Communication Breakdown

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll dissect how companies are mistaking noise for signal—and paying the price. From the surprising data behind Jimmy Kimmel’s suspension fallout at Disney to the bot-fueled backlash against Cracker Barrel’s rebrand, the hosts explore how misreading public sentiment and failing to align values with action opens the door for reputational damage. They introduce the concept of “narrative arbitrage”—a new kind of reputational risk where bad actors weaponize corporate messaging gaps for cultural or political gain. With real-time case studies and predictive insight, Steve and Craig lay out a roadmap for communicators navigating reputational minefields in the age of bots, culture wars, and chaos agents.TakeawaysCustomer behavior—not social media volume—is the real reputational signal.Disney’s 5X subscriber churn during Kimmel’s suspension was the clearest signal of consumer sentiment.Bots amplify backlash but rarely invent it—Cracker Barrel’s mistake was ignoring real diners.Narrative arbitrage describes when outsiders weaponize a brand’s contradictions for political or personal gain.Topics MentionedNarrative arbitrage, brand alignment, bots and amplification, reputational risk, cultural backlash, stakeholder trust, brand identity, narrative contradiction, chaos agents, crisis communicationCompanies MentionedDisney, Cracker Barrel, Target, Meta, Washington Post, YouTube, Microsoft, NFL, AlphabetEpisode Hashtags#Disney #CrackerBarrel #Target #Meta #YouTube #NFL #Microsoft #BrandReputation #CrisisCommunication #NarrativeControl #PublicRelations #StrategicMessaging #StakeholderAlignment #NarrativeArbitrage #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll mark the podcast’s one-year anniversary with a deep dive into two high-stakes moments in corporate communications. First, they break down Disney’s handling of Jimmy Kimmel’s abrupt suspension and return to air—an event that raised profound questions about corporate neutrality, free speech, and leadership under political pressure. Then they contrast that with Starbucks’ swift, quiet containment of a viral misinformation incident involving a barista, a teacup, and the memory of Charlie Kirk. Together, the two stories illuminate what happens when companies lean into—or away from—clarity, speed, and principle in emotional public moments. This episode offers a sharp look at the cost of corporate silence, the “Kimmel Effect,” and why even quiet moves can speak volumes.TakeawaysThe “Jimmy Kimmel Effect” shows how attempted censorship can amplify a message and a brand.Disney’s attempt at neutrality backfired by failing to articulate values or principles.In contrast, Starbucks executed a textbook response: fast, transparent, and proportionate.Topics MentionedFree speech, censorship, narrative contradiction, crisis containment, corporate values, leadership clarity, affiliate backlash, political pressure, reputation risk, internal trust, public perception, workplace statements, brand safety, misinformation, suppression effectsCompanies MentionedABC, Walt Disney Company, ACLU, Nextstar, Sinclair, StarbucksEpisode Hashtags#Disney #ABC #ACLU #Starbucks #JimmyKimmel #FreeSpeech #CrisisCommunication #ReputationManagement #CorporateLeadership #MediaStrategy #BrandTrust #CharlieKirk #SuppressionEffect #KimmelEffect #NarrativeContradiction #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll unpack the reputational risks of corporate silence in a post-Kimmel suspension media landscape. With Jimmy Kimmel pulled off-air by ABC following political pressure and regulatory threats, Steve and Craig explore the convergence of communicative caution, alignment signaling, and narrative contradiction. The conversation spotlights the emerging corporate trend of “strategic silence” as identified in the Ipsos Reputation Council report, and questions whether silence remains a viable risk strategy—or simply becomes complicity by omission. Disney becomes a central case study in this episode, where the fallout from its hasty and opaque decision-making offers critical lessons in stakeholder trust, regulatory pressure, and reputational consequence. For PR pros, CCOs, and corporate leaders, this episode is a deep dive into why and how silence communicates—and who gets to fill in the blanks when you don’t speak.TakeawaysSilence is never neutral- it communicates alignment, intention, or omission depending on the audience.Disney’s failure to explain or defend its actions regarding Jimmy Kimmel reveals a deeper narrative contradiction.Regulatory pressure, especially from politically aligned bodies, can reshape corporate communications in real time.Topics Mentionedcorporate censorship, regulatory pressure, strategic silence, narrative contradiction, alignment signaling, communicative caution, corporate reputation, media ownership, free speech, stakeholder perception, internal communications, SEC disclosure, scientists (legal standard), quarterly earnings, corporate strategy, political influence, reputational risk, legal