Lesson Learned: Don't Use AI in Sensitive Situations
The Office of Equity, Diversity, and Inclusion (EDI) at Peabody College, Vanderbilt University, used ChatGPT to generate an email about the Michigan State campus shooting, and it wasn’t received well. This story illustrates issues of accountability (administrators taking responsibility), but failing compassion in a time of tragedy and failing integrity (consistency).
The email referred to “shootings,” which is not accurate. Otherwise, it sounds like boilerplate, but not that much different from typical emails a campus community receives in these types of situations. Compare that email to one sent from the vice provost and dean of students, which sounds more emotional but is still common.
Perhaps the only giveaway was a line at the bottom:
(“Paraphrase from OpenAI’s ChatGPT AI language model, personal communication, February 15, 2023.”)
On the one hand, I admire the writers’ honesty, doing what faculty are increasingly asking students to do: to identify whether and how they use AI for their writing. But of course, the choice reflects poor judgment.
Student backlash was swift and fierce. Using words like “disgusting” and “sick and twisted,” students called on administrators to “Do more. Do anything. And lead us into a better future with genuine, human empathy, not a robot.” A senior said, “Would they do this also for the death of a student, faculty, or staff member? Automating messages on grief and crisis is the most on-the-nose, explicit recognition that we as students are more customers than a community to the Vanderbilt administration. The fact it’s from the office of EDI might be the cherry on top.”
University officials responded quickly. In a follow-up email to students, an EDI dean wrote, “While we believe in the message of inclusivity expressed in the email, using ChatGPT to generate communications on behalf of our community in a time of sorrow and in response to a tragedy contradicts the values that characterize Peabody College. As with all new technologies that affect higher education, this moment gives us all an opportunity to reflect on what we know and what we still must learn about AI.” Could ChatGPT have written that too?
This is a precarious time for universities, as faculty grapple with how to use AI tools and what policies best serve students and academic goals. Using AI as a starting point for such a sensitive message may never be acceptable, and it’s certainly too soon now. Faculty will have a difficult time enforcing AI policies if they use tools in ways that contradict the spirit of their own guidelines.
Google “Word Mangles” Shared Office Space
A message to Google cloud employees illustrates challenges with communicating bad news with integrity. The gist of the message is this: “Most Googlers will now share a desk with one other Googler.” Employees within departments will be organized into “neighborhoods“ and will negotiate their space: “Through the matching process, they will agree on a basic desk setup and establish norms with their desk partner and teams to ensure a positive experience in the new shared environment.”
The announcement would be unwelcome news at any time but has an extra sting after the 11,000 layoffs in January. Employees also expressed frustration with the “corpspeak.” The CNBC article reports one example:
Internally, leadership has given the new seating arrangement a title: ‘Cloud Office Evolution” or “CLOE,” which it describes as “combining the best of pre-pandemic collaboration with the flexibility” from hybrid work.
In one meme, an employee wrote, “Not every cost-cutting measure needs to be word mangled into sounding good for employees. A simple ‘We are cutting office space to reduce costs’ would make leadership sound more believable.”
For students, this example illustrates the value of straight talk and integrity. Particularly when the business purpose of the decision is obvious, transparency is a better approach for messages that impact people negatively.
Student Handout: Tips for Using ChatGPT
This handout guides students through using ChatGPT responsibly. I take a realistic approach, assuming that students will use the program regardless of our insistence not to.
Revise and use as you wish; you can also download this Word document. I would appreciate knowing what changes you make, so I can consider revisions.
Tips for Using ChatGPT for Your
Business Communication Assignments
Ask ChatGPT for help generating ideas.
If you’re having trouble coming up with or honing an idea for a writing assignment or presentation, ask ChatGPT. The program can help you move past writer’s block, clarify your thinking, and narrow down a topic. Practice asking follow-up questions until you get better responses.
Think of ChatGPT as a writing partner.
