What Happened
Three communication stories collided in the PR world recently: an AI tool got a crash course in public-facing messaging, McDonald's CEO found himself unexpectedly viral, and sustainability communicators are still fighting to be taken seriously. Each story sits at a different point on the credibility spectrum. Together, they paint a clear picture of what separates communication that lands from communication that flatters itself.
The Communication Angle
Start with McDonald's CEO going viral. Viral moments for executives fall into two categories: ones they engineered and ones that happened to them. The distinction matters enormously, because the response strategy is completely different. If the moment was organic, the worst thing a communications team can do is immediately professionalize it. Audiences can smell the polish. They liked the raw version. Don't sand it down.
Compare that to the sustainability messaging problem, which has the opposite challenge entirely. Sustainability communicators are not going viral. They are not breaking through. They are speaking in careful, hedged, corporate language to audiences who stopped listening three years ago. The problem is not the message. The problem is the delivery. They are talking about the future to people living in the present. They are using abstract metrics when concrete stories would do the job in half the time.
Here is the direct comparison worth examining: McDonald's CEO in a candid moment connects because it feels specific and human. Sustainability messaging fails because it feels generic and institutional. One person accidentally said something real. An entire industry is deliberately saying nothing memorable. That is the gap. Specificity beats scope every single time.
Now look at the AI angle. When an AI tool gets schooled on public communication, the lesson hiding inside that story is about trust. Audiences do not trust messengers they cannot locate emotionally. They want to know: does this source understand my situation, or is it just processing my question? The same principle applies to every spokesperson, human or otherwise. Competence without empathy reads as cold. Warm without competence reads as empty. You need both, and you need to show both fast.
The actionable comparison here is simple. McDonald's CEO gave people something to react to because he was present and specific. Sustainability communicators give people something to scroll past because they are vague and institutional. The AI story reminds us that even technically correct communication fails if the audience cannot find a human point of entry. All three stories are really one story: people connect with people, not with positions.
This is exactly the kind of scenario I break down in Say It Right Every Time. The chapter on message hierarchy gives you a framework for identifying which sentence in any piece of communication is doing the real work, and then building everything else around it rather than burying it. What McDonald's got right by accident, and what sustainability communicators keep getting wrong on purpose, comes down to that one discipline: knowing your sharpest point and leading with it.
Never Be Lost
for Words Again
Get word‑for‑word scripts for the conversations that shape your life, from job interviews and negotiations to difficult talks with family and partners, so you always know exactly what to say and how to say it.
Never Be Lost
for Words Again
Get word‑for‑word scripts for the conversations that shape your life, from job interviews and negotiations to difficult talks with family and partners, so you always know exactly what to say and how to say it.
Key Takeaway
Before your next public statement, whether that is a press release, a speech, or a social post, cut the first sentence entirely. The first sentence is almost always the setup you wrote for yourself, not for your audience. Your real message starts in the second sentence. Delete the warmup and open with the thing that actually matters. Try it once. You will not go back.
