Communicators, Why Are We Here?

From Gary Sheffer:

Since I delivered this speech to the Page Society in September 2024, changes in society make my words seem somewhat quaint. In my remarks, I exhorted my peers to remain steadfast in their roles as the consciences of their organizations. I asked the question, if not communicators—with their expansive view of the world—then who will stand up for values-based capitalism? I focused specifically on the fight for diversity, equity, and inclusion, which, objectively, makes companies more competitive.

Five months on, many companies are waving white flags on DEI, and some businesses are even wondering if DEI is now illegal. Alarmingly—particularly for communicators—the government is banning language and words it considers related to DEI. The National Security Agency is deleting web pages that contain words such as “privilege” and “equality”—even when they are not used in the context of DEI.

Few are standing against these chilling developments. I know and respect my peers in communications and I am certain that, inside their organizations, they are a voice for reason. I hope they are successful. 

***

A little more than 25 years ago, I got in my four-speed Ford Escort wagon with a George Pataki bumper sticker and made the trip from our home in Schenectady, New York, to GE world headquarters in Fairfield, Connecticut, and walked into the office of GE CEO Jack Welch for a job interview.

I was puzzled: Why would the world’s most famous CEO want to meet me? After all, I was interviewing for a media relations job.

Jack’s reason soon became clear. My current boss was the governor of New York, where GE had many issues. And Jack believed the governor sent me to GE to spy on the company.

I’m not kidding.

I figured it out right after Jack stared at me with his piercing blue eyes, pointed at me, and said, “You’re a spy.”

Jack was many things. Subtle was not one of them.

I wasn’t a spy, so Jack wanted to know what interested me about GE. There were a lot of places to do PR, to be a communicator. He asked, again in his blunt way:

“Why are you here?”

There were a few reasons, including that Barb and I had four kids to support. But I also wanted the challenge. I greatly admired the company and its history, its global businesses, its commitment to leadership. GE mattered.

So, I said:

“I always wanted to play for the Yankees. I can’t do that on the baseball field. But I can do it here.”

This seems like the right time and place to say that I never expected to play for my favorite baseball team and end up in the Hall of Fame.

But here we are… because Jack Welch loved being compared to the Yankees. 

I probably wouldn’t be at this podium tonight if not for Jack. I definitely would not be here if not for his successor, Jeff Immelt.

Jeff believed deeply in the communications function. And in the best way possible…by making sure that our advice counted.

I remember one conversation in particular.

It was 2011. The United States was still reeling from the global financial crisis. Unemployment was near the highest it had been in 30 years.

President Obama asked Jeff to volunteer and serve as chair of what was called, informally, the Jobs Council.

It was a non-partisan group of business leaders who convened to devise strategies to ensure American competitiveness and strengthen the economy.

Yet, it was controversial. Politics, mostly. The other party… the propagandists… even a few customers and employees… they were all waiting to beat Jeff up.

Jeff asked me if he should accept the president’s offer.

I had no better advice than to ask rhetorically: 

“Well, what’s your ‘no’ answer for when the President of the United States asks for your help?”

Jeff agreed to do it. Quite courageously, I should add.

I thought a lot about that conversation as I prepared for tonight—just as I thought a lot about that first meeting with Jack.

For me, they’re connected.

I think “why are you here” and “what’s your ‘no’ answer” are, in some ways, the same question. 

At least as they relate to what we do and the organizations we work for.

As they relate to Page and the work we do to advance the role of the chief communications officer.

And, as they relate to us being trusted advisors, coaches and mentors.

Why are we here? Why should we be active leaders even when it’s less controversial, and less risky, to stay quiet?

My answer: What’s easy isn’t always what’s right.

Our goal has never been just a title or an office in the C-suite.

We have earned a say…. But what’s more important—knowing the people in this room—is that we have something to say.

We, as communicators, have expertise. Insights. Advice. 

And they’re more important than ever.

Over the past year, I’ve heard and read about companies and universities pledging “neutrality” on important public policy issues—and retreating on ESG or DEI. Some suggest these initiatives are not core to their business.

It wasn’t that long ago when the CEOs of the Business Roundtable came together and redefined the purpose of corporations, saying they play an essential role in improving society…

Agreeing that a broader view is the key to long-term value…

Deciding together… rightly… that corporations should be committed to balancing the needs of all stakeholders.

