Corporate Press Release in Response to a Healthcare Crisis
Though the form and the intention behind informative and persuasive messages may not be dissimilar, differences in each direction do and should vary for the message to be effective. A variety of approaches can be used to solidify the type of messaging.
An informative message may be defined as one meant to transfer ostensibly factual information (though this is arguable depending on the actual intent of the message). The approach an informative message takes depends, in part, on whether information presented herein is positive or negative (Hynes & Veltsos, 2018). If positive, directly addressing the main idea to be conveyed right at the beginning of the message or very shortly thereafter is seen to be appropriate, whereas with negative information, indirectly addressing the information by adding a neutral or positive (if possible) buffer paragraph before the main message may be more appropriate. Both positive and negative information would be backed up with facts, though the composition may vary: positive messages would use facts to support the main claim made at the beginning of the message, while negative messages employ facts to explain the situation. Regardless of the angle, informational messages end with a goodwill statement, avoiding negativity especially in the case of negative information.
Persuasive messages, on the other hand, use indirect strategy almost exclusively (Hynes & Veltsos, 2018). It is possible—or even probably—that direct strategy in this case would be tantamount to a hammer to the head, possibly putting the backs up of those one is hoping to persuade. The indirect approach seeks to build an environment of trust and familiarity as a precursor to persuasion. An effective way to do so is to frame the goals of the persuader as similar to those of they who are being persuaded (Conger, 1999), and then propose solutions to or actions toward said goals. Unlike an informative message, a persuasive message cannot end simply with a goodwill statement: to do so would likely result in an entropic follow-through from the recipient. A call to action should be used instead (or in addition) to galvanize the recipient into action, even if said action is a mental shift rather than a physical one (Hynes & Veltsos, 2018).
Certain audiences may argue that indirect strategy is deceitful, that they prefer to hear only the facts and then be allowed to make their own minds up about said facts. They may consider indirect messaging underhanded or sly, or an attempt to cloak negative information in platitude. Others may appreciate the thought and strategy that are involved in indirect messaging, and may view it as a Machiavellian approach: shrewd and self-serving (perhaps), but necessary as the means to a favorable end. That indirect strategy has been used for unfavorable and/or unethical reasons does not help either case, which is made abundantly clear by the public’s overwhelming preference—in the present day, at least—for no “spin” (Scott, 2015). That human beings are inherently emotional and therefore often allow their emotions or other non-factual elements to color their processing of the facts presented (Conger, 1999) is a well-known staple of the marketing and PR professions; in this light, indirect strategy has an accepted and essential place in strategic messaging discussion.
Persuasive messaging comprises three strategies, a combination of which (any or all) may be used for maximum efficacy (Purdue Writing Lab, n.d.). The first of these is logos, or logic or reason. The aforementioned audience that ostensibly abhor indirect strategy often look for logos in messaging for which they are targeted, i.e., they look for facts. Persuasive messaging does not end with the facts, however: rather, facts are used as a starting point from which to draw generalized conclusions in inductive reasoning or in support of generalized assumptions in deductive reasoning. Care must be taken, however, to avoid logical fallacies, which detract from pure logic and can seriously harm the argument.
Ethical appeal, or ethos, refers to the level of credibility the message—or its author—demonstrates in the eyes of the audience, and directly affects how persuasive a message is (Purdue Writing Lab, n.d.). An audience is significantly easier to persuade if they trust the entity doing the persuading (Conger, 1999), and ethical appeal lays the foundation for the other persuasive elements. Ethos can also serve to establish common ground between the persuader and the audience, particularly in cases where said audience is hostile or otherwise resistant to being persuaded, by highlighting shared goals and values in an attempt to overcome this resistance (Purdue Writing Lab, n.d.)—without common ground, a resistant audience may simply refuse to be receptive to an otherwise persuasive argument, even if the logic is sound (Conger, 1999).
Pathos refers to emotional considerations. While persuasive messages rely heavily on argument and fact (hopefully, at least), connecting emotionally with the audience is essential. Gauging the audience’s emotions can be a challenge when there is no personal contact (as would be the case with a news media press release statement, or a television commercial, for example), but other methods can be used to do so, including polling and using a representative sample of the audience (Conger, 1999). To employ pathos effectively in persuasion, the message must appeal to the audience’s emotional needs and sensibilities.
Sarah McLachlan’s iconic ASPCA commercials are a classic example of persuasive messaging at work (Rawden, 2016). McLachlan is not a veterinary expert, so she establishes credibility through her celebrity status and well-known voice and singing style (Conger, 1999), exemplifying ethos (Purdue Writing Lab, n.d.). Logos is established with facts (albeit a bit vague) regarding animal abuse and neglect, but the true persuasive artistry is in the pathos, in the emotional connection forged with the audience with images of animals, some injured, some missing limbs or eyes, some in cages, all looking decidedly pathetic (in the original sense of the word, i.e., arousing pity), all designed to tug on the audience’s heartstrings. This ad campaign resulted in over $30,000,000 in contributions to the ASPCA (Rawden, 2016), speaking directly to the value of a well-crafted persuasive message.
References
Conger, J. A. (1999). The Necessary Art of Persuasion. Health Forum Journal, 42(1), 17. Retrieved from http://ezproxy.snhu.edu/login?url=https://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=edb&AN=2214584&site=eds-live&scope=site
Hynes, G. E., & Veltsos, J. R. (2018). Managerial Communication: Strategies and Applications. SAGE Publications.
Purdue Writing Lab. (n.d.). Rhetorical strategies. In Purdue Writing Lab. Retrieved from https://owl.purdue.edu/owl/general_writing/academic_writing/establishing_arguments/rhetorical_strategies.html
Rawden, J. (2016). Even Sarah McLachlan can’t make it through the Sarah McLachlan dog commercial. Retrieved from https://www.cinemablend.com/television/Even-Sarah-McLachlan-Can-t-Make-It-Through-Sarah-McLachlan-Dog-Commercial-107897.html
Scott, D. M. (2015). The New Rules of Marketing & PR (Vol. 5th Edition). Hoboken, New Jersey, U.S.A.: John Wiley & Sons.