Imagine that the program is a tutor or writing center consultant, who would ask you questions and give you ideas and feedback—not write for you. Use ChatGPT as part of an iterative thinking process.
Use your natural, authentic voice.
ChatGPT is a robot and sounds like one. You’re taking this class to find your own personal writing and speaking style. If ChatGPT writes for you, you’re missing the opportunity to convey your personality. What differentiates you at work is your character—who you are as a person. No AI technology can ever match your sense of humor or style.
Adapt writing to your audience.
Every assignment in this class has a defined audience. ChatGPT can’t build a relationship; only you can do that. You’re more likely to inspire or persuade someone when you use your emotional intelligence to understand what moves and motivates someone, and then tailor your writing to that person.
Beware of misinformation.
ChatGPT tends to “hallucinate”—invent information that doesn’t exist, particularly sources like books and journal articles. If you ask the program to provide evidence to support claims, check everything and add sources after 2021, which ChatGPT can’t access. For your own credibility, do your own research.
Learn from ChatGPT’s corrections.
If you ask ChatGPT to correct your grammar, ask it to explain the mistakes it corrected and the grammar rules, so you can learn for the future.
Plan ahead and expect change.
As of now, ChatGPT is often overloaded, so you’ll need to plan ahead if you rely on it. Also, these suggestions are based on ChatGPT as of January 2023. The program will evolve.
Developed by Amy Newman, February 2, 2023. Revise and use as you wish.
Inspired by Lance Cummings, @LanceElyot, “Student Contract for AI Creativity (draft),” Twitter, January 10, 2023.
Greenwashing Gets Sophisticated
Greenwashing—making false or exaggerated claims about sustainability or positive impacts on the environment—is nothing new, but companies may be getting more subtle. A recent CNBC article warns consumers, “For a company to say they’re ‘100% sustainable’ or they’re ‘eco-conscious’ . . . doesn’t mean anything.” Those seem to be obvious empty statements.
But a Euronews article offers six more sophisticated ways companies greenwash. The article gives examples of each, and students can find their own:
Greencrowding: hiding within a group or being the slowest adopter within a group.
Greenlighting: emphasizing a green aspect of the company to detract from negative impacts.
Greenshifting: blaming the customer for environmental problems (example shown here).
Greenlabelling: calling something green or sustainable that isn’t really
Greenrinsing: changing goals before they’re achieved.
Greenhushing: downplaying or hiding green activities to avoid attention.
Both articles suggest investigating companies’ credentials; the CNBC article also suggests looking at metrics and the company’s history. But let’s face it: that requires work. We’re easily swayed by labels and soundbites. Perhaps students can identify what affects their purchase decisions, which of course, is what drives greenwashing in the first place.
Boeing CEO Explains Quarterly Results
In a message to employees posted on the company website, Boeing CEO David Calhoun wrote, “We delivered a solid fourth quarter,” but the numbers say something different. According to a Wall Street Journal article, “The aerospace company’s fourth-quarter profit and sales both fell short of analysts’ expectations,” although they improved from the third quarter.
Calhoun is doing what any good CEO would do: spin the news, convey confidence, and keep employees motivated. Focusing on the future, the subtitle sums up the message, “Steadily building momentum.” Calhoun starts by thanking employees, and a short video shows fourth quarter achievements. The message doesn’t mention the $663 million quarterly loss or the $5.01 billion loss in 2022 but instead focuses on “more than $3 billion in free cash flow.”
Calhoun acknowledges, “we have more work ahead to drive stability in our operations and within the supply chain.” But, overall, the bad-news message sounds positive. And maybe it is good news, considering the 737 Max history and that the stock lost nearly 39% in the past 5 years.
The full message is below. Side note: The Wall Street Journal reports, at some point in his communications, Calhoun said he expects operating margins to be “bouncy” this year, an odd term for a plane manufacturer. Will they be turbulent?
