How to Appear Confident

/in , , /by

The passing of the torch from the outgoing White House press secretary to the incoming White House press secretary is a monumental thing. Though it’s an honor to hold the job title for any amount of time, it’s also a very tough job as the world watches and waits for and grades your performance.

This week, we watched as Karine Jean-Pierre replaced Jen Psaki. And while there was a lot to critique in her answers to tough questions, her body language also deserves a conversation. Karine Jean-Pierre will likely improve as time goes on—the first week is usually the toughest—but there are lessons to learn in how she handled herself behind the podium. We all knew she was nervous (who wouldn’t be?!) because she looked nervous. But even if you are, there are ways to hide it and project confidence instead.

#1 — Don’t shift weight.

In this clip, you can see how the new press secretary shifts her weight from leg to leg. Doing so causes her to move around in the frame, which is distracting. Occasionally shifting weight is fine as you don’t want to lock your knees, but you want to stay centered behind the podium the majority of the time. Standing planted helps you look like you’re in control.

#2 — Maintain eye contact.

Referencing your notes to answer tough questions is wise. Reading straight from your notes without making eye contact with your audience makes it appear as if you don’t know the content. It’s better to alternate between referencing your notes and looking at the audience—spending more time looking at the audience. Of course, it’s best to have had enough practice to be able to speak without relying on notes. But if you’re not at that point, don’t let your fallback be to read your notes verbatim. Again, maintaining as much eye contact with the audience helps you look like you’re in control.

Words Matter

/in , , /by

The topic of abortion has dominated the airwaves since the release of the alleged majority draft opinion was published by Politico one week ago. We’ve heard plenty of arguments both for and against a sensitive issue that requires those who identify as pro-life to talk about it with care.

In the 50 years since Roe, we’ve learned that word choice matters because it reveals how you feel about abortion. For example, you can tell which side of the debate you’re on by which of the following words you use or don’t use: “baby” vs. “fetus” “pro-choice” vs. “pro-life” “right to life” vs. “women’s rights.” Confuse your words and you betray your message, just like President Biden did last week when he said, “abort a child.”

In addition to the words you use, it also matters HOW you talk about abortion and the examples you cite. Polling shows that a slim majority of Americans agree with the right to an abortion. But when asked to specify how far into the pregnancy an abortion should be permissible, that same majority of Americans overwhelmingly think there should be limits.

This change in perspective is largely due to the technology that reveals how a baby develops in the womb, which means those on the pro-life side of the issue should lean on these developments to ground their case.

Here’s what we now know about a baby’s development in the womb:

  • You can hear a baby’s heartbeat as early as three to four weeks.
  • A baby responds to touch at eight weeks.
  • A baby feels pain by 20 weeks or earlier.

Words matter, but so do the examples you use. When discussing the life of an unborn child, focus on their development in the womb. Doing so will give great weight to your talking points in the pro-choice/pro-life debate as these facts and figures continue to change hearts and minds.

To Tweet or Not to Tweet

/in , , /by

With all the talk surrounding Elon Musk’s Twitter “takeover,” the question remains—is it valuable to have a presence on the platform?

The answer is an easy “yes” if Twitter trends more towards a free speech zone. But even if it doesn’t, we argue there are still good reasons to log on. While only 23% of Americans are on Twitter, almost everyone that you need to stay in contact with to build a media presence is — producers, reporters, bookers, and hosts. Even if they don’t officially follow you, they often check Twitter feeds of guests to judge legitimacy.

If you want media coverage for your issue, organization, and/or brand, you have to start tweeting. Here are a few tips to help you use Twitter to your advantage:

#1 — Remember, you are what you tweet.
What you tweet about is your brand, so don’t go viral for the wrong reasons. Instead, think reasonably and be persuasive on issues you care about, even if doing so only results in a few followers at a time. Slow and steady wins the race.

#2 — Be consistent.
Tweet at least once a day (Monday-Friday) to build a following. Comment on news-of-day issues that are in line with your brand. Quote tweet people talking about those issues to show agreement and disagreement.

