My Beloved Em Dash—In the News
My favorite punctuation mark—meant to highlight important bits—has become the important bit itself. Let’s look at the AI issue.
Most business communication faculty probably know by now that the em dash has been viewed as a marker for cheating with ChatGPT and other Gen AI. Turns out, the dash is a weak indicator, if one at all. Let’s remind students that AI mirrors existing writing, including writing that uses and overuses the em dash.
An Insider Higher Ed contributor warns about overuse—in an article entirely em-dash free, which I find both laudable and disappointing:
[A]s writers, we should be connecting thoughts smoothly and taking care to use just the right punctuation for a specific purpose while resisting the allure of an em dash that might save us the expert work of choosing the precisely placed period, comma, parenthesis, semicolon or colon.
I see her point, but sometimes the em dash is the perfect mark, isn’t it? In my example before the indented quote, I see awkward alternatives:
An Insider Higher Ed contributor warns about overuse in an article entirely em-dash free, which I find both laudable and disappointing: [modifier problem: the overuse isn’t in the article, obviously]
An Insider Higher Ed contributor warns about overuse. In an article entirely em-dash free, which I find both laudable and disappointing, she writes the following: [choppy and needlessly long]
In an article entirely em-dash free, which I find both laudable and disappointing, an Insider Higher Ed contributor warns about overuse: [complicated and too long before we get to the main subject and verb]
Most important, none of these options use my favorite punctuation mark.
Although punctuation isn’t the most exciting business communication course topic, this might be time to discuss the differences among the hyphen, en dash, and em dash. (For geeks like me, you can read this history of the em dash.)
Whatever students decide for their own writing, I hope they don’t cast off the em dash for fear of a plagiarism accusation. We need all tools available for clear, fluid writing.
Spotify Leadership Announcement: What’s Not Said
Spotify announced CEO changes without giving reasons. Students can see how the company spins the news.
Founder and CEO Daniel Ek will transition to the Board Chair position, and the two current co-presidents will become co-CEOs. The change comes at a critical time for music streaming services and, particularly, for Spotify. Technology Magazines cites potential reasons for the leadership change not mentioned in the company’s press release.
As we expect from these announcements, Spotify’s statement spins the message:
Highlights that the co-presidents have worked successfully, addressing the oddity of a tech company having co-CEOs.
Mentions how Ek’s “role will more closely reflect a European Chairman setup,” countering reactions to his being placed as a “ceremonial chairman,” common in American governance structures.
Mentions succession plans in the works for “several years,” denying current controversies as the reason.
The statement doesn’t mention that several artists have boycotted Spotify, pulling their music because of low royalty payments, licensing failures, and AI-generated songs. In addition, Ek has been criticized for his investment in a German military company. All this weakens its position against Apple Music.
Of course, Spotify doesn’t mention any of that. But we might expect the statement to say more about plans going forward. The statement ends on this new-CEO quote:
While we bring different experiences and perspectives to the CEO role, we both have a strong bias to action and can’t wait to get started knowing that we will have Daniel’s full partnership and ongoing support.
Overall, the message feels defensive, staving off additional criticism rather than facing the future from a position of strength.
Lessons from Amazon Alleged Deception for Prime Sign-Ups
Amazon’s $2.5 billion “historic” settlement with the U.S. Federal Trade Commission (FTC) offers lessons for ethical webpage design. The lawsuit accused Amazon of misleading customers to subscribe for a Prime account.
Following are examples of the FTC’s evidence—how students might avoid designing webpages that intentionally or inadvertently dupe users:
“Dark patterns”—design choices to intentionally deceive. One example is the prominent, yellow subscription button compared to the faint “No thanks.” Another example is the visual option for shipping. Students can compare how differently the shipping options are presented on Amazon today.
“Iliad flow”—a long, confusing process, for example, how to cancel a subscription. The FTC cited the need for customers to “navigate a four-page, six-click, fifteen-option process" to cancel but only one or two clicks to enroll.