Boeing CEO Updates Employees on 4th-Quarter Results
Steadily building momentum
CHICAGO, Jan. 25, 2023 —Boeing President and CEO Dave Calhoun shared the following message with employees today addressing the company’s fourth-quarter results:
Team,
We delivered a solid fourth quarter. As we report our financial results today, I want to start by saying thank you. Together, we’re making important strides and steadily improving performance. Your resilience and hard work are building momentum, and we’re well on our way to restoring the operational strength we expect of ourselves at Boeing.
We generated more than $3 billion in free cash flow in the fourth quarter, driven by progress in our performance and strong demand. This helped us generate positive full-year free cash flow for the first time since 2018, an important metric in our recovery.
Our teams across the enterprise delivered on several key milestones and I encourage you to watch some of our fourth-quarter highlights in the video below. [omitted]
While we have made meaningful progress, challenges remain and we have more work ahead to drive stability in our operations and within the supply chain.
This will be another important year for us as we look to steadily increase our production rates, further improve performance, progress in our development programs and deliver on our commitments. Through it all, we will keep safety, quality and transparency at the forefront.
We’re proud of how we closed out 2022, and despite the hurdles in front of us, we’re confident in our path ahead. Demand is strong and our portfolio is well positioned. We have a robust pipeline of development programs, we’re innovating for the future and we’re increasing investments to prepare for our next generation of products.
Thank you for all you do to support our customers, our company and each other. I am proud of our team and excited about our future.
Dave
FDA Suggests Less Lead in Baby Food
The U.S. Food and Drug Administration (FDA) issued guidance for baby food manufacturers, and the messages serve as good examples of reports and persuasion:
Action Levels for Lead in Food Intended for Babies and Young Children: Draft Guidance for Industry. This is a text report that students could analyze for organization, writing style, evidence, data visualization (or lack there of), etc.
Federal Register Notice. This legal-sounding document explains how to submit comments, either by “electronic submission” or “written/paper submission,” an archaic-sounding process. People also can order paper copies of the draft guidance, something you might do in 1970: “Send two self-addressed adhesive labels to assist that office in processing your request.”
Several times, on the website and within in each document, the agency reminds us, “Contains Nonbinding Recommendations Draft-Not for Implementation.” The agency further describes the “guidance”:
In general, FDA’s guidance documents do not establish legally enforceable responsibilities. Instead, guidances describe FDA’s current thinking on a topic and should be viewed only as recommendations, unless specific regulatory or statutory requirements are cited. The use of the word should in FDA guidances means that something is suggested or recommended, but not required.
The approach attempts to involve industry and consumer groups, who likely have a lot to say about the FDA’s data and recommendations. In the introductory website text, the agency says it considers the goals “achievable by industry when control measures are taken to minimize the presence of lead.” We’ll see whether others agree. Already, one consumer group weighed in, saying the guidance “doesn’t go far enough,” while Gerber and other companies are “reviewing” the proposal.
New Zealand PM Resignation
Jacinda Ardern’s announcement of her resignation as the prime minister of New Zealand is a good example for students to analyze. In addition to the obvious discussion about delivery skills and script writing, Ardern demonstrates several character dimensions, for example, humility, vulnerability, authenticity, and integrity. Her decision also raises issues of gender roles, as this opinion article explains.
Microsoft Layoff Email
In step with other tech companies, Microsoft is laying off 10,000 employees, and CEO Satya Nadella’s email is posted publicly. I’m surprised that Nadella didn’t learn more lessons from the 2014 Microsoft layoff email a NY Magazine writer called “hilariously bad.”
Nadella starts with the vague subject line, “Focusing on our short- and long-term opportunity,” and then writes two paragraphs about challenges and opportunities that lie ahead. Mercifully, he gets to the news in the first sentence of the third paragraph. This is an improvement over the 2014 memo in which former exec Stephen Elop announced layoffs in the eleventh paragraph.
