Posted on

Media and communications lessons from the Nicola Bulley case

Cosy chats with friendly desk sergeants. Daily calls to the duty inspector from the newsroom of the local paper. Off the record briefings for the gentlemen of the press. A more symbiotic and trusting relationship between the media and the police…

All of these things and much much more have been said by the media commentariat over the past few weeks. Largely by retired journalists (and here I must declare an interest) recalling the good old days and conveniently ignoring the one thing that has changed both policing and reporting on policing out of all recognition since they dictated their copy from a red phone box: social media.

Nature, they say, abhors a vacuum. Facebook, Twitter and, especially it seems, TikTok love one. In the absence or scarcity of official information in rushes a tidal wave of bilge. So-called amateur sleuths (I’m inclined to call them idiots) broadcasting breathlessly that they’re convinced – without a shred of either evidence or decency – that Bulley was being held against her will by shadowy figures. A private underwater search company stating unequivocally that the poor woman’s body could not have been in the river, as if the sonar equipment they were using was somehow any less fallible than the humans operating it.

And all of this, of course, making the agony suffered by the Bulley family even harder to bear and the job of the police investigating her disappearance even harder to do.

Much of the criticism levelled at Lancashire Police has been ill informed and unfair. Particularly the condemnation of their decision to go public with highly personal information about Bulley’s private life. They didn’t do so lightly, I would have thought. Nor without the family’s consent. Details of her struggles with alcohol were about to be made public anyway, after they were leaked to the media as an exclusive – possibly in return for money. So they decided to reveal the information themselves to lessen the value and impact of the leak. Better to keep ahead of the narrative as police press officers might put it. What else were we to do, they might reasonably ask of all those questioning their approach including the prime minister, Rishi Sunak, the home secretary, Suella Braverman, and the leader of the commons, Penny Morduant.

To this point specifically, I believe the police were right to reveal at least some of this information but wrong in the way and to the extent they went about it. They knew, presumably from day one, that Bulley was vulnerable. So they should also have known from the outset that at some point this information would be made public, warned the family accordingly and together drawn up a plan to manage it. They may have done this to be fair; I have no special insight. But if they did, the public part of the plan could have been handled better.

The police initially said at a news conference Nicola had “a number of specific vulnerabilities” which meant she was “graded as high risk.” This crucial issue was rather lost in the remaining 30 minutes or so of the conference which seemed to be more of a point by point rebuttal of criticism of the inquiry than an update on a missing person. I’ve watched the conference in its entirety twice. It certainly wasn’t the “utter disaster” as some of the more colourful coverage suggests. It certainly was a thorough and detailed description of the inquiry to date. It also nailed some of the more outlandish, to use the words of assistant chief constable, Peter Lawson, “ill informed speculation and conjecture.” (And, by the way, it was good to see the conference chaired by Mr Lawson, not by the senior investigating officer, Rebecca Smith. Sometimes the messenger is as important as – or even a part of – the message).

Picture credit: Getty Images

But what that conference also did – ironically perhaps most successfully of all – was get every journalist wondering exactly what those specific vulnerabilities were. Indeed, this was the very first and last question asked by reporters – almost inaudibly, off microphone – at the conference. This line of questioning was only going to louder and more persistent. To not have anticipated this and dealt with it there and then was problematic. All Mr Lawson said at the time was “I feel we’ve said as much as we can about that. It is personal, private information known to the investigation but foremost in our thoughts, in addition to the integrity of the investigation, is the privacy of Nicola’s family…”

So what changed in just a few hours? Because later that day, in a follow up statement, the police added that those vulnerabilities included alcohol misuse connected to the menopause. This smacked of being bounced into saying more by events, rather than being in control of events. I’d have been inclined to release the two statements simultaneously at the news conference. I’d have advised omitting the menopause point entirely. It’s too personal and, on the face of it, much less pertinent than the alcohol issue. I’d also have explained the background to the release and attempted to reassure the public – and women in particular – that this was a highly unusual move in response to irresponsible coverage and wouldn’t become a routine part of missing persons inquiries. To avoid losing the focus on these really important points I’d have shortened the conference and left out anything that sounded defensive. There’s a time and a place for that. And it isn’t when a person is still missing.

In their defence most police press officers are way down the command chain, have no rank and I’m sure are regularly ignored when asked for advice. But that doesn’t make the advice wrong. They should be speaking truth to power and asking the SIO or ACC:

Be absolutely clear: what is the purpose of this news conference or release?

