The Myth of Silence
Let’s be honest, there was a time when “no comment” was a perfectly acceptable way to handle a difficult story.
It wasn’t avoidance, it was strategy. You could throw a two-word statement at a journalist and, nine times out of ten, watch the whole thing blow over.
The logic was simple: tomorrow’s paper would be wrapped around someone’s chips, and the headlines would be forgotten by lunchtime. Silence bought time, softened the blow and starved the fire of oxygen.
But that time is long gone.
In today’s digital-first world, nothing disappears. Screenshots are permanent. Social media is instant. Archive links outlive apologies. A “no comment” is no longer neutral, it’s a red rag to a journalist, a green light to trolls and a vacuum just waiting to be filled by someone else’s version of events.
I know this because I’ve been on both sides of the media machine.
As a showbiz journalist and editor and as a business and human interest reporter, I used to love a no comment. It gave me the space to write the story I believed needed told – without constraint, without interruption and without the PR-polished spin.
As a publicist and strategist, I’ve seen organisations cling to silence hoping it’ll save them, only to watch it backfire, escalate and spiral far beyond what a well-placed comment could have controlled.
Here’s the truth: if you don’t speak, someone else will, and they’ll shape your story and the narrative without you.
It’s time we put the old “no comment” mindset to bed. Because what used to protect you will now destroy your credibility.
How “No Comment” Used to Work, And Why It Doesn’t Anymore
It’s true there was a time when getting a “no comment” as a journalist was like hitting the jackpot.
It was freedom. Space. Control.
See, when you’re writing a story, especially one that’s controversial or challenging, you’re constantly balancing competing voices, legal considerations and editorial constraints. And in the print-first world I started in, there were hard word counts. You had 500 words. Maybe 800 if you were lucky. So every quote, every line of rebuttal, every paragraph of clarification… it all took up precious space.
When a person, organisation, or publicist handed me a “no comment”, it wasn’t the end of the story, it was a green light to shape the narrative without interference.
Let’s be clear: most journalists aren’t trying to be biased. But when one side engages and the other goes quiet, what do you expect is going to happen?
The piece will inevitably lean towards the only story being told. Because when you leave a void, it gets filled. And I filled it… with detail, evidence and the voice of the people who were willing to speak.
Sometimes, that meant I got to shine a spotlight on injustice or something that needed to be called out. Sometimes, it meant I had more room to dig into the nuance of what was really going on. Either way, the “no comment” didn’t kill the story. It gave it more oxygen.
I remember a very specific case, writing about what could only be described as exuberant spending by a prominent organisation during a time when austerity was hitting hard and the public conversation was focused on poverty. I reached out for comment and got, essentially, a bland “no comment” delivered via a major PR agency. And I remember being genuinely shocked. I could think of a ton of ways they could have framed it to protect themselves or at least soften the blow. But they gave me nothing.
So what happened? The charity I’d spoken to, the ones representing the people being impacted, got more space. More time. More weight. Their version of events went unchallenged. The story landed harder. And the organisation missed its chance to explain, contextualise, or defend.
That was then.
But now? The media landscape has completely transformed and “no comment” doesn’t cut the mustard, it does more damage than ever.
We’re not working with chip paper anymore. We’re working with pixels, screenshots, shares, search engines and archives. There’s no word limits on a news website. There’s no finality to a tweet. When you stay silent now, the story doesn’t go away, it builds and it spreads. It takes on a life of its own.
And let’s not ignore the local context here. In Northern Ireland, silence has long been a cultural reflex. A legacy of the Troubles, a by-product of political fear, a tactic of institutional caution. And for years, it worked, because people were afraid to speak and the media was more predictable.
But we’re not in that world anymore.
The new generation of audiences, and journalists, want transparency. They want accountability. They want human response. And they’re not afraid to call it out when they don’t get it.
So if your comms strategy is still operating on the assumption that saying nothing is the safest option in a crisis, you’re playing a very old game in a very new arena.
And I can promise you – you will most certainly lose.
When and How to Speak. Real Strategy Over Panic Response
Let’s get something straight, speaking up in a crisis isn’t about reacting fast for the sake of it. It’s about reacting strategically.