In Chapter 8 of Business Communication and Character, I write extensively about the value of putting bad news up front and the lack of research support for the “indirect style”—giving explanations first and then the bad news. In this case, I’m quite sure that employees knew what was coming, so a more direct style is more appropriate.
In these sentences, Nadella puts the 10,000 in perspective, as we teach in crisis communication. However, employees will wonder whether they are affected and when they will hear the news. Based on the industry and his first paragraphs, employees working on AI likely feel safe, but a clearer timeline for those who aren’t is always a good idea.
Today, we are making changes that will result in the reduction of our overall workforce by 10,000 jobs through the end of FY23 Q3. This represents less than 5 percent of our total employee base, with some notifications happening today. It’s important to note that while we are eliminating roles in some areas, we will continue to hire in key strategic areas.
Twice, with a paragraph in between, Nadella promises transparency:
. . . we will do so in the most thoughtful and transparent way possible.
. . . we will treat our people with dignity and respect, and act transparently.
Employees might prefer actual transparency to hearing about it.
Nadella does express compassion and explain benefits, which is useful for employees, but clearly designed for public viewing. Overall, the email reads like one always intended for a public blog.
Update: A Wall Street Journal article reported a concert Microsoft sponsored at Davos with Sting performing for about 50 people the night before layoffs were announced. The author describes it as a “bad look.” We could call it “bad optics”—or just insensitive, lacking integrity and compassion.
George Santos Resume
In case you didn’t see it, here’s the resume of now U.S. Representative George Santos. Although we’ve been hearing for weeks about his fake jobs at Goldman Sachs and Citi and his fake education at Baruch, it’s quite shocking to see it all in print.
Students might enjoy reviewing his resume, finding errors and other ways to improve his employment communication. For example, the summary and list of skills at the top are jargony and sound like boiler plate; I’m surprised to see so little tailoring to a political position. Students will find other issues, for example, unparallel bullets, an odd page break, misaligned spacing, a lower-case i, missing periods, a missing end parenthesis, and acronyms that readers might not know.
Another fun discussion with grammarians in your class: I’ve avoided writing “Santos’s resume” as did The New York Times. The paper titled the article, “The Résumé of George Santos.” I chose the modifier form instead. And I’ve given up on the accent marks in résumé because I rarely see them in business job descriptions.
Email for Editing
Here’s a fun email—from a publishing company!—with obvious errors and other issues for students to fix. Also, I’m not an accounting professor. I’m guessing Wiley outsourced this research and the communication.
Dear Amy,
Due to the holiday's, we decided to extend the deadline of this survey to 1/15/23, for anyone interested to give us their feedback.
As an Accounting professor, we know you are constantly looking for ways to optimize your curriculum. We would love to get to know more about the resources you leverage to build your curriculum and your challenges and needs of teaching material for your Accounting courses. Your feedback would go a long way to help us create products and services to better support our Accounting instructors.
The survey should take approximately 15 to 20 minutes to complete.
Upon completing the survey, your email will be entered into a random drawing for 1 of 10, $50 Amazon.com gift cards. The random drawing will take place the week of 1/16/23, where winners will be contacted via email. You will also receive a code for 20% off one book on Wiley.com.
The survey will remain open until 1/15/23.
Follow this link to the Survey, if you are interested to give us feedback:
Take the Survey
Or copy and paste the URL below into your internet browser:
https://wiley.qualtrics.com/jfe/form/SV_5oSZeObx6LcRbAq?Q_DL=Z28LxciSPjK2660_5oSZeObx6LcRbAq_CGC_3xI24GCcnaZf9jE&Q_CHL=email
Send an email to [omitted]@wiley.com if you have any questions.