exposure, employee trust, corporate values, FCC influence, crisis communicationCompanies MentionedABC, Disney, Ben & Jerry’s, Unilever, Ipsos, Nextstar, Sinclair Broadcast Group, FCC, Turning Point USA, Cracker BarrelEpisode Hashtags#ABC #Disney #BenAndJerrys #Unilever #Ipsos #Nextstar #SinclairBroadcastGroup #TurningPointUSA #FCC #CrackerBarrel #StrategicSilence #CorporateReputation #CrisisComms #NarrativeContradiction #PoliticalPressure #RegulatoryRisk #PRStrategy #StakeholderTrust #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll dig deep into the growing risk of narrative contradiction—when a company’s claims, perceptions, and reality stop aligning. Craig introduces the idea of “narrative governance” as the next frontier for communications leaders, urging companies to track and reconcile their messaging with the same rigor used in financial reporting. The discussion offers a practical, high-stakes guide for communicators navigating the blurred lines between framing and fraud in today’s environment of radical transparency.TakeawaysNarrative contradictions are not lies—they're truths that no longer add up.Drift happens when messaging evolves; contradiction happens when that drift breaks coherence.Claims, perceptions, and reality must align—or trust begins to erode.Topics Mentionednarrative contradiction, messaging alignment, narrative governance, stakeholder trust, disclosure risk, PR strategy, corporate reputation, internal vs. external messaging, complexity, drift vs. contradiction, ESG communication, SEC rule 10b-5, CSRD compliance, activist investors, leadership credibility, operational paralysis, contradiction registersCompanies MentionedCracker Barrel, Vale, PepsiCoEpisode Hashtags#Target #CrackerBarrel #Vale #PepsiCo #NarrativeGovernance #CorporateReputation #CrisisComms #DisclosureRisk #StakeholderTrust #ESGStrategy #LeadershipMessaging #CommunicationStrategy #ComplianceRisk #InternalComms #PublicRelations #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkCreditsProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast for the Observatory on Corporate Reputation.Connect with us: podcast@ocrnetwork.com • LinkedIn: Observatory on Corporate Reputation

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll dissect activist investor Elliott Management’s $4 billion stake in PepsiCo — and the rival business plan they rolled out to reframe the company’s strategy. The hosts analyze how activists weaponize contradictions, use timing to hijack the news cycle, and tell Pepsi’s story better than Pepsi itself. They also look at Harvard’s restraint in the face of a legal victory over the Trump administration, and the reputational freefall of a Polish CEO who sparked global outrage by snatching a souvenir hat from a child at the US Open. Together, the cases highlight the stakes for communicators in reclaiming narrative control and protecting credibility under fire.TakeawaysActivist investors often compete through narrative, not just capital.Shadow strategies succeed by simplifying contradictions companies ignore.Preempting reputational fault lines is more effective than defending them later.Topics Mentionedactivist investors, shadow strategy, corporate contradictions, credibility, transparency, restraint strategy, reputation risk, viral outrage, apologies, narrative control, crisis managementCompanies MentionedNestlé, PepsiCo, Coca-Cola, Starbucks, Southwest Airlines, Harvard University, Trump Administration, DrogbrookEpisodeHashtags#Nestlé #PepsiCo #CocaCola #Starbucks #SouthwestAirlines #Harvard #TrumpAdministration #Drogbrook #CorporateCommunications #CrisisManagement #Reputation #PublicRelations #Leadership #NarrativeControl #StakeholderTrust #Apologies #MediaRelations #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkCreditsProduced by AdvoCast for the Observatory on Corporate Reputation.Connect with us: podcast@ocrnetwork.com • LinkedIn: Observatory on Corporate Reputation

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll examine Cracker Barrel’s ill-fated modernization campaign and the backlash that forced the company to abandon its new logo. What began as a $700 million refresh—new interiors, a reworked brand identity, and a Manhattan pop-up event—quickly spiraled into a reputational crisis. Loyal customers complained the chain was stripping away its nostalgic charm, opportunistic critics amplified the outrage, and even President Trump weighed in. Steve and Craig break down how narrative contradictions, misplaced priorities, and political opportunism turned a design update into a communications debacle. They also highlight how Taylor Swift’s engagement announcement demonstrated the opposite: clarity, timing, and message control at cultural scale.TakeawaysNostalgia is not just décor—it’s a core part of Cracker Barrel’s brand identity, and changes to symbols like logos or interior risk alienating loyal customers.Defensive messaging (“our values haven’t changed”) signals insecurity; brands should lead with substance rather than justifying their choices.Topics Mentionedbranding backlash, nostalgia