Is it to give the public an important update on progress or to seek further public help – an appeal for witnesses for example?

It it to protect the family from potentially hurtful information – true or otherwise – being put into the public domain by unscrupulous and insensitive media coverage or social media commentary?

Or is it to defend the force and more to do with reputation management?

The first two, sir or ma’am, are justified. The third is not. Until well after a missing person is found. Alive, or as it would now seem in this desperately sad case, dead.

Posted on

How to make sure you’re in focus in online videos

Sharper-eyed viewers have spotted a rubber mask in the background of some of my online videos. So here I put him (it?) in the foreground, centre stage as it were and explain why he’s my mate. Spoiler alert. Watch to the very end. And please do not adjust your sets.

This is just one of a series of how to videos over on the Owl Service our YouTube channel.

Posted on

How to avoid your media interviews being edited

Want to know why I could get away with robbing a bank?

Because years of editing radio programmes with razor blades have removed much of my fingerprints. If you want to avoid journalists removing many of your important points in a media interview then you need to be disciplined so that your words – and your reputation – don’t get shredded.

And here’s how, in the first of a brand new mini series from the people that brought you the Z to A of Presenting (because everyone starts with A) – the Z to A of Media Training.

Spot the new(s) desk btw!

Posted on

C is for Captions

Richard Uridge: the perfect face for radio.

Captions are really good at making your videos more accessible. And handy for people who want to follow what you’re saying without having the volume turned up (even if it’s just in case the boss is listening). But it’s really annoying when those captions aren’t in the right place. The audience want to see your mouth. And your eyes. So here’s a bit of fun advice about positioning those captions so they help rather than hinder the whole business of communication. Yes! It’s the latest episode in the Z to A of Presenting.

Posted on

The end of the F word?

No not that F word! But the F pattern that describes the way the human eye takes in content from a screen. A quick scan from left to right along the top of the screen (the top bar of the F). A smaller scan just beneath it (the second horizontal bar). And a glance up and down the left hand side (the upright of the F).

Eye tracking and heat mapping studies of the human eye established this browsing pattern and, based on that research, web writers and designers were encouraged to string the hooks – the words and images – that grab a potential reader’s attention – somewhere along the F. Not bury those hook so far down that they wouldn’t be seen let alone read. Except maybe the F pattern no longer applies.

I say this because I’ve just updated my iPhone to iOS 15.1 and I’ve noticed the address bar has moved to the bottom of the screen (see screenshot). This may seem like a modest layout tweak. But this is HUGE change. It’s akin to the change from top-loading to front loading washing machines. Seriously, I don’t think anyone has yet fully thought through the implications. It could, for example, mean that the screen space just above that box with the URL in becomes as important as the top of the screen. So perhaps the F will morph into an E.

An annotated iPhone screengrab showing the address bar has moved from top to bottom.

That said, what hasn’t changed it is that words still matter. Always have. Always will. Top loading and front loading washing machines have clothes in common. F pattern or E pattern websites have words in common. The right word in the right place is always going to do better than the wrong word in the wrong place. So it’s worth asking: is this the right place? Right down the bottom here with the address bar (at least on my iPhone)? I’m keen to know your thoughts…

Still not sure what the F pattern is? Then here’s a quick video we put together for one of our clients who used our Ask the Owls service on our YouTube channel.


This post first appeared on LinkedIn and will be leading me to update (yet again) my modest little book Writing for the Web which is available to buy here and on the Apple and Amazon bookstores for just £4.99 which is probably less than you spend on coffee everyday and will give you a buzz for weeks.

UPDATE: Since posting this I’ve discovered that it’s possible to change the location of the search bar back to the top of the screen. So maybe news of F’s death is a little premature. If, like me, you want to change back to the old location go to settings>Safari>Tabs and select the Single Tab radio button as per the screenshot.

Posted on

Writing for the Web – now available on Apple Books

The first volume in ACM Training’s Wise Owl how-to series is now available in the Apple Bookstore. As an e-book only (for the time being at least) the publication of Writing for the Web – why reading differently means writing differently is not quite up there with the excitement I felt as my first front page lead thundered off an old News of the World hot metal printing press back in my days as a cub newspaper reporter. But hey, that’s the post-Gutenbeg era for you eh?! At only £4.99 in the UK and a similar price in 50 other countries I reckon it’s brilliant value for money. But then I would say that… I’m the author. Judge for yourselves and please let me know if you agree. Or not.