Thank you and sincere regards,
The Wiley Accounting Team
Steve Jobs Email Blast from the Past
We get a window into executive decision making with Internal Tech Emails. This 2005 thread starts with Google Co-Founder Sergey Brin telling his team that Steve Jobs called, angry about Google “recruiting from the safari team.” Without ever hitting the caps key, Brin described Jobs as “agitated” about at least one potential hire away from Apple. In addition to losing staff, Jobs was concerned about Google developing a search engine to compete with Safari, but Brin assured Jobs that this wasn’t in the works.
The email thread includes other Google execs jumping in to explain that they were, in fact, trying to recruit a high-profile employee from the search team—and that the hire might bring additional employees as well. At some point, an HR leader, Arnnon Geshuri, weighs in: “We are careful to adhere to non-compete agreements if we have established these with any company. However, it is the staffing organization's practice to aggressively pursue leads that come from our employees and bring the best talent onboard.”
But, as the conversation continued (and after few more calls from Jobs), we see the team shift. They agree not to pursue more candidates without pre-approval from Apple if the prized employee came on board.
Making Sense of Big Numbers
On a recent “No Mercy, No Malice” podcast episode (NSFW), Scott Galloway compares Meta’s spend on Reality Labs—$1 billion per month—to what he considers better investments.
In Business Communication and Character, I suggest that students compare data to concrete objects to help people understand the magnitude. Galloway offers several suggestions to put the expense into context—and to show how Mark Zuckerberg might put the money to better use than building a doomed Metaverse. One is to “pay the entire cost of attendance for every undergrad in the University of Texas and California systems.”
Of course, his point is how much money is being wasted. For students, it’s a good example of making numbers more relevant to an audience.
"Embellishment" vs. Lying
New York Representative-elect George Santos misrepresented himself during his campaign for Congress and is facing calls to resign. The story is relevant for students finding the line between “putting their best self forward” and lying during a job search.
Santos now says, “My sins here are embellishing my resume. I’m sorry.” But his claims are clear fabrications in several cases. What’s interesting about the situation is how easily his claims could be verified. The New York Times simply contacted Goldman Sachs, Citigroup, and Baruch College, and none could verify his employment and graduation claims.
In his position paper, he claimed to be “a proud American Jew.” He also said he is “half Jewish” and a “Latino Jew” and claimed that he has Holocaust and Ukrainian heritage, which has not been supported. Now he clarifies: "I am Catholic. Because I learned my maternal family had a Jewish background, I said I was Jew-ish.”
Santos also defended himself during an interview. He said, “I didn’t outright lie,” but he did admit that he used “a poor use of words” and included “a little bit of fluff.” He blamed “elitist” outlets like The New York Times for referring to his customer service experience as “odd jobs,” which forced him to inflate his experience.
His justification raises an issue about how students can handle their own vulnerability. Business communication faculty encourage students to explain how their experience relates to a prospective job. Some students downplay their experience, so we ask them to highlight the relevance to an employer. But none of us would encourage students to include experiences they didn’t have.
We’ll see whether his colleagues vote for him to stay or leave.
Jan. 6 Committee Report
After almost two years of investigative work, the U.S. House committee complete its report about the January 6 attack on the U.S. Capitol. As we might expect, the report has some features we teach in business communication classes.
The 845-page report starts with a list of contributors and a “letter of transmittal”—language I saw in old textbooks when I started teaching in 2004. Next, we see a few “forward” statements from elected officials, which seem like political posturing, until we get to the six-page table of contents. Students will recognize that the headings are descriptive but aren’t quite parallel: some are full sentences, while others are phrases. Bias—or persuasion—is clear in the heading choice, for example, “The Big Lie,” and an all-caps quote, “JUST CALL IT CORRUPT AND LEAVE THE REST TO ME.”
If you’re brave enough to discuss the report in class, other report features are worth reviewing. The 193-page executive summary is unusual for a business report, which is usually about 10% of a total report. The portrait layoff and footnotes are typical for a more formal report, but the photos, used primarily for emotional appeal, are not. Depending on your perspective, the writing style is vivid, inflammatory, or something else. The report on documentcloud.org is navigable by page numbers and a clunky search, but it could be more interactive, for example, with hyperlinks from the table of contents. This is a public document, so students could analyze the audiences and communication objectives.