vs. modernization, corporate identity, logo symbolism, PR campaign strategy, narrative contradiction, crisis communication, investor relations, political pressure, culture wars, influencer marketing, media coverage, message clarityCompanies MentionedCracker Barrel, Campbell’s, Pabst Blue Ribbon, Jaguar, Walmart, Fast Company, Good Morning America, Taylor Swift, NFL (Travis Kelce)Episode Hashtags#CrackerBarrel #Campbells #PabstBlueRibbon #Jaguar #Walmart #FastCompany #TaylorSwift #TravisKelce #CorporateCommunications #PublicRelations #BrandReputation #CrisisManagement #CultureWars #MessagingStrategy #InvestorRelations #ReputationManagement #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll examine how companies are navigating the volatile communications landscape under Donald Trump’s renewed political influence. From Home Depot’s silence as ICE raids unfold in its parking lots, to Swatch’s mishandled apology for a racist ad, to American Eagle’s choice to double down rather than apologize, the conversation dissects what corporate silence, contrition, or defiance really signals. They also debate the inclusion of Trump’s press secretary Caroline Levitt in PR Week’s “Power 50” list, and close with Campbell’s Soup and Pabst Blue Ribbon’s oddball marketing mashup. For PR and corporate comms professionals, this episode asks: when does silence protect reputation, and when does it erode it beyond repair?TakeawaysHome Depot’s compliance-focused statement on ICE raids highlights the reputational risks of ignoring the human dimension of crises.Swatch’s apology fell flat by shifting blame onto “a young motivated team” instead of owning responsibility.American Eagle showed that doubling down with confidence can be less damaging than a half-hearted apology.PR Week’s ranking of Caroline Levitt underscores the tension between rewarding influence versus credibility in the PR profession.Topics Mentionedcorporate silence, reputational risk, crisis communication, industrial policy, Trump-era politics, stakeholder capitalism, ICE raids, values-driven branding, apology strategy, blame-shifting, culture wars, advertising backlash, politicization of campaigns, credibility in PR, brand confidence, marketing stuntsCompanies MentionedHome Depot, NPR, ICE, Swatch, Reuters, Instagram, American Eagle, Calvin Klein, Campbell’s Soup, Pabst Blue RibbonEpisode Hashtags#HomeDepot #Swatch #AmericanEagle #CalvinKlein #Campbells #PabstBlueRibbon #CorporateCommunications #CrisisManagement #ReputationStrategy #StakeholderCapitalism #PRWeek #Advertising #BrandValues #TrumpEra #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll break down Taylor Swift’s meticulously orchestrated rollout of her 12th studio album, The Life of a Showgirl. Far more than a standard product launch, Swift’s campaign blended multi-platform media activation, symbolic fan engagement, physical-world spectacle, and a strategically chosen podcast reveal to create a cultural moment with total narrative control. The hosts unpack how she turned authenticity at scale into a reputational masterstroke—one that bypassed traditional media, elevated her allies, and redefined expectations for major announcements. For PR, communications, and brand leaders, this is a case study in how to fuse precision planning with organic-feeling fan momentum to achieve maximum impact.TakeawaysAuthenticity at scale requires pre-designed systems that make organic participation feel natural, not managed.Strategic integration across platforms—digital, physical, and social—creates reinforcement, not just reach.Physical-world elements (Empire State Building lighting, Times Square billboards) multiply perceived cultural significance.Bypassing legacy media and traditional label machinery demonstrates the power of owned narrative architecture.Topics MentionedAuthenticity at scale, cultural convergence, fan engagement, multi-platform integration, narrative control, podcast strategy, strategic venue selection, physical-world media activations, pacing and sequencing, bypassing traditional media, brand credibility, cultural cross-promotion, reputational pivotCompanies MentionedIntel, Bureau of Labor Statistics, Spotify, NFL, Empire State Building, Times Square, Spotify, Wondery, AmazonHashtags#Intel #BureauOfLaborStatistics #Spotify #NFL #EmpireStateBuilding #TimesSquare #Wondery #Amazon #TaylorSwift #AlbumLaunch #CulturalConvergence #FanEngagement #PodcastStrategy #BrandReputation #PublicRelations #CorporateCommunications #StakeholderTrust #NarrativeControl #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork #SwiftyProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll explore two high-stakes showdowns—one rooted in strategic restraint, the other in narrative failure. First, they unpack Harvard's quiet but calculated resistance to White House pressure, as the university rejects a rumored $500 million settlement and signals a shift away from capitulation. Then, the focus shifts to Intel, where a four-month silence about its new CEO’s investments gives Trump and allies room to frame the