Deceiving text—for example, this button for “30 days of Prime for . . . FREE.” When users selected this option, they were immediately enrolled but not told that the subscription would auto-renew monthly and for how much.
The FTC report also cites evidence from Amazon’s internal documents. Messages refer to “accidental” signups, acknowledge that “subscription driving is a bit of a shady world,” and call unwanted subscriptions “an unspoken cancer.” This is a reminder for students to watch what they put in writing, even in informal messages.
As we know, when a company settles a suit, it doesn’t admit guilt. Amazon’s short statement says little, but they did agree to the agreement terms, which include clearer buttons, explicit disclosures, and easier ways to cancel a subscription.
Tylenol, Crisis Communication Exemplar, Now in Crisis
Four for decades, Johnson & Johnson’s handling of Tylenol tampering has been a case study for teaching crisis communication. Now, Tylenol has a new crisis: addressing claims that taking the product during pregnancy causes autism.
In 1982, when poisoned Tylenol tablets caused deaths, J&J immediately told customers not to take any Tylenol product and removed all products from shelves nationwide. The company then pioneered tamper-proof packaging. A reviewer for my book Building Leadership Character suggested I mention the case. Believing it had run its course, I added it begrudgingly, but now I see the renewed significance. (Also see the 2025 Netflix show, Cold Case: The Tylenol Murders.)
The earlier situation was a “victim crisis,” in which the company had no control (Tachkova and Coombs, 2022). Students might conclude the same about the current accusation that Tylenol, now under the parent company, Kenvue, causes autism. Other types of crises are accidental and preventable. Although unlikely accidental, like a fire, students could believe the crisis is preventable—if they believe the autism link. That conclusion might be beyond the scope of a business communication class (although a useful discussion would distinguish causation and correlation). Either way, we can look at the company’s messaging as a victim crisis, given the company’s view that the claim is false.
With this premise—that the claim is false—the company’s response focuses on correcting misinformation. An apology is neither needed nor appropriate.
Here are responses for students to analyze:
Tylenol website: The homepage has a link at the top, “Have questions about recent media coverage…?” Referring to “media coverage,” the company avoids the president and politics. The link opens a page with a bunch of FAQs. The first few questions are generic, which is an important part of the company’s strategic response: to be measured—to neither elevate the claims nor dismiss them, either of which could draw more negative attention. Later FAQs are specific to autism. The company broadens the conversation to acetaminophen, implicating their competition and downplaying the focus on the Tylenol brand. Here’s the first part of the first response, which relies heavily on credibility and reputation management. However, students might question whether the “scientific” approach would work for the intended audience.
We understand the recent media coverage you’re reading may cause concern or lead to questions. We want to make sure you have the answers.
Here is what we can tell you:
Credible, independent scientific data continues to show no proven link between taking acetaminophen and autism.
Medical and public health organizations agree.
This includes:
Our best advice? Talk to your healthcare professional before taking or administering acetaminophen.
As our label says, “If pregnant or breast-feeding, talk to your healthcare professional before use.”
Your health provider is best positioned to advise whether taking this medication is appropriate based on your unique medical condition.
Instagram. Three posts, shown here, are pinned on Tylenol’s Instagram account. Comments on each image are short, and the third links to the website.
Tylenol Professional: This short page includes excerpts from the main page and is tailored for doctors.
The company also responded to a 2017 post reposted by the U.S. Department of Heath and Human Services and The White House. In a statement, Kenvue said the statement was “taken out of context" and was in response to a customer post that was deleted. The company clarified, “We recommend pregnant women do not take any over-the-counter medication, including acetaminophen, without talking to their doctor first.”
Kenvue shares bounced back a bit after hitting an all-time low. We’ll see whether the crisis communications can rebuild the brand as they did so well years ago.