Justin Bieber and H&M Dispute
Justin Bieber claimed—on Instagram—that H&M created and was selling products without his approval. In addition to the post shown here, he wrote, “The H&M merch they made of me is trash and I didn’t approve it,” and “Don’t buy it.”
H&M pulled the products and explained the decision in a statement: “H&M has followed all proper approval procedures, as we have done in this case, but out of respect for the collaboration and Justin Bieber, we have removed the garments from selling.”
This story raises questions about integrity: what exactly was the process, and was it followed as agreed? I also question Bieber’s medium choice. Why did he make such a public statement? Did he already reach out to H&M privately and not get the response he wanted? We might question both parties’ accountability: how did they agree to resolve differences?
Integrity Issues in Musk and Twitter Comms
Two Elon Musk/Twitter-related gems this week illustrate issues of integrity. I’m posting these in case you’re not entirely bored with Musk news and teach winter classes or are already planning for next semester.
Musk’s Poll: Musk posted a poll asking whether he should “step down as head of Twitter,” and the results are clear. The next day, he blamed bots for the results. Two days later, Musk tweeted, “I will resign as CEO as soon as I find someone foolish enough to take the job! After that, I will just run the software & servers teams.” We might call this a lack of integrity—both questioning a poll he ostensibly runs and not doing what he says he will do. In addition, Musk still owns the company, so he remains the leader until he sells, and he has no successor, particularly given the recent exodus.
Banned Accounts: Twitter banned @ElonJet, which posted Musk’s use of his private plane. Journalists and others reporting on the account, who say the data is public, had their accounts suspended. One journalist explains that, although his account no longer indicates suspension, he cannot post until he removes offending tweets. Mastodon, a Twitter competitor that’s gaining traction, also had an account suspended and explains how the platform is superior to Twitter’s. The Mastodon message illustrates persuasion—and not-so-subtle sales tactics that would be interesting to explore with students.
FTX Bubble Chart
As fraud and conspiracy charges roll in for FTX Founder Sam Bankman-Fried (SBF) so do the graphics. Yahoo has a doozy—a worthy visual showing where $5 billion was spent (and lost), unbeknownst to investors.
As we expect, this bubble chart packs in a lot of data, and the interactivity explains why some bubbles show cut-off or no text at all. Mouse-over text is clear, but it’s hard to pinpoint some small bubbles. By small, I mean those amassing a mere $5 million or less—or “Flourishing Humanity,” which, sadly, received only $80,000. Zooming in solves the text problem, but it’s not intuitive (at least to me) on a laptop. I almost want another level of detail. Another click could tell me what the Pangea Cayman Fund is.
Color contrast is an obvious issue in this chart, with large swaths of black that prevent the at-a-glance value of a good chart on a laptop. Some of the brighter colors make the white text hard to read, but it’s better when zoomed in.
If you share this chart with students to analyze, I hope they’ll find the comma splice in the title.
Interview Advice from a CTO
Deloitte CTO Leo Alexandru offered interview advice in a Twitter thread. Most of it is common sense, but the examples could inspire a good class discussion, including why tech has trouble attracting more women. Here are his (non-parallel) main points in bold, with some commentary:
Honesty. Of course, but he recommended admitting concepts that you “never heard of, haven't used in a while, and want to learn more about.” Students would do well to prepare for the last two.
The right attitude, which Alexandru describes as “positive, trustworthy, and solution-oriented.”
Don't talk s**t about their previous job. This is a good one, and students should prepare for questions about their internships. Even if they were disappointed, how can they describe the experience in a balanced way?
Chemistry. This one worries me and reminds me of other assessments about “fit.” Sometimes, this is a veil for “just like me” and leads to a homogenous team.