narrative. The hosts dissect what these stories reveal about institutional autonomy, reputational endurance, and why communications discipline—not noise—is the playbook for surviving today’s political climate.TakeawaysHarvard demonstrates how strategic restraint can shift power without escalation.Refusing to match chaos with chaos can be a reputational strength.Intel's vague response opened a narrative vacuum others were happy to fill.Ambiguity is a liability in an era of weaponized attention.Topics Mentionedinstitutional autonomy, strategic restraint, narrative control, flood-the-zone tactics, reputational risk, crisis communications, political targeting, knowledge ecosystems, stakeholder communications, leadership under pressure, self-interest and civic responsibility, communications discipline, cross-sector coalitionsCompanies MentionedHarvard, Columbia, Brown, Intel, Cadence Design Systems, Nvidia, TSMC, Coca-ColaEpisode Hashtags#Harvard #Columbia #BrownUniversity #Intel #CadenceDesignSystems #Nvidia #TSMC #CocaCola #CrisisComms #NarrativeControl #CorporateReputation #PRStrategy #LeadershipMessaging #TrumpAdministration #ReputationRisk #InstitutionalAutonomy #StrategicSilence #CraigCarroll #SteveDowling #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll return to the ongoing saga at Astronomer—the data pipeline company whose PR tailspin took a surprising detour into celebrity marketing. Just when the dust seemed ready to settle, Gwyneth Paltrow dropped in with a cheeky, scripted spin crafted by Ryan Reynolds' Maximum Effort agency. Steve and Craig unpack what worked, what flopped, and what it means to let a “reset” moment breathe—or botch it by marketing the marketing. They then pivot to a broader analysis of earnings season as automakers and consumer brands navigate tariff turmoil with radically different communication strategies. Ford, GM, and P&G all face the same policy shock, but each tells a different story. The hosts break down how structure, candor, and stakeholder framing shape trust and signal control in volatile times.TakeawaysAstronomer’s Gwyneth Paltrow ad was an elegant off-ramp—until the company kept talking.“Don’t market the marketing” remains one of PR’s oldest rules for a reason.Tariff communication during earnings calls revealed three distinct narrative approaches: GM (structure), Ford (stakeholder framing), and P&G (candor).When policy is unstable, message legibility becomes more valuable than confidence.Topics MentionedCrisis communication, marketing vs. comms, reputation management, leadership accountability, corporate silence, narrative control, brand reset, post-crisis storytelling, tariffs, earnings season, inflation, stakeholder strategy, transparency, apology culture, narrative legibilityCompanies MentionedAstronomer, Maximum Effort, Goop, Mint Mobile, General Motors, Ford, Procter & GambleEpisode Hashtags#Astronomer #Goop #MaximumEffort #MintMobile #Ford #GM #ProcterAndGamble #CrisisCommunications #PRStrategy #ReputationManagement #StakeholderEngagement #EarningsSeason #TariffPolicy #LeadershipComms #Transparency #CorporateNarrative #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll unpack the viral scandal that cost Astronomer CEO Andy Byron his job after a kiss cam moment at a Coldplay concert set the internet ablaze. What started as a personal gaffe quickly escalated into a reputational crisis that put Astronomer—and its board—in the media spotlight. Steve and Craig examine how the company managed communications while its CEO and Chief People Officer were under scrutiny, and how discipline, not speed, became the foundation for reputational containment. The conversation explores the emotional dynamics of viral PR disasters, the limits of narrative control in the TikTok era, and the emerging lexicon of getting “Coldplayed.” It’s a crash course in governance-led crisis management for any comms professional navigating scandal in real time.TakeawaysSilence is still a message—vacuum breeds speculation, especially in a viral stormIn emotionally charged crises, audiences demand accountabilitySeparating the CEO’s behavior from the company’s values helped protect the brandTopics MentionedCrisis sequencing, TikTok virality, fake apology posts, emotional reputation, CEO misconduct, narrative control, governance delay, media spectacle, brand separation, legal exposure, corporate silence, executive accountability, information cascade, crisis containmentCompanies MentionedAstronomer, Coldplay, Modern Family (ABC)ChaptersEpisode Hashtags#Astronomer #Coldplay #ModernFamily #CrisisCommunications #ReputationManagement #ExecutiveConduct #CorporateGovernance #NarrativeControl #ViralScandal #TikTokPR #PRStrategy #CorporateReputation #StakeholderTrust #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll unpack one of the strangest PR weeks in recent memory—where Elmo becomes collateral damage in a public broadcasting funding fight, and Coca-Cola gets pulled into a bizarre distraction campaign by the President of the United States. They break down the crisis comms response from Sesame Workshop