Elina R. Tachkova and W. Timothy Coombs, Communicating in Extreme Crises: Lessons From the Edge, Abingdon (UK: Routledge, 2022), 35–42.
How Scam Artists Work Today
More people I know—smart, skeptical people—are getting scammed by new tactics. A reporter who writes about scams got duped, and from the detail, we see persuasion tactics we teach our students.
The scammer called the reporter, feigning concern that someone is stealing from his Chase bank account. These callers prey on our fear and vulnerability. Here’s how this one used logical arguments, emotional appeals, and credibility:
The caller said $2,100 had been transferred from the reporter’s account to San Antonio; he needed to act quickly. (emotional appeal and sense of urgency, encouraging a quick response without thinking)
The reporter was skeptical and asked for verification. The caller asked him to check the phone number, which matched that of a Chase branch in NYC. (credibility) The caller said, “Here at Chase, we’ll never ask for your personal information or passwords” and gave the reporter a long confirmation code. So, he gave information rather than asking for an account or card number, which would make the reporter suspicious. (credibility)
The caller said transfers were made between his Chase account (which he doesn’t have, but the caller said one was just opened in his name) and Zelle, which he does have. (logical argument)
The caller transferred him to his “supervisor,” who asked for the confirmation code. (credibility)
The reporter wised up when asked to start a Zelle transfer and type in the confirmation code, without the letters, which looked like a phone number that would have received his funds. The premise doesn’t make sense: that the funds would be reversed into his Zelle account, but by end of the call, the reporter was astonished to realize he was on the phone for 16 minutes, plenty of time for him to feel cared for by the callers and to get sucked into a story.
In business communication classes, we teach the importance of specificity for credibility. An amount more precise than $2,100 might have worked even better, but let’s not tell the scammers.
To avoid being scammed, the best advice is to hang up and call the company’s phone number listed on your card or billing statement. This advice and ways to use logos, pathos, and ethos in more ethical ways are worthy classroom topics.
Duolingo Scores Displayed on LinkedIn
An agreement for LinkedIn to post Duolingo Scores provides employers with information about language learning—not necessarily proficiency. But the new partnership might give students an edge in the job search.
A writer for Monster lists language proficiency as an example of “skill stretching.” Without a test, students choose a category they believe best fits their level—and they might exaggerate. A Duolingo spokesperson described the issue and the company’s solution:
Currently, the Languages section on LinkedIn is entirely self-reported. By adding a Duolingo Score, it provides an additional level of evidence beyond self-reporting.
The Score, which will update automatically on a LinkedIn profile, represents how far someone has progressed through a Duolingo language course. For example, a score between 80 and 99 out of 160 indicates, “You can share your opinion, tell stories, and navigate most daily situations.” That presents more evidence than self-reporting, but not everyone who has reached the course level will have the same demonstrated ability, so it’s not a perfect evaluation. As a completion level, the score tells an employer what’s possible, so the Duolingo representative’s claim might be overstated:
The Score’s visibility provides recruiters and employers with a clearer and more consistent understanding of a candidate’s language ability.
Perhaps the Score is a better measure than self-reported categories. On resumes, typical categories are conversational, proficient, or fluent; in the languages section of a LinkedIn profile today, people choose elementary proficiency, limited working proficiency, professional working proficiency, full professional proficiency, and native or bilingual proficiency. These are hard for students and employers to distinguish.
If students aren’t taking Duolingo language courses, they might prove proficiency by taking a standardized test, providing written work samples, creating a video, or providing examples in their cover letter or resume of how they have used a language in personal or professional situations.
Communication Implications of AI-Generated Models
As the fashion industry increases use of AI-generated models, students can explore whether communication can play a role in preventing the perpetuation of body-image ideals.
PBS News Hour reports how the industry is deploying AI to reduce costs. One concern is whether viewers will feel increased pressure to achieve a perfect body. Some argue that AI images decrease body-image pressure because viewers know they are not real and, therefore, are unattainable. But, at a minimum, that would require disclosure—clear labeling—that images are AI-generated.