#3 — Get personal.
Because you are what you tweet, strive to be more than just your issue, organization, or brand. Tweet out personal photos, and comment on your hobbies and activities of the day. Doing so gives people insight into who you are as a person and makes you more interesting to follow.

Politics Doesn’t Have to Be a Raging Fire

/in , , , /by

At DMG, we agree with President Biden that in America it is about the right to “dissent peaceably.” But many in our country do not think that free speech applies to ideas they disagree with. DMG will continue to defend free speech—ideas that we agree with as well as those we don’t—and help our clients stand on the biggest platforms to use their voice. As the fight for free speech is front and center, consider hiring DMG to amplify you and your message in print, on radio and TV.

We wouldn’t be doing our job if we ended this email without a tip, so here’s an important one:

If you want your voice heard on radio and TV, op-eds are crucial. Radio and TV producers put the content and people they read on their shows. Plus, op-eds are gold for your media booking team.

Will you kneel?

/in , , /by

For the past two weeks, we’ve watched speech mobs dominate the protests and coerce politicians, cops, and Members of Congress into binary discussions to no productive end. As president of District Media Group Beverly Hallberg explained in her latest article: “They demand you condemn issue X and publicly shame you into specific action or silence if you have a different perspective.”

The speech mobs have attached themselves to several issues in recent days—lockdowns, defunding the police, etc.—but the script is always the same. We’re presented with one choice over another, and the space for debate is limited.

One of the binary questions that candidates and politicians can expect to face is: “Will you kneel?”

We’ve watched some already answer this question by kneeling. But others have chosen to stand in “solidarity,” and many haven’t kneeled, including a black state trooper who said, “I only kneel to God.”

What if you’re asked to kneel and you don’t plan to? Do you know how to respond?

True—the mob won’t be satisfied unless you comply with their demands. But in an effort to reach out to and work with people, it’s important to not be coerced into action. Issues are nuanced.

Here’s how we suggest you respond to someone else’s demand that you kneel:

“My posture is always going to be to stand. To stand up for people in this country and fight for <insert talking point>.”

If you shift the focus from kneeling to the bigger issue they think kneeling addresses, you take control of the answer and the rest of the conversation. It’s easier to have a productive debate if the conversation revolves around the issue and not the symbolism.

How to talk about the ERA

/in , , /by

In February, the House of Representatives voted to reconsider the Equal Rights Amendment. And just this week, FX is set to launch a mini-series detailing conservative activist Phyllis Schlafly’s fight against the same in the 1970s. For these reasons, it’s a timely issue to message.

But it’s also a tricky issue to message because arguments in favor of the ERA are highly politicized and emotionally-charged.

Here’s how we suggest you talk about it, with the help of the Independent Women’s Forum:

#1 — Start with common ground.
Even though we don’t support the ERA, we agree that women should be treated equally under the law. The good news is: women already enjoy equal treatment under the law as it’s illegal to discriminate based on sex. But you first have to state that equal treatment of women is important to you BEFORE you transition to why the ERA is bad legislation so people don’t immediately dismiss your argument.

#2 — Use examples to show that erasing sex distinctions is harmful to women.
A provision of the ERA is to erase sex distinctions, which is harmful to women. Examples abound and will help you make this point — “separate restrooms and locker rooms in public schools; the military draft for males; Social Security spousal benefits; the Department of Agriculture’s Women, Infants, and Children program; the Violence Against Women Act; grants for girls’ STEM training; and more.” Women would lose these benefits in the name of “equality” if the ERA becomes law, meaning we would be less safe and less free than we are today.

For more information about the ERA and why it’s harmful to women, check out the Independent Women’s Forum policy focus here.

Virtual Training + Coronavirus

/in , , /by

Stuck at home out of an “abundance of caution” to protect yourself and others from coronavirus? Us too.

So, why not use this time to refine your media interview and/or public speaking skills? DMG offers virtual training for all experience levels from the comfort of your home.