Too many organisations fall into two camps: panic and say too much or freeze and say nothing. Both are dangerous. Both can cost you credibility, relationships and long-term trust.
Real crisis comms isn’t about spin. It’s about structure.
And before you even open your mouth, or start crafting a line for the press, you need to know one thing:
Not everyone is fit to speak.
It doesn’t matter how senior someone is. If they can’t think on their feet, remain composed under pressure and deliver a message with clarity, they should not be the spokesperson. Full stop.
I’ve seen too many businesses push their CEO or founder out front “because they’re the face of the organisation”, only to watch them flounder, say the wrong thing or crumble under scrutiny. The damage from a botched live interview or poorly judged press comment can take months, even years, to undo.
Written Statements Matter… And They Set The Agenda
In most cases, I’ll advise starting with a well-crafted written statement.
This gives you time to control the message, clarify the facts and give journalists something they can build their questions around. A good statement guides the narrative. It puts you on the front foot. And in the early hours of a crisis, that can be the difference between escalation and de-escalation.
But be warned, the humble holding statement isn’t what it used to be.
You can’t fob people off anymore with a vague “we are aware of the situation and looking into it.” That might have held space ten years ago. Now it just signals weakness, dithering or worse – indifference.
People want decisive language. Leadership. Action. Even if you don’t have all the answers, you must at least show that you know what’s going on and that you’re doing something about it.
Never Make Decisions By Committee
One of the biggest mistakes I see organisations make in the early stages of a crisis, especially when I’m consulting on a crisis situation, is trying to crowdsource their response.
You pull together six leaders, three advisors and a couple of comms people… and suddenly you’ve wasted half a day rewriting a one-line statement. Everyone has an opinion and no one ever wants to be the first to comment, the first to sign off or the final word. It’s exhausting, frustrating and, frankly, detrimental to the situation.
In today’s media landscape, you simply don’t have that luxury.
Speed matters. And clarity matters even more. That’s why when I’m working with clients to craft a crisis comms plan I always insist that it must clearly define:
- Who owns the message
- Who signs off on final wording
- Who speaks (if anyone)
- Who handles internal communication
- And when to escalate
You need clear ownership and authority. And you need someone in the room who understands the reputational and political impact of every word you publish.
A Real-World Example
A few months ago, I handled a real-time crisis with a client where something had broken publicly before the team had even seen it coming. Within 20–30 minutes, we had the core leadership on a video call. No dithering, no ego, no panic.
We walked through what had happened. Clarified what was known and what wasn’t. Agreed on tone, drafted a statement outline and agreed final sign off procedure. I then took it away, wrote the statement, sent it to everyone but waited for the “owner” of sign off to review and approve. The statement was live within the hour and the client was on a major radio station within 2.
That’s not luck. That’s structure. That’s process. That’s experience. Not just mine, but of the team who knew who to trust, when to step in and when to stand back.
And it’s exactly what I mean by real strategy over reactive response.
The Five-Point Framework For Effective Crisis Comms
This is what I share with my clients – and it holds up every time, different practitioners will have different versions of this and depending on the crisis – you may have to amend slightly:
- Step 1 – Acknowledge the issue Don’t dodge it. Don’t downplay it. Recognise what’s happened and who it affects.
- Step 2 – Admit fault, if applicable If it’s your mistake, own it. Quickly and without qualification.
- Step 3 – Apologise meaningfully Not the passive “we regret any inconvenience” nonsense. A real, human apology.
- Step 4 – Provide context How did it happen? Why did it happen? People want to understand, not speculate.
- Step 5 – Share what you’re doing to fix it Tell them what steps you’re taking. Be specific. And show how you’ll prevent it happening again.
This isn’t about appeasement. It’s about leadership. And in a crisis, leadership is communication.
Ethics, Truth and Controlled Transparency
Let’s get this out of the way – yes, publicists have a reputation for spin.
But if you’re doing it right, crisis comms isn’t about lying, evading or sugar-coating the truth. It’s about presenting the truth strategically, responsibly, and authentically, with the right message, to the right people, at the right time.