We have no standard, requirement, or means of enforcement for such messages today. However, we do see similar regulations from the Federal Trade Commission (FTC) for product endorsements, with influencers admitting “paid partnership” or identifying sponsorships. Similarly, the FTC requires companies to add “actor portrayal” or “dramatization” labels on commercials when people provide testimony, for example, for a pharmaceutical drug.
Students might explore whether something similar could work for the fashion industry. Still—even with the clearest messaging—could AI models do harm? The potential for comparison may still exist, as it does today. We know models’ images are Photoshopped, but that doesn’t seem to reduce young people’s aspiration or their self-harm to achieve ideals. There’s just so much communication can do.
“Rigged” Data Questions in Business Communication
Without getting too political, we could talk with students about what “rigged” data might look like in a business setting. President Trump used the term to explain his firing of the Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS) commissioner.
Students might first review the BLS report, “The Employment Situation.” Then, they might read an interview with Cornell University Economist Erica Groshen, who was the BLS commissioner for four years during President Obama’s administration.
Data integrity refers to its accuracy, completeness, and consistency over time. In the interview, Groshen disputes claims by highlighting the BLS’s rigor (choreographed, specific roles) and repetition (consistency):
With regard to allegations of altering the data, the process is highly, highly choreographed, with tight deadlines. BLS does this every month, and everybody knows who needs to do what job on what day to get this out on time.
Without getting into the details of the jobs report, students might explore potential “rigged” data in other contexts. What does “rigging” mean? Although a colloquial term, we could interpret it to mean falsifying or manipulating inputs or presenting results to intentionally mislead.
Some examples are obvious, but others are not so clear-cut. For example, at what point could apple polishing, cherry picking, or comparing apples to oranges legitimately be labeled rigging data? If one month of weak sales data during a product recall is omitted from a line chart, is that rigging the data? How about if a rural location is compared to an urban location? On a dating app profile, if someone claims to be 5’ 11” when they are 5’ 10”, is that rigging data? What if they’re 5’ 10.2'“?
Students might consider the consequences of data reporting. Manipulating drug testing results is clearly different from exaggerating customer feedback about a food truck start-up. Students might discuss plans to ensure accuracy in their own data reports—and the consequences of inaccuracies or omissions.
Google’s Defense of AI Search
A blog post by VP, Head of Google Search, Liz Reid illustrates persuasive strategies and data interpretation to deny the negative impact of AI search features on website traffic.
Although reports find that Google AI search summaries reduce clicks to news and other sites, the company argues that is not the case. In a blog post, Reid writes, “user trends are shifting traffic to different sites, resulting in decreased traffic to some sites and increased traffic to others.” A TechCrunch writer describes the rhetoric well:
That word “some” is doing heavy lifting here, as Google doesn’t share data about how many sites are gaining or losing. And while chatbots like ChatGPT have certainly seen traffic increase in recent months, that doesn’t mean online publishers aren’t suffering.
In business communication, we encourage students to find more precise words than “some” and “very.” Here we see Google hiding behind vague references and aggregate data to mask the impact on publishers. Reid also wrote, “overall traffic to sites is relatively stable.“
Reid claims, “AI in Search is driving more queries and higher quality clicks.” Google argues that click “quality” is improving, meaning people are more purposeful, engaging longer on sites they choose for a reason instead of responding to clickbait. That may be, but organic searches (from unpaid sources) is still down for “some” news outlets already hurting because of declining print and digital subscriptions.
If users get their questions answered from the AI summary, why go to the original source? Students might discuss what, if any, responsibility Google bears for compensating content creators.
Advice for Taking Time Off
A Financial Times article offers advice for those hesitant about taking time away from work, particularly time away from email. The suggestions from company executives may be useful to new graduates and others starting a career.
