, a 2017 Stanford startup that claims dozens of marriages accused Date Drop of co-opting some of their questions and marketing approaches.)
Consistency: People Align with Their Clear Commitments
After taking the time and trouble to answer 66 questions, students almost certainly opt in to see their matches.
Liking: People Like Those Who Like Them
This one isn’t as apparent as some others. Compliments and commonalities are wanting in the marketing, which we might expect in the main and about sections of the website. This could say more about the founder, a graduate student, than anything else.
Social Proof: People Follow the Lead of Similar Others
I’m not sure how the app got started—and students may be interested to find out—but it picked up speed quickly. At this point, with such a high percentage of students on the app, it’s hard to not be a part.
Students can easily identify other persuasion principles used and reasons students might be drawn to the app. For example, Date Drop is a great name, with it’s monosyllabic words, alliteration, and allusion to other “drops,” such as media launches. Like Facebook, it’s a fast success.
Starbucks Communicates New Rewards
Starbucks changed its rewards program, reinstating tiers lost in 2019 and adding yet a higher status. The program encourages customer engagement, a good topic for business communication students in addition to analyzing the company’s language and graphic choices.
As always, customers earn “Stars” for buying stuff—more stars for more expensive stuff. But the company is moving away from everyone earns equally back to levels: Green and Gold, as in the past, and the new one, Reserve.
The word reserve deserves attention. I’m on the finance committee of a nonprofit organization, and we pushed back on our financial advisor for using “reserve” to describe our short-term investment fund. To some of us, the word would more appropriately describe our long-term fund: something stored away, not used unless necessary.
The Starbucks level follows this thinking. Reserve implies high social status, which is appropriate for Starbucks’ increased divisions. Wildlife and nature reserves are protected, exclusive areas. Only Reserve members receive a personalized card to flaunt while waiting for a latte. Of course, what isn’t stated is that those in the lowly Green and Gold categories receive rewards at lower rates, therefore devaluing rewards for most customers.
The three tiers are clearly explained in this graphic. Black indicating the highest level aligns with marketing we see in other industries, for example, “Black Label” Johnnie Walker and the American Express Centurion “Black Card.”
The global chief brand officer explained the focus on engagement:
We’re redefining the industry with customer-focused benefits that set a new standard and ignite fandom. Starbucks Rewards has always been about creating connection, and we’re evolving the program based on what our members told us matters most, offering faster, more meaningful benefits that make them feel appreciated. This evolution is a key milestone in our Back to Starbucks strategy and will reinvigorate what it means to be a Starbucks Rewards member.
Critics say, as the company encourages use of the app, customer data is collected with every click.
Trump “Didn’t Make a Mistake”
I can’t let this go without comment. President Trump refuses to apologize or even acknowledge an egregiously racist post on his Truth Social account.
Tim Scott, the only Black Republican in the U.S. Senate, put it well: “it’s the most racist thing I’ve seen out of this White House.” The video of ape bodies with the faces of President Obama and Michelle Obama to the song, “The Lion Sleeps Tonight,” is despicable and outrageous.
At first, the White House tried to downplay the post, a classic crisis communication strategy. Press Secretary Karoline Leavitt said, “Please stop the fake outrage and report on something today that actually matters to the American public,” as though Americans don’t care about racism. Trump said, “I guess during the end of it, there was some kind of picture people don't like. I wouldn't like it either, but I didn't see it. I just, I looked at the first part, and it was really about voter fraud."
But downplaying doesn’t work when the outrage is real and justified. Trump, or someone on his staff, did take the video down. But he did not do what we expect of leaders with strong character: take responsibility and apologize. Instead, he said, “I didn’t make a mistake,” because he will never admit it.
Christian Ads Change Course
Students can analyze how the Christian group He Gets Us has changed its ad campaigns. Super Bowl ads since 2023 reflect the social-political climate of the time, and this new one addresses criticism of previous years’ ads. The group describes its purpose as, “a campaign that invites all people to consider Jesus and why he matters.”
Critics called the ads hollow and question the expense, which they say is counter to Jesus’s teachings. Liberals call out hypocrisy of including LGBT+ people while funding anti-LGBT+ programs. Conservatives call recent ads “woke.”
In response, we see a move from interpersonal strife to personal struggles. Today, the website is organized around a “Journey” we select to dig deeper: I want more, I have questions, I can’t do it all, and I want to be me. With all starting with “I,” the focus is clearly on ourselves.
In addition to the website, the 2026 Super Bowl ad, “Is There More to Life Than More?,” seems squarely aligned with Jesus’s teachings about material restraint and fulfilment. It’s the first of the series that includes dialog throughout—appropriate for the focus on overconsumption. The video is noisy and chaotic until the end when we see a young woman hiking and the text, “There’s more to life than more,” and “What if Jesus shows us how to find it?”
The ad’s creative officer explained the current campaign: “‘Hey, he gets you where you’re at specifically, and what you’re going through in your life.” A summary of previous ads is below.
2023: “Love Your Enemies.” A black-and-white series of stills shows people in conflict to the soundtrack, “Human,” by Rag'n'Bone Man. The only text is at the end, “Jesus loved the people we hate,” and then the tagline, “He gets us. All of us.”
2024: “Foot Washing.” Again a series of stills, this time in color, shows people we don’t expect to see together, no less washing each other’s feet. The soundtrack is INXS’s “Never Tear Us Apart,” and the end text is “Jesus didn’t teach hate,” and “He washed feet.”
2025: “What Is Greatness?” These stills show people in despair, comforting each other, and celebrating. To Johnny Cash’s “Personal Jesus,” the ad ends with the text, “Jesus showed us what greatness really is.” This one challenges us to consider what greatness means—less about individual achievement and more about humility and service.