Posted on

Social media and local government – 10 tips for councillors

  1. Prepare for a lot of shit to be thrown your way.
    Politics is a dirty business. Always has been. But the trolls lurking in the darker corners of the social web have made it a whole lot dirtier. And the quality of political discourse nationally has only made things worse.
  2. Don’t be too negative.
    Politics, of course, involves saying how badly your opponents are doing. But as a Labour councillor if you over do the Tory-bashing, or vice versa, people will tire of your moaning.
  3. Show don’t tell.
    We know you want to make Anytown a better place to live, work and play. That you’re passionate about the area. And that as a councillor/group/party/administration you have an enviable track-record for getting things done. You would say that wouldn’t you? After all you want our votes! But leave the self aggrandisement to your election blurb and show us instead of tell us. Which means posting pictures and videos of yourself with your sleeves rolled, getting involved in your community. Helping clear the litter. Shovelling snow. Stacking sandbags. Making tea. Forge a positive visual association in people’s minds between your face/name and good work. 
  4. Don’t push the politics.
    You probably enjoy the cut and thrust of the council chamber or the Commons but not everyone likes the adversarial nature of our political system. So ease back on the politics. A conversational tone is better on the social web.
  5. Avoid picking a fight online.
    It’s easy when provoked on Facebook or Twitter to hit back. What’s the old adage? Attack is the best form of defence. It isn’t on the social web. Or at least not very often. Even if you win. Because by hitting back you’re likely to draw more attention to the criticism (unless that’s what you want). Try to take any angry exchange of views offline. Suggest you follow one another so you can deal with the issue by DM (direct message) away from the public gaze. Or if the prospect of following your arch nemesis seems a step too far (although can always unfollow one another later) offer to email them instead. Anything instead of a public slanging match.
  6. Don’t post just for the sake of it.
    Overposting increases the background noise (I liken it to the shash of a mistuned, old school radio) and makes it even harder for you to cut through. Post too much and you risk becoming the online equivalent of the councillor, unloved even by their own party, who drones on and on and on and on…at council meetings. Or the little boy who cried wolf once too often, so when he had something really important to say nobody was listening.
  7. Go easy on slavishly sharing and reposting material from your party’s central social media accounts.
    If we want to hear from Boris or Jeremy or Jo or Nicola we can always follow them ourselves. Encourage us to follow you because of you not because you’re simply a cipher for Conservative Central Office or whatever. Local people still vote for local candidates and often across party lines. How many times have I heard “Ooh I’ve never voted Tory/Labour/Lib Dem/SNP/Plaid before in my life but councillor so and so gets my vote every time because they’re local and you see them at all the local events. He even lets us throw wet sponges at him and the vicar in the stocks at the village fete.” (I made that last bit up but you get my point).
  8. Be nice and be human.
    It’s easy to forget that politics can be consensual. Be generous and (even grudgingly) praise your opponents when they vote for something you believe in. Show us who you are behind the rosette. It’s the social web not the antisocial web.
  9. Listen and watch.
    The social web is a great place to tap into the community “vibe.” You’ll be alerted to issues that need dealing with more quickly this way than waiting for somebody to bring it to your attention at one of your surgeries. Be the councillor with your finger on the pulse.
  10. Walk away.
    And finally, back where we started, used strategically the ups of using the social web can far outweigh the downs. But if the online abuse gets too much, switch off, close your accounts (at least temporarily) and walk away. Nobody needs that kind of shit in their lives. Not even politicians!

Richard Uridge facilitates ACM Training’s social media and other communication workshops. We regularly have councillors attending our open, public workshops. Or why not book us to deliver this training in-house for your group or administration? That’s the way we work with hundreds of local authorities across the UK from Aberdeenshire to Devon and from Bangor to Boston. It could just get you re-elected!

Posted on

Formal or informal language? What toilet signs can tell us about writing for the web

This is the tale of two loos. Both of them at venues we use at ACM Training for our open workshops. One of them – Ort House Conference Centre in Camden – at the more traditional end of the market. The other – Waterfront Meeting Rooms in Bristol – at the funkier end. Now I’ve nothing against traditional or funky per se. But it’s funny how the signage at the two venue follows suite.