Here’s my summary with character dimensions that may be illustrated by each action:
Set clear expectations with friends and family about work commitments. (accountability, courage)
Empower people to respond for you and have a plan for emergencies. (humility)
Model vacationing without email for coworkers. (accountability)
Respond only during set times during the day, for example, in the morning, if you must. (integrity/consistency)
Write an OOO message that discourages emails waiting for your return. (integrity/transparency)
Resist the temptation to check email! (courage, integrity)
Lessons from Delta Comm Failures
A passenger describes a “total communication breakdown” before, during, and after an emergency Delta flight landing. Following are lessons for students from both the incident and from how the reporter addressed the passenger’s complaint.
On a flight from Madrid to New York City, an engine failed, requiring the plane to land on the island of Azores, a stunning place to visit but perhaps not following an emergency landing. After researching the situation, a New York Times reporter confirmed that “Delta’s crisis communications strategy failed badly.”
Lesson 1: Customers have more credibility when they report what happened accurately and objectively.
The reporter called out a few inaccuracies and generalizations in the passenger’s telling. Here’s one example:
“It is also not exactly true that Delta had no ‘ground support or personnel.’”
The reporter found that the airline contracted with locals who were lauded by other passengers. Delta doesn’t fly to that airport, so they can’t be expected to have their own staff.
As another example, the reporter refines the passenger’s note about compensation:
Marc, you called Delta’s approach “shady and evasive.” I would go with “incomplete and maladroit.”
“Shady and evasive” are character judgments, yet we have no idea whether malintent existed. The reporter sticks with behaviors: a failure of good practice and a lack of skill.
Lesson 2: Overcommunicate (within reason) during a crisis and ensure that all customers get the same message at the same time.
The reporter confirms that the wait for information, particularly whether passengers would have hotel rooms, was long and caused stress. Some got messages, while others did not.
Passengers also saw flight staff “whisked off” to a hotel with no explanation or communication. Turns out, rest was mandatory so the crew could fly the next day. But as business communication faculty know, frequent communication is essential. Passengers felt “in the dark.”
Lesson 3: Crisis situations are not the time for humor.
This next bit sounds outrageous from a crisis communication perspective. Passengers heard “loud, scary noises from the left side of the plane” and estimate that it wasn’t until 10 minutes later—10 minutes!—when they heard an announcement recalled this way (commentary is from the reporter):
“The pilot just woke up from his nap and is going to look into what is happening.” If true, wrote Mr. Durrant [a Delta spokesperson], the nap reference was “likely referring to planned rest periods for flight crew.”
Even if the pilot was napping for legitimate reasons, why share it with passengers? If it was a joke, passengers did not seem to find it funny.
Lesson 4: Demonstrate integrity (consistency, accuracy, and transparency) in all communications.
The pilot announced that another plane would arrive in 6 hours. Any reasonable, hopeful passenger would assume this means they would be leaving in 6 hours, but that wasn’t the case because of rest requirements. Passengers had to spend the night.
In addition, passengers seemed to be compensated different amounts at different times, despite an EU law regulating the amount. Some garnered more after writing a “measured” complaint letter.
In the end, this situation reflected poorly on Delta. A few simple changes would not have made the situation less scary or frustrating but could have reduced the reputational hit.
McDonald's Quarterly Earnings Report and Comm Strategies
McDonald’s had a good second quarter, with global sales up 6%. Students could analyze the report formats and communication strategies executives used during the earnings call.
One lesson for students is the multiple communication channels and report formats McDonald’s published to communicate its quarterly earnings. The press release, quarterly report in four formats (PDF, Zip files, HTML, and Excel), and recorded Webcast earnings call (and transcript) are all open to the public and convey a consistent message, which is upfront in the press release:
Our 6% global Systemwide sales growth this quarter is a testament to the power of compelling value, standout marketing, and menu innovation—proving again that when we stay focused on executing what matters most to our customers, we grow. Our technology investments and ability to scale digital solutions at speed will continue to elevate the McDonald's experience for customers, crew, and our global System.