Hilton’s Crisis Communications
Hilton Hotels is facing reputational damage related to U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) actions in Minneapolis.
The controversy started when the Hampton Inn in Lakeville, MN, refused Department of Homeland Security reservations, telling agents, "We are not allowing any ICE or immigrant agents to stay at our property.” Students might identify this action as an example of character, particularly courage—taking action despite risks. But Hilton, the parent company, did not appreciate the move, posting this statement on X.
Students may analyze this message as classic crisis communication strategies, particularly distancing the parent company from the actor. They also might point to the jargon about “meeting our standards and values,” and maybe, “a welcoming place for all.” Everpeak Hospitality, the Hampton management company, supported Hilton’s view with a statement of its own: “We do not discriminate against any individuals or agencies and apologize to those impacted.” That’s the policy issue both companies rely on, an example of criteria reasoning: we have a standard in place.
Hilton did follow through on the threat and removed the hotel from its portfolio. We see the former URL, but the empty page is clear.
Despite Hilton’s attempts to distance the brand, the company is implicated along with other Hampton hotels. Some criticize Hilton for not engaging in the “courageous conversations” promised after the killing of George Floyd. Students might read about that initiative and discuss whether current actions are inconsistent (another issue of integrity).
This week, after seeing ICE agents at the NYC Hilton Garden Inn, protestors crowded the lobby, resulting in dozens of arrests.
Although Hilton is most actively in the news, an organizing effort might affect other brands. “No sleep for ICE” may extend protests to other hotels, which the American Hotel & Lodging Association anticipates with this statement:
The hotel industry is closely monitoring the situation in Minneapolis and remains hopeful that tensions will de-escalate. As places of public accommodation, hotels play unique role in their communities and are focused on the safety and well-being of their employees, guests, and the broader public. Hoteliers are committed to navigating this sensitive and evolving situation with care, professionalism, and respect for the communities in which they operate.
The association tries to balance conflicting values and priorities. Yes, hotels are public spaces, yet they care about the “safety and well-being” of the “broader public.” This moment seems to demand both and yet both may be difficult to achieve. Students might discuss how a hotel owner—of an independent brand and one part of a group—can navigate these times. It isn’t easy.
Ye’s Apology
Once again, let’s talk with students about a sincere apology. Ye’s doesn’t cut it.
Students might remember that rapper Ye (Kanye West) sold clothing with swastikas, released the song "Heil Hitler,” and went on a few antisemitic rants, causing Adidas and Gap to cancel their partnerships. Students also might remember his apology back in 2023 before he released a new album (after which he wrote on X, about “my new sound called antisemitic”).
This week, he took out a full-page Wall Street Journal ad to apologize—again, before releasing a new album. Criteria for sincere apologies are explained in chapter 7 of Business Communication and Character. In addition to the promotional timing, students might point out how long his antisemitic actions lasted, despite his crisis communication attempts to contain them.
Ye blames a brain injury and mania for his actions. But of course, not all people who have bipolar disorder write Nazi songs and sell Nazi t-shirts. This is an example of his not taking responsibility—not apologizing at all—and possibly causing harm by stigmatizing others.
By far, the most questionable line is, “I love Jewish people.” He doesn’t say it, but we know what follows: “Some of my best friends are Jewish.”
A spokesperson for the Anti-Defamation League put it well:
[The apology] doesn’t automatically undo his long history of antisemitism and all of the feelings of hurt and betrayal it caused. The truest apology would be for him to not engage in antisemitic behavior in the future.
Yes, changed behavior is one criterion of a sincere apology. We’ll see.
New Dietary Guidelines Website
The new U.S. dietary guidelines are represented visually on a website, realfood.gov. Students can analyze the content and graphics for the primary audience of Americans.
Here are a few points students might identify:
Clear, simple language appropriate for the audience. “Real Food” is a consistent message, and the summary works well upfront:
Better health begins on your plate—not in your medicine cabinet.
The new Dietary Guidelines for Americans defines real food as whole, nutrient-dense, and naturally occurring, placing them back at the center of our diets.
Colorful, but navigation doesn’t work well. Lots of graphics engage the user, but some of the graphics don’t work quite right, at least on my screen. Numbers in red boxes increases with each click without new corresponding text. The static text, “America is sick. The data is clear,” shows for several increasing percentages, so the data isn’t clear. When I tried the mouse instead of keystrokes, I got a blank red screen.
Consistent messages. Language reinforces the connection between diet and health throughout:
90% of U.S. healthcare spending goes to treating chronic disease—much of which is linked to diet and lifestyle.
Debatable evidence. WIthout sources, the user can’t research claims further. Above is a good example we might want to explore, particularly what “much” means in this context. Also, the “links” are quite complex and vary by person.
Misleading history. The site includes a food pyramid from 1992, shown here, which has been updated. Also, the associated text doesn’t match the situation then or now:
For decades we've been misled by guidance that prioritized highly processed food, and are now facing rates of unprecedented chronic disease.
Nowhere do the 1992 guidelines or any since, including the simplest and most recent, MyPlate, recommend processed foods.
Simplistic FAQs. Expanded boxes at the bottom of the site include silly questions and answers, for example:
What about hydration?
Hydration matters. Choose water or unsweetened beverages to accompany meals and snacks.
Few disagree with the push for real food and fewer preservatives. But critics question the emphasis on animal protein—the environmental impacts and the dangers of over-consuming saturated fat and sodium. In addition, the “inverted pyramid,” with its clipart food images, doesn’t offer guidance for limiting quantity or balancing of food choices, which MyPlate tried to address. Finally, the high cost of food makes the recommendations for some families difficult or impossible to follow.