after Elmo’s Twitter account was hijacked with violent and anti-Semitic content, just as federal funding for PBS and NPR came under attack. Then, they examine President Trump’s erratic strategy surrounding the Epstein controversy, including how his communications chaos dragged Coca-Cola into the spotlight with false claims of a recipe change. From emergency messaging in rural America to narrative hijacking in the age of political performance, this episode explores what it means to be a high-trust brand in an untrustworthy media environment.TakeawaysSesame Workshop’s fast, values-based response showed the power of timely clarity in a reputational crisis.Brands in proximity to political power risk becoming props—regardless of intent.Trump’s “flood-the-zone” chaos strategy forces companies to respond to narratives they didn’t create.In an environment where nothing is off-limits, reputation resilience requires readiness—not just planning.Topics Mentionedcrisis response, public media, Sesame Workshop, communications strategy, media trust, distraction tactics, political hijacking, corporate reputation, rural communications access, narrative control, message framing, visibility vs. neutralityCompanies MentionedSesame Workshop, PBS, NPR, Corporation for Public Broadcasting, Twitter, Coca-Cola Episode Hashtags#SesameWorkshop #PBS #NPR #CocaCola #CrisisCommunications #PublicRelations #MediaTrust #CorporateReputation #TrumpAdministration #StrategicComms #NarrativeControl #StakeholderEngagement #BrandRisk #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll unpack three reputational firestorms that reveal deeper cracks in the comms industry. First up: Melinda French Gates’ jab at CEOs “pivoting to what some comms person tells us is the right thing to do”—a comment that drew both defensiveness and reflection from PR pros. Steve and Craig examine whether Gates was attacking communications—or challenging the field to rise to its values. Then, the hosts turn to Twitter (now X), where Elon Musk's latest pivot to AI—and Linda Yaccarino’s quiet exit—spark debate over whether communicators should follow their audiences off the platform. Finally, they dive into a plagiarism scandal at Air India, where a CEO’s post-crash message closely mirrored another airline’s statement. Was it just playbook fatigue or a failure of empathy? This wide-ranging summer episode is a case study in what happens when communications defaults to shortcuts, optics, and defensiveness instead of purpose and precision.Link:N Chandrasekaran First & Exclusive Interview After Air India Plane Crash:  https://youtu.be/VLbU3BNiGDo?feature=sharedTakeaways● Gates’ critique spotlights the reputational risk when messaging replaces authentic action.● Comms pros should respond to criticism with reflection—not defensiveness.● Twitter’s toxicity makes it an unreliable environment for corporate messaging.● Crisis playbooks are tools, not scripts—messages must still reflect humanity and values.● Speed is important in a crisis, but not at the expense of originality and sincerity.● The PR field must own its role in values communication or risk becoming the scapegoat.Topics MentionedCorporate values, PR defensiveness, strategic pivots, Elon Musk, crisis playbooks, plagiarism, platform strategy, AI backlash, sincerity in messaging, stakeholder trust, reputational risk, values-based leadership, message alignment, corporate response strategyCompanies MentionedX (formerly Twitter), Air India, American Airlines, Tata Group, Blue Sky, Writers Guild of America, NPR, BoeingChapters00:00 Melinda French Gates Calls Out Comms02:15 Should Comms Take It Personally?06:45 Integrity vs. Optics09:00 Twitter’s Collapse and Linda Yaccarino’s Exit12:50 Elon’s AI Pivot and Toxic Platforms17:40 Thinking Strategically About Leaving X21:30 The Air India Crash and the Copy-Paste Crisis25:00 Playbooks vs. Personalized Apologies28:00 Speed vs. Sincerity in Crisis Messaging30:25 The Role of the Comms Pro in Crisis Moments33:00 Final Reflections and a Nod to “Plagiarism Today”Episode Hashtags#MelindaFrenchGates #AirIndia #AmericanAirlines #Twitter #X #ElonMusk #BlueSky #WGA #NPR #CrisisCommunication #StrategicMessaging #CorporateReputation #LeadershipComms #StakeholderTrust #PRStrategy #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll mark the halfway point of 2025 with a look back at some of the most instructive communications moments of the year so far. From automakers navigating the chaos of shifting tariff policies to law firms facing political retribution, this highlight reel explores how corporate leaders have used — or misused — narrative to signal alignment, project confidence, and stake out their values in the Trump 2.0 era. It’s a holiday weekend rewind filled with lessons in visibility, proximity to power, and the risks of getting the volume wrong in today’s high-stakes media landscape.TakeawaysFord’s CEO used “most American company” messaging as identity-forward alignment signaling.GM’s Mary Barra opted for a stakeholder-safe, restrained toneUnited Airlines used proactive transparency