Any question and answer during the earnings call provides examples of communication strategies. For example, executives use what we might teach as hedging or tentative language (“I think”); however, students can see these responses employed strategically. They persuade the audience by demonstrating humility and credibility—qualifying responses to show a cautious approach and, in effect, saying, “I don’t know everything.” This language also protects an executive whose prediction turns out wrong, and it conveys a conversational tone to build trust.
Although the news is good, the first question challenged the company’s reliance on “value,” particularly in the United States, where families are under increasing financial pressure. Here are the first question and answer as an example from the transcript (my notes in green italics):
David Palmer, Analyst, Evercore: Thank you, and thanks for all of your, comments. Sounds like you’re still exploring ways to bolster value perception in The US. Ahead of anything there, you know, could you just speak to where you think McDonald’s value and affordability scores are today in The US? You know, perhaps before and after Snack Wrap and your recent McValue menu changes. You know, where is the consumer perception today versus McDonald’s in the past and versus near end competitors and maybe even fast casual competitors?
And and if there’s a difference between The US perception in terms of value versus other key IOM markets, would love to hear about that as well. Thanks so much.
Chris Kemczynski, Chairman and Chief Executive Officer, McDonald’s Corporation: Hi, David. It’s Chris [builds trust with first names and a friendly tone]. Thanks for the question. I think [demonstrates conversational style and humility with hedging language] when we talk about value, it’s important that we we really break it down and and get very specific about the different consumer segments. And I’ll start with, our most loyal consumers, and these are the ones who are on our loyalty program [previews content].
Roughly a quarter of our business in The US is on our loyalty program [frames the response and emphasizes return business]. And what we see is if you [conversational style] are a loyalty member at McDonald’s, we have we have exceptional value and affordability scores amongst those consumers. And probably that’s most evidenced by what I shared in in the prepared remarks, which is the uptick that you see in terms of frequency when we have a loyal consumer in our loyalty program going from 10 roughly 10 visits to 26 visits. So I think [again] with our loyalty members, our most ardent McDonald’s customers, we’re in a really good position as it relates to value [reinforces “value” throughout] and affordability perception. If you move then to the McValue program, McValue is working.
And if you think about what we have with McValue, we have the $5 meal deal, which is the anchor for that. That continues to perform very well for us. And then we also have the buy one, add one for a dollar program. What’s interesting is [highlights what’s important] those two programs are very complementary. If you look at consumers who are using both, it’s only about 8% or so who are actually using both.
So they’re going after two very different occasions, two very different users, but compelling to both. So I feel good about the loyalty program. I feel good [uses anaphora to emphasize his confidence] about where we are with McValue. But the issue or the opportunity is if you add those two up, that’s, call it, roughly 50% of the business. And we know there’s the other 50% that today isn’t coming into our restaurant, isn’t using McValue, isn’t using the loyalty program [anaphora again], and that’s where we have the opportunity, which is around core menu pricing that we talked about in our prepared remarks [transitions to an “opportunity”—is more direct in the next section].
Today, too often, if you’re that consumer, you’re driving up to the restaurant and you’re seeing combo meals could be priced over $10 and that absolutely is shaping value perceptions and is shaping value perceptions in a negative way. So we’ve got to get that fixed [addresses concern directly]. As I mentioned in my remarks, we’re having, I think [again], very active and productive conversations with the franchisees. But the single biggest driver of what shapes a consumer’s overall perception of McDonald’s value is the menu board. And it’s when they drive up to the restaurant and they see the menu board, that’s what’s shaping the that’s the number one driver. [Could be clearer, but the gist is that the low-priced meals are good sellers, but pricier menu items negatively affect consumer perception.]
