Power of words (negative & positive)11 Mar 2021 09:52
I am consistently bemused by the language , messages and words used in RNS by those posting. Do these RNS have to be worded in a set way? As this is the only explanation I have for negative context and not explaining the situation. With the most recent RNS on IAMGold - just the mention of delays on programme of drilling due to Covid restrictions may have had better damage limitation. I am sure this is potentially a key reason/ impact for not meeting targets. The explanation of why only 10m drilling would also have helped.
Simply relaying facts without clarification, only initiates doubts - and ultimately the perfect excuse for market forces to drop the value or encourage panic selling.
Use of positive rather than negative words are under-rated on these messages. Recent RNS I have read have used IMO negative (at worst) neutral (also sometimes as bad) and rarely positive words in their message.
For example: a single phrase can be worded differently, mean the same, but be read in different ways. A rough example below may help to explain my point:
- results show anomalies
- results confirm the presence of interesting anomalies
- results confirm the presence of interesting highly resistance anomalies
I am no word smith, and it would appear the Communications side of many organisations are also the same. There needs to be a concerted effort by many to look carefully at the wording of their messages to ensure (within whatever rules there are for RNS publications) that the power of words can communicate the right/ or the wrong message.