to build public trust during airport radar failuresLaw firms’ PR responses to Trump’s pressure campaign revealed a split between surrender and principle — with Jenner & Block emerging as a communications standout..Topics Mentionedalignment signaling, identity-based messaging, corporate reputation, political proximity, stakeholder trust, transparency, crisis communication, legal PR strategy, proactive media, rule of law, narrative controlCompanies MentionedGeneral Motors, Ford, Stellantis, United Airlines, Paul Weiss, Milbank, Jenner & BlockEpisode Hashtags#GeneralMotors #Ford #Stellantis #UnitedAirlines #PaulWeiss #Milbank #JennerAndBlock #CorporateCommunications #PublicRelations #CrisisComms #ReputationManagement #TariffPolicy #RuleOfLaw #PoliticalPressure #StakeholderTrust #AlignmentSignaling #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll take a halftime look at 2025, recapping six months of communication pivots, power plays, and reputational landmines. They revisit Ford's dramatic turn from tariff warnings to flag-waving patriotism, Amazon’s blink-and-deny tariff transparency saga, and Harvard's steady hand in the face of political attacks. Elon Musk's spiraling comms strategy earns him a slot as the year’s reputational loser, while Alan Garber and Harvard emerge as unlikely champions of principled messaging. The episode paints a vivid picture of today’s post-subtlety PR landscape—where performance, not prudence, is driving corporate narrative strategy.TakeawaysFord's strategic pivot from tariff critic to flag-waver shows how messaging must now flatter power to remain heard.Amazon’s fast walk-back on pricing transparency reveals the cost of misreading political room temperature.Harvard’s response to federal pressure showcases a masterclass in institutional resolve, values framing, and quiet leadership.Elon Musk’s refusal to embrace comms strategy has left Tesla’s brand reputation untethered and declining.Topics Mentionedtariffs, performance communication, narrative alignment, political signaling, reputation management, CEO comms strategy, institutional voice, values framing, anti-woke backlash, DEI silence, crisis communication, corporate courageCompanies MentionedUnitedHealth Group, Restoration Hardware, Ford, GM, Stellantis, Amazon, Harvard University, Tesla, SpaceX, TwitterChapters00:00 Midyear Recap Setup01:00 Ford’s Patriotic Pivot on Tariffs04:30 Silence, Strategy, and the Auto Industry06:55 Amazon’s Blink-and-Bury PR Move11:45 Harvard's Reputational Reframing16:20 Standing Still vs. Flooding the Zone18:45 Elon Musk’s PR Freefall22:00 Strategic Isolation and Comms Collapse25:00 Clash of the Titans: Musk vs. Trump27:50 Wildcard Predictions for the Back HalfEpisode Hashtags#UnitedHealthGroup #RestorationHardware #Ford #GM #Stellantis #Amazon #Harvard #Tesla #SpaceX #Twitter #CorporateCommunications #ReputationManagement #CrisisComms #CEOComms #DEI #PoliticalMessaging #PublicRelations #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetworkProduced by Shawn P Neal at AdvoCast

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll wrestle with the restless energy leaders feel when business eases up but the mental engine keeps revving. They name—and tame—behaviours like “strategic fidgeting,” “vroom scrolling,” and “urgentifying,” showing how fake urgency drains teams while disciplined stillness builds clarity. Listeners get a play-by-play on reframing the July lull into a strategic asset that makes Q4 easier instead of heavier.TakeawaysIdentify strategic fidgeting early. Restlessness often masquerades as vision; spot when you’re rearranging furniture versus steering the ship.Value beats volume. Simplicity signals rigor—complex “show-your-work” deliverables usually hide anxiety, not insight.Watch the tachometer. Operating at ~90 % effort protects judgment and morale better than red-lining at 100 %.Kill fake urgency. “Urgentifying” creates activity without impact and erodes credibility; match momentum to the moment.Use quiet cycles for empowerment. Delegate stretch projects, deepen relationships, and set “quiet finish lines” that remove weight from next quarter.Schedule stillness. A blocked hour of genuine reflection surfaces strategic work worth doing—and what can safely pause.Topics Mentionedstrategic fidgeting, summer slowdown, fake urgency, vroom scrolling, urgentifying, leadership discipline, time-blocking, performance vs outcome, team empowerment, corporate communications strategyChapters00:00 Intro & the Summer Slowdown Paradox02:27 Naming the Moment: Weight Without Urgency04:48 The Dog Who Caught the Car – When Stillness Feels Wrong07:08 Defining Strategic Fidgeting09:27 Value, Not Volume: Dodging Complexity11:39 Vroom Scrolling & False Vigilance13:57 Managing the Tachometer: Running at 90 %16:21 Urgentifying: Manufacturing Pressure18:35 Empowering Teams During Quiet Cycles20:56 Forcing Functions & Quiet Finish Lines23:23 Final Thoughts & Quiet-Time InitiativesEpisode Hashtags#StrategicLeadership #CorporateCommunications #CrisisPrevention #TimeManagement #TeamEmpowerment #WorkplaceWellbeing #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll examine the communications void left as Los Angeles becomes ground zero for President Trump’s escalating deportation campaign. With ICE raids, military presence, and mass detentions dominating headlines, corporate America has largely chosen silence. Dowling and Carroll unpack why companies are hesitant to speak, what that silence signals, and how communicative caution is evolving in the second Trump term. Drawing from frameworks like ACCESS and STEADY, they offer a roadmap for CEOs navigating chaos, visibility, and value signaling in a climate where every word is a trigger. This episode challenges corporate leaders to prepare their principles now—before the spotlight finds them.TakeawaysSilence in high-stakes moments signals drift, not discipline—especially in politicized crisesThe ACCESS and STEADY frameworks offer actionable models for scenario-testing, stakeholder awareness, and calibrated messaging.Waiting for polling shifts or market drops to determine a communications stance undermines credibility.The line between individual expression and corporate implication is dangerously thin, especially with legacy brands.Clarity of principle, not volume of voice, should guide when and how companies speak up.“Not my lane” arguments fall flat when employee safety, local presence, or brand values are at stake.Topics MentionedImmigration enforcement, corporate silence, communicative caution, narrative control, visibility vs. invisibility, ACCESS model, STEADY model, alignment signaling, stakeholder expectations, CEO discipline, Trump-era messaging, reputational risk, chaos management, constitutional principles, political neutrality, civic responsibility, misinformation, scenario testingCompanies MentionedHome Depot, Waymo, Google, WalmartChapters00:00 Trump’s Crackdown in LA and Corporate Silence01:45 ICE Raids, National Guard, and Business Fallout03:40 Garment Industry Disruption and CEO Hesitance05:15 Tall Poppy Syndrome and Fear of Standing Out07:00 Neutrality as Complicity—Messaging that Holds09:23 Walmart's Minimalist Response to Christie Walton's Ad11:50 Immigration Polls Shift—Does It Matter?13:45 Invisibility Isn’t Safety: Readying the Message16:00 Communicative Caution vs. Disappearance18:00 ACCESS and STEADY—Frameworks for Clarity20:40 Aligning with Principles, Not Political Sides23:40 Scenario Testing When It Reaches Your Backyard26:00 From January Wildfires to Armed Conflict—Where’s the Consistency?28:13 Yale CEO Poll—When Would You Speak Out?30:39 Moral Judgment or Market Trigger?32:55 Final Thoughts: Speak as a Citizen, Not a BrandEpisode Hashtags#HomeDepot #Waymo #Google #Walmart #CorporateSilence #CrisisCommunications #ReputationManagement #StakeholderTrust #PublicRelations #TrumpAdministration #StrategicMessaging #LeadershipVisibility #CivicResponsibility #CorporateGovernance #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll dissect the silent recalibration of corporate Pride support in 2025 and the ripple effects of the Trump–Musk breakup. The discussion opens with a sharp look at how once-visible support for Pride has been replaced by hushed donations, geographic reallocation, or total retreat—leaving questions about stakeholder alignment, reputational strategy, and the meaning of corporate citizenship. The hosts challenge assumptions about “pullback,” caution against using soft data to make big claims, and underscore the blurred line between internal and external communications. In the second half, they unpack the political and reputational implications of Elon Musk's now-defunct alliance with Donald Trump, offering a cautionary tale about proximity to power—and the risks of borrowing someone else’s brand.TakeawaysMedia narratives built on thin data (like small-sample polls) can distort the conversation and mislead stakeholders.When companies tie themselves to political figures, they inherit not just reach but risk—and need an exit plan.The Trump–Musk breakup illustrates the reputational baggage of short-term alliances with polarizing figures.Topics MentionedPride Month, corporate sponsorships, stakeholder engagement, political risk, diversity support, internal communications, authenticity, employee trust, performative allyship, executive alignment, proximity to power, reputational fallout, data misrepresentationCompanies MentionedTarget, PepsiCo, Citi, MasterCard, SAP, Nestlé, HSBC, Comcast, Gravity Research, Twitter, TeslaChapters00:00 Corporate Pullback on Pride Month Sponsorships10:12 The Impact of Political Climate on Corporate Engagement19:00 The Fallout of the Trump-Musk AllianceEpisode Hashtags#Target #PepsiCo #Citi #MasterCard #SAP #Nestlé #HSBC #Comcast #Twitter #Tesla #CorporateCommunications #StakeholderEngagement #PrideMonth #ReputationStrategy #AuthenticityMatters #TrumpMusk #CrisisComms #StrategicSilence #LeadershipMessaging #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll examine how United Airlines and Harvard University are responding to reputational pressure with two very different transparency