Communication skills. Alexandru writes, “So I am very interested in how well you express a point of view. Without being aggressive.” His perspective could be a difficult balance for women, who, in one study of performance reviews, were far more likely than men to be criticized for being “too aggressive.”
Don’t be a “yes man.” See above!
Preparation. This is always a good reminder for students: know the job description and research the company ahead of time. The bigger challenge might be integrating what they know into the conversation.
Asking questions. Alexandru suggests asking about challenges in the job, what success looks like, and why a previous person left. A colleague told me that she starts an interview by asking what questions the candidate has. Other hiring managers prefer most of the interview to be led by the candidate. An interactive discussion is usually best, and students need to be on their toes.
Passion. This is a good reminder for students to show enthusiasm and prepare reasons for wanting the job other than, “Apple is the best company in the world.”
Proven track record. Alexandru wants candidates to “show” not just “tell” results. An ePortfolio or other documented work will help.
Misleading College Financial Aid Letters
A lively class discussion is almost guaranteed if you introduce the topic of college financial aid letters. A U.S. Government Accountability Office (GAO) report found that 91% of colleges either underestimate net prices or fail to include the net price entirely.
In their offer letters, the GAO recommends that colleges subtract only grants and scholarships that students will receive but include ancillary costs like “tuition, fees, housing and meals, books, and living expenses.” Any parent with a college-age student—or any student paying their own way—know that these expenses add up.
The GAO report is also a good example for students to analyze. It follows some principles we teach in business communication classes: a clear structure and detailed table of contents (with hyperlinks); a mix of text, tables, and other graphics (with callouts); and an executive summary. Some design features are a bit curious, for example, left-column headings and squiggly lines around tables.
Overall, best practices are clear, and I hope that colleges take the GAO’s advice. The news raises issues of integrity and accountability. I find it interesting that the GAO was renamed the Government Accountability Office from the Government Accounting Office in 2004. The name does seem to better fit the organization’s mission.
FTX Founder Plays the Innocent
Sam Bankman-Fried’s interview about the collapse of FTX tells us a lot about him, about investors, and about regulation. Bankman-Fried chose to tell his story to New York Times columnist Andrew Ross Sorkin via video from the Bahamas. (See transcript.) Starting with a discussion of the many people were “hurt” by the business failing, Sorkin tried to hold Bankman-Fried responsible for billions of losses. He offers two divergent views of what happened to the company: that Bankman-Fried is a “young man who made series of terrible, terrible, very bad decisions,” or that he “committed a massive fraud—that this is a ponzi scheme, a manipulation of the system.”
Business communication students might see this as a false dichotomy. Bankman-Fried claimed that his goal was to “do right” by people and that he made mistakes. He said, “Look, I screwed up. I was C.E.O. I was the C.E.O. of FTX. And I say this again and again that it means I had a responsibility, and I was responsible ultimately for us doing the right things and didn’t. We messed up big.” But he denied setting out to commit fraud. Ross read a letter from someone who says he lost $2 million—his life savings—and that Bankman-Fried used his money to fund his hedge fund. Maybe both narratives are true, and Bankman-Fried isn’t seeing or admitting it.
Students might benefit from a class discussion or assignment about the investor perspective. Not to the blame the victim, but what accountability do investors have in this situation? What were they hoping to achieve compared to other investors—or compared to the general public who do not have $2 million to invest? Depending on how far you want to take this story, a discussion about regulation is certainly relevant, and students, particularly if they or they families have benefitted from crypto investments, might have a lot to say about it.
Otherwise, the video serves as a good example to analyze for delivery, persuasion, character, and interview skills. How is Bankman-Fried as a presenter? How does he balance logical arguments, emotional appeals, and credibility? What character dimensions are at play? Was it the best decision, going against his lawyers’ advice, to do this interview—and from his penthouse in the Bahamas? How well did he respond to questions? Overall, are students more—or less—favorable about Bankman-Fried after watching the interview?