“We will endeavour to fix the issue in a timely manner,” asserts the sign from the Building & Facilities Team (their capitals) at Ort House when, in truth, the team is probably just a bloke with a spanner who doesn’t speak like that in real life – the bloke, that is, not the spanner.

By comparison the Waterfront sign is much less formal and the writer has even thought about the audience by appealing directly to younger gents (I can’t vouch whether the same sign appears in the ladies) with the “or your parents’ home” line.

Now you could argue that a sign on a toilet wall doesn’t really matter because people’s impression of the venues is based on so much more – the friendliness of the reception staff, the cleanliness of the facilities, the airiness of the training rooms. And that’s certainly true with face-to-face businesses. But what about those businesses whose customers only transact with them online in a virtual sense? Or those where the initial contact is via a website or blog? Then words really matter because, like the reception staff in this example, they are for many people the first point of contact. And first impressions matter.

So if you’re writing for websites instead of toilet signs you need to think long and hard about the most appropriate use of language. For most organisations conversational but purposeful is best. That and plain English. Have a ponder next time you visit the loo.

By the way, I have endeavoured, on behalf of ORT House, to fix the linguistic issue in a timely manner so here, for what it’s worth, is my alternative…

If it’s broke we’ll fix it. You just need to let us know.

If your website is broke (linguistically that is) we’ll help you fix it.Or, better still, we can train you to fix it yourself. Either way you just need to let us know.


[product sku=”wpid=63″]

Posted on

“Right Royal chump leaves BBC” – how Danny Baker became Twitter’s latest twit.

Danny Baker: still smiling as he’s doorstepped by reporters following his sacking by the BBC.
Image credit: PA

He’s not on the BBC’s list of top earners, so we can safely assume Danny Baker was paid less than £150,000 a year for his Saturday morning job at Radio 5 Live. But getting the sack for tweeting a picture of a smartly dressed chimp captioned “royal baby leaves hospital” was an expensive mistake all the same – both financially and reputationally.

Of course, he’s not the first to, dare I say, make such a chump of himself on the social web. And he definitely won’t be the last. So what is it about Twitter that leads so many people who should know better to say silly things?

“Facility and immediacy combined are a toxic mix.”

Richard Uridge, social media trainer, ACM Training

Facility, that is ease of use, is the first part of the problem. Speed is the second part. The two together make a toxic mix. The ubiquity of mobile phones with their always on apps leads to what I call instant quips: words and images that we realise, too late (post post if you will ), are really not that funny or, worse still, potentially offensive. If we had to go home or back to the office and login via a dial-up internet connection (remember them?) we’d have time for reflection.

There’s a third component in the Danny Baker case. Journalists and, in particular, those working in live broadcasting thrive on the buzz. Believe me I’ve been there. It’s like a drug. In fact it is a drug – just a naturally occurring one called dopamine. So tweeting leads to a natural high. And, just like junkies, the more you tweet the more you need to get the same level of high. Until one day you overdose.

So what’s the answer? Short of coming over all cold turkey and deleting your Twitter account(s), I recommend you follow my seven minute rule as a part of a social media policy. It works a bit like a longer version of the seven second delay on early radio broadcasts which meant that bloopers and profanities could be stopped before they made it to air. Wait seven minutes – you really won’t miss the party – and if the tweet still works* for you and, crucially, your target audience then by all means hit the tweet button. And if it doesn’t? Then use the next seven minutes to change it until it does.

*By works for you I mean is the tweet or social media post purposeful in that it helps move you even a small step towards your personal or organisational objectives? By works for your audience I mean is the tweet likely to be received in the way it was intended. If the answer to one or the other question or both is no then at best you’re simply adding to the white noise on the social web and at worst you’re going to land yourself a P45. Just ask Danny Baker.


[products limit=4 columns=4 skus=”wpid=78,wpid=63,wpid=109,wpid=38″]

Posted on

When Lightning Strikes

Approx listening time: 28 minutes.

In October 2005 Allan MacDiarmid was struck by lightning as he played football with a group of friends near Sudbury in Suffolk. Amazingly he survived with barely a scratch. Combining Allan’s extraordinary testimony with the latest scientific thinking and the work of amateur storm chasers, What Happens When Lightning Strikes deconstructs the moments before and after he was hit by the blinding flash in an effort to better understand one of the most powerful forces in nature.

This podcast was first broadcast on BBC Radio 4.