That was only five years ago.

What happened? 

It’s also worth remembering that corporations have a proud history of promoting social good after listening to stakeholders, such as on gay marriage in the United States and apartheid in South Africa.

What good company doesn’t want to be socially responsible… environmentally responsible… well-run from a governance perspective? It seems to me it’s just good business.

Now I want to be clear. I understand how difficult it is to make decisions that affect brand sentiment and reputation, even possibly the bottom line. “Bud Light Syndrome” is real. Proxy fights are at an all-time high. We live in a polarized society, and stakeholders with conflicting interests make these choices difficult.

I also realize that I no longer work for a corporation or an agency. I’m in a different place than most of you. I am here as a friend to encourage and exhort, not to lecture.

It’s my view that, given the varied interests of modern corporations and organizations, neutrality seems impossible.

And, in some cases, it may be irresponsible.

At the very least, it’s too easily interpreted as indifference.

Holocaust survivor—and Boston University professor—Elie Wiesel warned in a 1999 speech about the perils of indifference. He said: 

Indifference is not a response. Indifference is not a beginning; it is an end. How can we seem indifferent when stakeholders care about business issues such as corporate tax policy, regulation, climate, and where and how we work?

How can we seem indifferent when stakeholders are passionate about—and often personally invested in—social issues, including human rights, voting rights, LGBTQ+ rights, and reproductive rights?

And in an area of particular concern to Page—and to me—how can we accept that varied stakeholders in an ever-changing world no longer care about diversity? Or that equity and inclusion are now bad words? 

How can any organization argue that any of this is not core to what they do, or who they are?

To be fair, I can’t possibly know from the outside what exact considerations go into any decision to step back from DEI programs and commitments…even, in some cases, to end employee resource groups.

I can only tell you, respectfully, what it looks like from the outside: capitulation to well-funded bullies. 

So instead, I hope you will continue to advocate for DEI…something that objectively improves your organizations and is supported by most Americans as a “good thing.” [Ipsos/Washington Post poll.]

In our industry, there is widespread agreement we must do better on DEI. Page’s work has been outstanding. The Diverse Future program and Diversity Action Alliance offer opportunities for all of us to get involved in advancing DE & I. The mentoring program is energizing and fun; I guarantee you will make a lasting connection with a rising communicator. 

So, please…let’s not give up.

Let’s not separate ourselves from the society that gives us permission to operate. 

Our job as communicators is to effectively manage the nuance and gray areas of our world. It’s to forge engagement, understanding, and compromise that bridge extremes—where we can.

No other function thinks about the perception—or potential for fabricated perception—manipulated by forces using sophisticated content, channels and tools—the way we do. And that discussion isn’t just important for our organizations, it’s at the very root of society.

This is not about endorsing any political candidate or taking public positions on everyissue. Rather, I’m suggesting that we carefully reflect and consider the future of a system that has made so many enterprises so successful.

We must help executives and clients develop and adopt a point of view that is consistent with their corporate values and their fiduciary duty … and not radically inconsistent with the views of customers, employees and partners.

This is the hardest task we face. 

So, let’s be intentional about our work.

Let’s understand that while companies’ views will not necessarily reflect the views of their stakeholders every time, good companies will always listen and consider them.

And let’s reflect on what we, as PR and communications executives, can do to protect and enhance our companies and clients…and as we do, the rights and well-being of people. 

Knowing what Page stands for, and the tremendous work it has done to strengthen the role of the chief communications officer.

And looking at the impressive people assembled here…

Remembering all the immensely talented communicators I’ve had the privilege to work with…

Thinking of the potential of the next generation, tomorrow’s PR leaders, the diverse group that Page members are currently mentoring…

I know we can do a lot.

But not by being passive. 

As communicators, we did not scratch and crawl all the way to the C-suite… so once we arrived, we could play it safe. We did it because we developed a vision for engagement, for building character and trust, and for social value creation.

So, I ask, perhaps again rhetorically.

What’s our ‘no’ answer for when stakeholders and society ask if we’re willing to stand up and speak out?

Why are we here?

We’re here because you’ve earned a seat at the table…in fact, you’ve earned many seats at the table. 

We have a voice.

And if we use it, our voice can be the conscience.

Thank you.