Here’s the truth: if you lie, you’ll get caught. Maybe not immediately, but you will. And when that happens, the damage won’t just be reputational – it’ll be structural. Trust takes years to build and seconds to lose.
As a journalist, I’ve exposed those lies. As a publicist, I’ve seen what happens when people try to bluff their way through. And as a strategist, I’ve had to pick up the pieces of too many shattered brands that thought they could manipulate their way out of accountability.
Not Everything Has To Be Said, But Everything Must Be Decided
There’s a big difference between telling the truth and telling everything.
You don’t need to put all your dirty laundry out in public. You don’t need to walk journalists through every decision-making process or internal dynamic. But you do need to know:
- What’s public
- What’s private
- What’s fair to disclose
- What’s likely to be discovered anyway
- And what line you’re willing to stand over under scrutiny
Controlled transparency is exactly that – controlled.
It’s not hiding. It’s not spin. It’s saying, “Here’s what we can share, here’s what we can’t and here’s why.”
If you’re still deciding these things on the fly – or worse, when you’re already under pressure – you’re too late.
The Real Risk Is Being Found Out
When your internal narrative doesn’t match your external one, the results can be devastating:
- Staff leak screenshots.
- Journalists chase unnamed sources.
- Whistleblowers surface.
- Social media sleuths start pulling receipts.
- And before you know it, your carefully worded statement is being torn apart in the comments section.
This isn’t paranoia. It’s reality.
If your statement says one thing and your team is telling another story behind the scenes, journalists will dig deeper. And they’ll find the gap. And when they do, that gap becomes the real story.
You’ve got to align your internal and external messaging, not just for consistency but for credibility. That means preparing your staff, briefing your leadership and making sure the values you put on paper actually show up in your actions.
Authenticity Is Long Game Strategy
I know it’s tempting to patch over the cracks. To minimise. To deflect. To “manage optics.”
But the truth, when delivered with clarity and context, is always more powerful than spin.
And let’s be honest: your audience is smarter than you think.
They can smell insincerity. They can see through PR theatre. They know when they’re being handled.
What they want is honesty with direction. Not chaos, excuses or jargon.
The more authentic you can be, even when it stings in the short term, the more likely you are to build resilience, loyalty, and trust in the long run.
So stop worrying about sounding perfect.
Start focusing on sounding real.
The Digital-First Reality… And Why Your Comms Structure Must Catch Up
We’re no longer in a print-first world. That’s not a prediction – it’s a fact.
Today, the first place most people hear about a story isn’t the newspaper or even the 6 o’clock news – it’s a social media post, a WhatsApp group, a screenshot, a tweet, or a push notification.
The media cycle is now digital-first… and instant.
And yet, far too many organisations are still managing their communications like it’s 2003.
They’ve built their comms strategies around press releases, internal approval chains and leadership sign-off on every word – while the real-time conversation is already happening online, without them.
Here’s the problem: digital is where the crisis starts – and often where it ends. So why are we still putting our most inexperienced people on the frontline?
When The Least Experienced Run The Most Powerful Channels
In many businesses, especially in Northern Ireland, social media is still treated like the intern job. It’s handed to the youngest person on the team, often because they “get social”, other times because no one else wants to do it. Web updates, email responses, even community management – all dumped on someone junior with little or no strategic oversight.
And during business-as-usual, that might just get you by.
But when something goes wrong? When you’re in the eye of a storm?
When a journalist is watching your replies, a stakeholder is reading your comments and your own staff are seeing how you handle pressure?
That digital presence becomes the face of your organisation. And if it’s being managed by someone with no authority, no training, and no escalation plan – you’re in trouble.
Digital Is Now Your Public Front Door
Social media platforms, your website, email inbox – these aren’t just comms tools. They’re live, reactive environments.
They’re where:
So your comms structure needs to reflect that. You must have clear policies in place for:
- Who monitors what, and when
- What can be said without approval
- When a response must be escalated
- Who signs off under pressure
- How digital and leadership comms stay aligned
There must be zero guesswork in a crisis. Your digital team, whether it’s one person or five, should never have to wonder, “Can I say this?” or “Should I wait?” when time is critical.
