✅ Why the smartest communicators know when to shut up
New research argues that the most powerful strategic alternative to more communication maybe none at all. Here are four ways silence shapes reputation, risk and influence.
When communication doesn’t land, the reflex is predictable: increase the volume or tweak the message. But there’s a third option that is rarely discussed: don’t communicate at all.
That blind spot sits at the heart of a new conceptual paper by Olaf Hoffjann, published in Corporate Communications: An International Journal. His argument is simple: the most fundamental alternative to a strategic message is not a better one, but the deliberate choice to remain silent.
Hoffjann calls this strategic non-talking. This is a conscious decision to withhold a message because speaking would make things worse.
The paper identifies 12 forms. Four stand out for their direct relevance to everyday communication practice.
1. Silencing: stopping an issue before it becomes one
Silencing is the most instinctive form of non-talking. It is used to prevent an issue gaining oxygen in the first place.
Examples include:
Not commenting on sensitive or damaging topics to avoid triggering scrutiny
Ignoring provocation to deny critics legitimacy
Keeping a deliberately low profile to avoid becoming a target
This is where greenhushing sits: choosing not to promote sustainability credentials to avoid accusations of hypocrisy or greenwashing. The absence of a campaign goes unnoticed, but the reputational risk is quietly managed.
Many issues only become reputational problems once organisations start talking about them.
2. Provoking: using silence to create attention
Silence sometimes fuels debate rather than dampens it. Provocation through non-talking works when silence itself becomes the signal:
Refusing to comment invites speculation
Sudden quiet from a normally vocal organisation creates intrigue
Withholding detail amplifies perceived stakes
This is the logic behind strategic ambiguity. By not spelling everything out, organisations encourage others (media, competitors and stakeholders) to do the work for them.
Used carefully, silence can generate more attention than any press release.
3. Opening: keeping future options open
This is the least visible, and arguably the most common, form of strategic non-talking.
Organisations regularly stay silent to preserve flexibility:
Avoiding public positions on emerging debates
Not criticising competitors to keep partnership options alive
Holding back campaigns to avoid distracting from bigger priorities
Every public statement closes doors. Non-talking keeps them ajar.
In leadership contexts, this often looks like patience or calm. In reality, it is contingency management: waiting until the landscape is clearer before committing words that cannot be taken back.
4. Closing: letting silence narrow the field
Silence can also be used to make outcomes feel inevitable.
Examples include:
Allowing silence to signal agreement or consent
Applying pressure in negotiations by refusing to fill the space
Prolonged quiet after a crisis to rebuild credibility through restraint
After apologies are issued, continued talking often does more harm than good. A period of humble non-talking can speak louder than reassurance ever could.
In these moments, silence stabilises a situation by reducing noise, expectation and resistance.
Why this matters for communicators now
AI is accelerating content production. The temptation is to fill every gap with something that signals activity.
This research argues the opposite. In a crowded attention economy, restraint can be strategic. Non-talking conserves credibility, budget and stakeholder attention for moments that genuinely matter.
It also exposes a structural bias in corporate communications and public relations: we are rewarded for output, not judgement. Advising a manager or client not to communicate rarely feels like a win even when it is the right call.
The challenge Hoffjann leaves practitioners with ismis practical: Is what you are about to say genuinely better than silence? If the answer is no, the most strategic move may be to do nothing.
Have a good week ahead.
Communications management and leadership (full-day, online course)
The communications and public relations function is being pulled upstream into management work at exactly the moment when organisations are becoming harder to govern, harder to predict and harder to legitimise.
The familiar reference points of practice (channels, campaigns, media relations, even stakeholder engagement as it has traditionally been understood) are no longer sufficient to explain what high-performing functions are doing, or why others are struggling.
I’m hosting a series of one-day online courses on communication management and leadership for a maximum of eight senior communicators. February is sold out but we’ve added dates in March, April and May. Please follow this link for further details.
🎥 BROADCAST TRUST: Boos for JD Vance at the Milan Winter Olympics were clearly heard in the stadium and on international feeds, but not by US viewers watching NBC. Attempts to manage reality rather than explain it risk accelerating distrust, especially as global audiences increasingly assume that what is missing from coverage is being deliberately hidden. Source: The Guardian.
🧭 POLITICAL SHAME: Fraser Nelson argues that the Mandelson affair exposes a deeper collapse of conflict-of-interest norms, linking Britain’s political malaise to a global populist trend embodied by Trump and Farage. The warning is stark: when leaders normalise private gain from public office, trust drains away fast and no amount of rhetoric can repair credibility once shame has left the system. Source: The Times.
📊 ECONOMIC VALUE. The PRCA has commissioned CBI Economics to produce an independent, policy-ready assessment of public relations’ true economic, societal and strategic contribution to the UK economy. The move signals a long-overdue shift to a stronger evidence base that positions public relations as a core driver of trust, resilience, behaviour change and commercial performance. Source: PRCA.
🔍 SEARCH SHIFT: Publishers are not done with search, but the old model of relying on Google for organic site traffic is fragmenting fast as AI‑driven summaries and feed‑based discovery claim user attention. Traditional SEO may still have value, but brands and newsrooms now need strategies that prioritise direct audience relationships. Source: Press Gazette.
🤖 AI CREDIBILITY: AI researchers are clamping down on the use of large language models after conferences have been swamped by low-quality, sometimes fabricated papers, raising fears about trust and scientific integrity. It’s a timely reminder that unchecked AI use may boost output but can rapidly corrode credibility. Transparency, disclosure and editorial rigour should be non-negotiable. Source: The Financial Times.
📰 NEWSROOM UPHEAVAL: The Washington Post publisher and CEO Will Lewis has resigned just days after overseeing mass layoffs that cut about one-third of the newspaper’s staff, amid internal backlash and controversy over his leadership and absence during the cuts. Former executive editor Marty Baron condemned the downsizing as “among the darkest days in the history of one of the world’s greatest news organisations”. Source: BBC.
The Wadds Inc. newsletter is read by more than 5,000 communications and public relations practitioners twice a week. We distil news, research and industry developments twice a week into actionable briefings to help you at work.
Thanks to Aamir Abbasi, Catherine Frankpitt, Ben Lowndes, Alan Morrison, Sarah Waddington, and everyone who shares and debates the newsletter stories in our Facebook and LinkedIn communities.
The newsletter takes four to five hours each week to produce. It is free to read (knowledge should travel freely), but I’d be grateful if you’d consider upgrading to a paid subscription to support my PhD research and writing.
Thank you for this post - I’ll definitely be looking up the original paper!