Just like our in-person training, virtual training focuses on best practices for media interviews and public speeches. Our team will work to identify strengths and weaknesses as well as strategies to further refine visual, vocal, and verbal performance via the same real-time practice and critique as our in-person training.

If virtual training sounds like a great fit for you and your staff, email info@districtmediagroup.com for rates and availability.

The One Word Rule

/in , , /by

One-word answers to a reporter’s questions are never a good idea until they are.

Secretary Pompeo proved the effectiveness of this strategy in recent interviews around Soleimani’s killing. In the interest of safety and strength, he was right to answer serious questions like “Any plans to evacuate the embassy in Baghdad, sir?” and “Any plans to pull some of the 5,000 U.S. troops in Iraq out?” with a simple “none.”

“None” communicated his point, left no room for misinterpretation, and underscored the severity of the situation. But it’s also interesting to note that he didn’t lean into the interview with a one-word answer. He first gave a 30-second assessment of what happened, which enabled him to be concise in his following two answers.

We often encourage clients to fill the time they’ve been given because you only get so many questions to communicate your message. But if the nature of the interview is such that national security is at risk, one-word answers are not only allowed but recommended.

Tax Day is coming.

/in /by

Monday is Tax Day, and we can expect a lot of confusion over refund size because of tax cuts. The common narrative by Democrats is the tax cuts benefited the rich at the expense of the middle class. But that’s incorrect, and we encourage you to spread the good news.

Here are two important things to remember when talking taxes and tax returns in 2019:

#1 — Refunds = Interest-Free Loan

Let’s not misunderstand what’s happening when you receive a refund from the government. The government is not giving you money, the government is returning your money. The money you receive in a tax refund is your money, but you’ve allowed the government to hold it interest free over the past year.

#2 — Check Your Paycheck

According to Money.com, smaller refunds are likely a result of larger paychecks — “In other words: ‘You’ve been receiving the tax cuts every two weeks’ for the past year.’” This is actually very good news given point #1. Because employers had to change how much money they withhold from employees under the new tax law, you get to keep more of your money throughout the year RATHER THAN having it returned to you via a lump sum during tax season.

Critics are likely to point to smaller refunds as proof that the tax cuts only benefited the wealthy, so use these two talking points to expose their false narrative.

How to talk about the Green New Deal

/in , , /by

The Green New Deal (GND) hits the Senate floor this week. Though it’s been in the news since its release, coverage will increase in the next few days as we watch the Senate presidential primary candidates decide whether to back up their vocal support with a vote.

Increased coverage means you should be prepared to field a question or two in your upcoming interviews. The good news? So often it’s difficult to visualize the impact of legislation –- how will it affect pocketbooks, what changes day-to-day, etc. — but tangible examples abound in the GND.

Here are a few of our favorites:

#1 — Cost
Total cost is roughly $93 trillion, which is a meaningless number to quote. Instead, break it down to cost per household = $419,000. There is not one single household willing to expand their budgets by $419,000/year. Not one.

You can also use a comparison to emphasize the sticker shock. The CBO has estimated that the moon landing would cost $225 billion today (which is a lot less than $93 trillion). AND WE WERE ABLE TO PUT A MAN ON THE MOON.

#2 — Eliminate air travel…
…in favor of high-speed rail. Given the recent high-speed rail fail in California, this seems like an impractical suggestion.

#3 — Everything is free
Literally, everything. The GND promises free money to those “unable or unwilling to work,” free jobs, free education, and free housing for EVERY American. 

The legislation is outrageous and unworkable as the facts and figures suggest, and you only need to highlight one or two examples per interview to prove your point. 

***

BONUS — If you’d like to stay away from facts and figures, here’s a block and bridge to highlight the absurdity:

Q: Don’t you think the GND is the best answer to a pressing issue?

A: “Why take seriously something the authors of the bill aren’t ready to put their names on? The very day AOC unveiled this plan, she removed it from her website and voted against it on the House floor.”