Your Online And Offline Messaging Must Be Cohesive
It’s no good putting out a formal public statement if your social media replies are off-message, delayed, or worse…tone deaf.
I’ve seen organisations say all the right things on paper while their digital presence is contradicting them in real time. That disconnect kills credibility. It creates confusion. And it opens you up to even more scrutiny because now you’re not just facing a crisis, you’re also proving you can’t manage your own narrative.
It’s Time To Treat Digital Comms With The Respect It Deserves
Your frontline comms team aren’t just content creators – they’re risk mitigators, tone-setters, and reputation managers. They need to be trained, trusted, and supported at a strategic level.
If you’re still treating digital as an afterthought, a dumping ground, don’t be surprised when your crisis response falls apart.
Because what you say in the press won’t matter if your online presence tells a different story.
What Northern Ireland Organisations Keep Getting Wrong
Let’s not dance around it, there’s a particular brand of risk aversion in Northern Ireland that has calcified into culture. It’s cautious. It’s quiet. It’s avoidant. And it’s outdated.
Too many organisations here are still operating with a post-Troubles communications mindset. One where silence was seen as safe and public messaging was treated like a potential landmine. But we’re not in that era anymore and pretending we are doesn’t protect your reputation. It damages it.
Silence As A Legacy Strategy
There was a time when saying nothing was the best option. When organisational leaders feared misinterpretation, backlash, or stirring up political sensitivities. In that context, silence made sense. But the media and public landscape has evolved. The audience is no longer content to wait for statements from formal channels – they expect visibility, clarity, and accountability in real time.
And when organisations fail to respond, the vacuum gets filled by speculation, misinformation or worse, by the very narratives they fear most.
Strategy By Stagnation
The problem isn’t just fear, it’s structure. Or the lack of it. I’ve seen too many Northern Ireland organisations:
- Operate without a crisis comms plan
- Avoid setting clear messaging principles or values
- Delay responses because “we need to run it past the whole board”
- Leave the comms team out of the decision-making room until it’s already too late
There’s a stubborn culture of “this is how we’ve always done it” that’s holding organisations hostage. It paralyses progress and leads to the same PR mistakes playing out again and again – different faces, different headlines, same comms chaos.
Case In Point: Ballymena
When the Ballymena riots broke out, what struck me wasn’t just the violence or the rhetoric – it was the silence. A complete failure of coordinated messaging. Organisations that should have been leading the narrative either said nothing or issued bland, disconnected statements that did nothing to de-escalate or inform.
And that gap? It got filled with chaos. With racist framing. With mob logic. With outrage theatre that pushed women and marginalised voices to the centre of a firestorm they never asked to be part of.
It didn’t have to be that way.
A single unified message – prepared in advance, grounded in values and delivered with clarity – could have helped. But it wasn’t there.
Time To Move Forward
The truth is, the public has changed. People in Northern Ireland are better informed, more connected, and more vocal than ever before. They see through spin. They question silence. And they expect better.
If your comms strategy hasn’t evolved to meet that expectation and if you’re still treating “no comment” as a shield or a stalling tactic, then you’re way behind.
This isn’t about chasing controversy. It’s about having the courage to speak when it matters, the clarity to say something meaningful, and the structure to do it well.
Because staying silent in a crisis isn’t safe anymore.
It’s surrender.
What I’ve Learned… And What I’d Tell My Younger Self
If I could sit down with my younger self – fresh-faced, hungry, still trying to prove she belonged in rooms where she was always the youngest, the loudest or the only woman – I’d start with this:
You’re not just here to write the press release.
You’re here to speak the truth, even when it’s inconvenient. Especially then.
I’ve learned that if you’re working in communications, whether you’re an in-house team member, a publicist, a strategist, or an external consultant, your job isn’t to nod, smile and spin whatever’s handed to you. Your job is to give advice. Honest, sometimes uncomfortable, sometimes ignored advice.
And you need to be okay with that.