So we’ve got more work to do on that in The US. I’d say on the IOM [international operational markets—insider abbreviations for the audience] side of the business, we’re in a better position on that. Part of it is, as I mentioned in in the remarks [Fourth time he refers to the remarks—could demonstrate consistency/integrity] as well, we have a really strong EDAP program in all of our markets. So these are essentially $1 $2.03 dollars $4 euro pound whatever the currency is. But that is proving to be a very strong addition to the value programs in the IOM market.
And then also, as I mentioned, our operators there have been very prudent and I think [again] are doing the right things to make sure that our core menu pricing continues to be at leadership levels in the market. I would just note [tentative language], also on our international side, it’s not as competitive a market as it is in The U. S. There’s a lot of different players in The U. S.
We don’t face the same breadth of those players or competitors in our international markets. And so I think it’s a little bit easier for us to stand out and represent good value in international.
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.
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.
Musk Email Lands in Italy
Elon Musk’s five-bullet-points email didn’t go over well in the U.S., but the reaction is worse in Italy, raising questions about intercultural communication for students to discuss. The email asks government workers to list five accomplishments in the past week.
With the subject, “What did you do last week?,” these emails were met with mixed reactions in the U.S., with some agencies instructing their employees not to respond. But when Italian workers at Aviano Air Base received the email, the negative reaction was stronger.
Students can explore cultural differences. One framework to explain the different reactions is Hofstede’s model, particularly the dimension of individualist / collectivist society. As one Italian union representative said, Italy “is not the Wild West like the U.S.” This country comparison tool website describes individualism as follows:
The fundamental issue addressed by this dimension is the degree of interdependence a society maintains among its members. It has to do with whether people's self-image is defined in terms of “I” or “W.” In Individualist societies, people are supposed to look after themselves and their direct family only. In Collectivist societies people belong to “in groups” that take care of them in exchange for loyalty.
The differences, shown here according to the comparison tool, aren’t as great as we might think, but Italian unions represent a higher percentage of the population, are more highly centralized, and provide broader protections than U.S. unions do.
Students may find other differences driving these reactions. For example, this past week, Italian President Sergio Mattarella declined a meeting with Musk about a potential $1.5 billion deal for Starlink, the satellite internet service. The request raised concerns about a public institution negotiating with a private entity. All this might be intensified by Europe’s reaction to the U.S. political situation at the moment.
Southwest's Failed Attempt at Humor
When affecting people’s pocketbooks, use humor cautiously. This is a lesson Southwest learned this week after announcing bag fees for this first time in the airline’s history.
The message communicating the bad news is vague. This Instagram post describes what the company will do—offer free bags for certain customers—but omits the obvious change, a significant one for the company that always touted “bags fly free.”
Investors responded well, lifting the stock price in a show of support for potentially greater profits. But customers, as expected, are unhappy.
Although Southwest is known for its folksy way (the stock symbol is LUV), maybe now was not the best time for jokes. The post downplaying the news by comparing it to the NBA trade that outraged fans didn’t go well.
We might see this as a failing of character in two ways. First, a lack of compassion minimizes the impact on customers and, in a way, takes advantage of their loyalty. Second, although consistent with the brand, humor detracts from the bad news and seems like a lack of integrity—inconsistency with the message.
We’ll see how the change affects flying decisions, particularly whether loyalty extends beyond this perk.
Kroger Is Vague About CEO Departure
Kroger’s CEO is leaving the company, but the reason is unclear. The official statement—and no word from the outgoing CEO—leaves us wondering what happened, which could conjure even worse stories.
The statement says Rodney McMullen, who started his career as a stock clerk while in college in 1978, left because of “his personal conduct that, while unrelated to the business, was inconsistent with Kroger's Policy on Business Ethics.” We’re told that an investigation happened, and we’re told what the conduct was not: “not related to the Company's financial performance, operations or reporting, and it did not involve any Kroger associates.”