strategies. United pulls back the curtain on its safety operations at Newark amid cascading air traffic control failures, launching an ambitious media campaign to reinforce trust. Meanwhile, Harvard President Alan Garber enters phase two of a drawn-out public relations battle with the Trump administration, rallying institutional morale with disciplined messaging and strategic framing. Steve and Craig break down both campaigns—dissecting their timing, tone, and tactics—to explore what transparency, alignment, and message discipline look like under pressure.TakeawaysUnited’s transparency push—inviting cameras into its command center and simulators—is a high-risk, high-reward move designed to replace fear with evidence.Confidence, as Steve notes, is earned—not declaredTransparency works when backed by consistency. If delays persist, even strong messaging can quickly backfire.The episode contrasts two reputational strategies: Columbia’s quiet compliance vs. Harvard’s assertive defianceTopics Mentionedproactive transparency, narrative strategy, crisis communication, alignment signaling, reputational framing, confidence modeling, internal morale, political backlash, institutional autonomy, coalition signalingCompanies MentionedUnited Airlines, Harvard University, CBS, CNN, The New York Times, NPR, Columbia UniversityChapters00:00 Intro: Newark’s Crisis and Harvard’s Commencement00:33 United’s Strategic Transparency at Newark03:11 Behind the Scenes at United’s Command Center04:45 Confidence through Capability: United’s Reputation Play07:05 Risks of the Confidence Tone in Public Messaging08:41 Harvard vs. Trump: Alignment Signaling and Coalition Building11:23 Garber’s Message Discipline and Strategic Framing13:44 Harvard’s Phase Two: Internal Rallying and the Commencement Stage15:49 Kareem Abdul-Jabbar’s Validation and Harvard’s Split Screen Strategy18:09 The Taco Trade: Will Trump Follow Through?20:31 Commencement as Reputational StagecraftEpisode Hashtags#UnitedAirlines #Harvard #ColumbiaUniversity #CBS #CNN #TheNewYorkTimes #NPR #CrisisCommunication #ReputationManagement #CorporateTransparency #AlignmentSignaling #InstitutionalAutonomy #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork

In this episode of Communication Breakdown, hosts Steve Dowling and Craig Carroll analyze the 2025 Axios Harris Poll 100 — a comprehensive ranking of corporate reputation based on consumer sentiment. While Tesla’s dramatic fall dominated headlines, Steve and Craig dig deeper into what this year’s results reveal about public trust, market behavior, and the communications strategies that helped companies either rise above the noise or sink beneath it. From the inflation-fueled rise of Trader Joe’s to the reputational resilience of Costco, they break down how chaos, affordability, and authenticity shaped the scoreboard. They also explore the long-term implications of AI optimism, DEI backlash, and CEO overexposure.The 2025 Axios Harris Poll 100 reputation rankings:https://www.axios.com/2025/05/20/axios-harris-poll-company-reputation-rankingTakeawaysChaos and inflation were the two dominant forces shaping corporate reputation in 2025.Companies like Trader Joe’s and Costco built trustElon Musk’s three companies suffered reputational freefallAI companies gained reputational momentum, but early optimism may not translate into long-term trust without aligning with public values.DEI rollbacks haven’t uniformly hurt reputation scores — but backlash-driven declines show timing and media visibility matter.Topics Mentionedcorporate reputation, stakeholder trust, inflation, brand stability, CEO branding, chaos vs. disruption, AI acceleration, DEI backlash, narrative infrastructure, crisis communication, affordability, alignment, corporate values, public perceptionCompanies MentionedTesla, Twitter (X), SpaceX, Trader Joe’s, Patagonia, Microsoft, Toyota, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe’s, Arizona Beverage Company, Meta, Target, Walmart, John Deere, IBM, Nvidia, OpenAI, DeepSeek, Ford, General Motors, Blue SkyChapters00:00 Introduction and the Harris Poll’s Significance01:04 Reputation Rankings: Who’s Up and Who’s Down02:40 The Chaos-Inflation Equation04:51 Tesla’s Triple Threat Reputation Crisis07:17 CEO Overexposure and Brand Risk09:29 Cybertruck and the Myth of Marketing Fixes11:53 Twitter and SpaceX: Reputational Flatlines13:01 DEI Rollbacks and Reputational Impact16:18 Timing, Target, and Agenda-Setting18:41 Costco’s Quiet Stand and Communications Paradox20:53 Values, Visibility, and Organic Reputation23:14 AI Optimism: Microsoft, Nvidia, and the Age of Wonder25:40 Meta’s Residue and the Risk of Unlearned Lessons27:40 The Acceleration vs. Safety Dilemma28:02 Wrap-Up and Final ThoughtsEpisode Hashtags#Tesla #Twitter #SpaceX #TraderJoes #Patagonia #Microsoft #Toyota #Costco #HomeDepot #Lowes #ArizonaBeverage #Meta #Target #Walmart #JohnDeere #IBM #Nvidia #OpenAI #DeepSeek #Ford #GeneralMotors #BlueSky #CorporateReputation #CrisisComms #AIReputation #DEI #BrandStrategy #StakeholderTrust #ShawnPNeal #AdvoCast #OCRNetwork