Stick To Your Values, Not The Payday
Over the years, I’ve turned down clients, contracts, and campaigns that didn’t align with my values. I’ve walked away from work that paid well but came with strings attached, ones that would’ve tied me to silence, to spin, to reputational clean-up that I wasn’t comfortable being part of.
My bank balance might not thank me, but my conscience always does.
That kind of clarity doesn’t come overnight. You earn it the hard way. By getting it wrong. By swallowing your voice in meetings. By pushing out messaging you didn’t believe in because someone said, “just make it work.”
But eventually, you hit a point where you know: if you have to contort yourself to make something look good, it probably isn’t.
And that instinct? That’s your compass.
Questioning Isn’t Disrespect – It’s Duty
One of the hardest lessons in this game is learning how to challenge without ego. To ask: Are you sure this is what you want to say? Are you prepared for how it’ll land? To be the person who slows down the statement that’s about to pour petrol on the fire.
I’ve had clients take that advice. I’ve had clients ignore it. Both are fine.
What matters is that you said it.
Because spinning something you know won’t land right – or worse, something that’s fundamentally untrue – will always come back to haunt you. People can smell inauthenticity a mile off. And when they do, they don’t just question the message, they question you.
Know Where You Draw The Line
You don’t need to agree with your client. That’s not the job.
But you do need to help them find the version of their message that feels true to them – not the prettiest or safest, but the most honest version they can stand over.
That requires trust. And trust doesn’t survive if you cross your own line.
So draw it early. Know what you’re willing to do and what you’ll walk away from. You won’t always be popular for it, but you will sleep at night. And in this business, that matters more than likes, claps, or coverage.
Because when the headlines fade, and the spin cycle ends, all you’ve got left is your name.
Make sure it still feels like yours.
If You Don’t Speak, You Don’t Lead
Let’s be honest, silence is rarely neutral.
In today’s media landscape, “no comment” isn’t just a missed opportunity. It’s a message in itself. And it usually says: We’re hiding. We’re not ready. We don’t care.
That might not be the truth. But it’s how it lands.
We’ve got to stop pretending that saying nothing is a viable strategy. It’s not. It’s a dodge. A delay tactic. A leadership cop-out dressed up as legal caution or strategic ambiguity. And more often than not, it backfires.
Because when people are scared, angry, confused or hurt, they look for direction. They look for leaders to speak, not to vanish behind a wall of “no further comment at this time.”
Silence Isn’t The Safe Bet – It’s A Surrender
There’s a myth that if you keep your head down and say nothing, the storm will pass. That if you just stay quiet long enough, the internet will move on, the headlines will fade and people will forget.
But that’s not how this works anymore.
Crisis comms isn’t about waiting it out – it’s about showing up. Owning the message. Meeting people where they are, even if where they are is angry, hurt or disappointed.
If you don’t step in to shape the narrative, someone else will.
And they won’t be working from your facts, your context or your intentions. They’ll be working from screenshots, speculation and whatever version of the truth makes the best story.
In the absence of your voice, people will fill the silence. And not in your favour.
Leadership Means Standing In The Fire
If you’re in a position of influence, whether you’re a founder, a CEO, a public figure, or even just the face of your own small business, you don’t get the luxury of disappearing when things get uncomfortable.
Leadership means speaking when it’s hard. When it would be easier not to. When the stakes are high, the heat is on, and there’s no neat or polished statement to hide behind.
You don’t need to have all the answers. You just need to be present.
People aren’t looking for perfection. They’re looking for accountability. For someone to say: “Here’s what happened. Here’s what we’re doing. Here’s what we’re learning”.
That’s what earns trust.
That’s what rebuilds reputation.
That’s what leadership looks like in the real world.
If you’ve made it this far and you’re still wondering what to say, or how to say it, just know you don’t have to do it alone.
For many many years I’ve worked behind the scenes with founders, leaders and teams who want to communicate with clarity, courage and conscience, especially when it matters most.
If that sounds like something you need, how can I help?
If you would like to review your crisis communications strategy, develop an action plan and/or need someone to step in and manage a crisis get in touch – [email protected] or grab my mobile number from my LinkedIn profile.