Naturally, I’m curious. This sounds like a sad ending for a distinguished career. Unlike other leader-departure statements, we see no acknowledgement of McMullen’s long tenure at the company. Other issues might contribute to the traditional missing quotes about a leader’s contribution: McMullen led an attempted acquisition of Albertsons, which failed because of regulatory issues, and now Albertsons is suing the company for failing to do enough.
My imagination is going wild. I wonder whether it’s worse to keep the “conduct” a secret, although I’m guessing the decision protects McMullen’s privacy and dignity. The company’s objective is to assure investors that the behavior hasn’t affected business—although of course it does. Shares fell after the news, compounded by sales falling below expectations.
As usual in these situations, what’s called a “resignation” probably isn’t—at least not in the way you or I would resign from a job. This, too, preserves McMullen’s dignity.
Mattel Communicates Tariff Response
Mattel communicated its plans as tariffs go into effect. Companies are in a tough spot. As a Financial Times writer explains, “Public companies have been reluctant to make concrete predictions over the effects of tariffs, as they struggle to keep up with rapid policy changes or seek to avoid antagonising Washington.”
Mattel depends on 40% of its production from China and 10% from Mexico. In the company’s fourth quarter financial report, guidance for 2025 includes the following:
Guidance includes the anticipated impact of new U.S. tariffs on China, Mexico and Canada imports announced on February 1st, and mitigating actions we plan to take, including leveraging the strength of our supply chain, and potential pricing.
Reading between the lines, students might understand that Mattel plans to reduce sourcing outside the United States (a CNBC article confirms plans to reduce the amount from 50% to 25% by 2027) and will try to absorb increased costs. In other words, Mattel is saying, we’ll be fine, but we might raise prices. In the end, as CNBC reports, Mattel, like Chipotle and many others, may have “consumers pay the rest.”
A New York Post headline is more blunt: “Mattel shares spike 15% after toy giant says it will raise Barbie prices because of China tariffs.” The article explains how toy companies, although vulnerable because 80% of their products are made in China, produce 80% new toys each year and have a captive audience: kids who want the latest toys and parents who will pay for them.
Price increases are one of those situations that is good or bad news depending on the audience. Either way, we could see it as an issue of integrity: Mattel’s language isn’t quite transparent (clear and accurate), although it’s appropriate for the primary audience of investors.
Grammy CEO Models Crisis Recovery
Recording Academy CEO Harvey Mason Jr. delivered a surprising speech during the 2025 Grammy Awards, directly addressing criticism of the awards and explaining actions taken.
He described the situation when he became CEO in 2020. He said some artists were “pretty vocal in their complaints” and described reading about the Weeknd’s boycott in the newspaper. This approach gives us a window into the personal impact and might engender compassion:
I remember waking up to the headlines that the Weeknd called out the Academy for lack of transparency in our awards. He went so far as to announce he was boycotting the Grammys. That made for some interesting reading over breakfast. But you know what? Criticism is, okay. I heard him. I felt his conviction.
Next, Mason described the Recording Academy’s “transformation,” including new initiatives and a more diverse voting body. As he ends this segment, he promises, “I firmly believe we’re on the right path,” but he says there’s still work to do.
Finally, he transitions to introduce the Weeknd!
As we've seen tonight, music is a powerful force for good. It heals us, it unites us, and we need that in this city right now. With that in mind, on a truly special night, what better way to bring us together than this next artist? Someone who has seen the work the Academy has put in. I'm so honored to leave you with a sentence that I wasn't sure would ever be said on the Grammy stage again. My friends, my fellow music makers, please join me in welcoming back none other than four-time Grammy-winning artist and global superstar, The Weeknd.
This is a preventable (not victim or accidental) crisis situation, so the Academy had to take responsibility and do better. In their book, Communicating in Extreme Crises: Lessons From the Edge, Elina R. Tachkova and W. Timothy Coombs might call this an “extreme crisis,” which requires more significant actions in response. Mason described them well, and his delivery is appropriate for the awards ceremony: scripted but conversational. This is a good example for students to analyze.
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.