Communicators Are Taking a More Cautious Posture in a Toxic Political Environment
10/21/26 – – I was baffled by this finding of an opinion survey released last week: 84% of communications and corporate affairs leaders at many of the world’s largest and most influential organizations consider politics when weighing the risks and rewards of their company’s public positions and statements.
Here’s what baffled me: What’s with the 16% who don’t take politics into consideration? And given the toxic political environment we’re experiencing, how could they (or their CEOs) still be employed?
International market research firm Ipsos conducted 200 interviews with members of its Reputation Council, representing senior communicators in 21 global markets. Reporting on the Ipsos “Life After Predictability” study, PRovoke Media Editor-in-Chief Paul Holmes summarized the key takeaways:
- 84% of Reputation Council members told Ipsos that their organization takes political factors into consideration when deciding whether to speak up about an issue;
- 61% said that even if their organization could authentically speak up, they preferred to stay quiet on potentially divisive issues;
- 35% admitted that in the last 12 months, their organization had stayed quiet on issues that it previously would have spoken out about;
- Only 17% of Council members agree that their “strategic silence” is a sign of corporate cowardice.
The Wisdom of Strategic Silence
Ipsos terms this cautious posture “strategic silence,” which communicators are adopting as their “default strategy.” As Holmes points out, the findings suggest companies “are staying quiet on potentially divisive issues—even those they could legitimately speak out on—after taking ‘political factors’ into consideration.”
The most serious retreat from outspokenness has come in the controversial areas of Diversity, Equity and Inclusion (DEI) and Environmental, Social and Governance (ESG). These initiatives, while not dead, have increasingly been in the crosshairs of investors and the current administration in Washington. Companies are toning down reporting of goals and achievements.
According to Ipsos researcher Milorad Ajder, the challenge is “exercising judgement: knowing which issues to engage with, which battles to fight, and how to help organizations make sound decisions when certainty is unavailable.”
Leave Politics to Politicians
Readers of The Crisis Preparedness Quotient are familiar with my warnings to companies stepping into the minefield of politics. It’s one of the nine most common sources of corporate crises discussed in Chapter 3, “Where Crises Come From”: People, Products, Priorities, Policies, Performance, Politics, Procrastination, Privacy, Past.
Some PR gurus and business school professors are still pressuring, actually shaming CEOs into speaking out (note that Ipsos asked if strategic silence is a sign of cowardice). These pundits point to studies showing that employees, customers and communities want businesses to take public stands in alignment with their personal values and views.
The problem is, not everybody has the same values and views.
Today’s world is split pretty evenly between liberals and conservatives, Democrats and Republicans. Our toxic “you’re either with us or against us” environment leaves little common ground. Make your feelings known about any important public issue, most of which have been politicized, and you’re likely to deeply offend half of your employees and customers. You’ll also make enemies in Washington, no matter which party is in power.
Deciding When to Engage
Of course, it’s not always wrong to speak out. Communicators can assess the strategic appropriateness of political issue-engagement opportunities by answering these four questions:
- How relevant is the issue to the purpose, operations and performance of your business, and can you make a difference?
- How strongly do you and your key internal and external stakeholders feel about the issue and what’s your level of resolve to stay meaningfully involved even as the situation evolves?
- What rewards can your company expect from engagement?
- What repercussions may come your way from taking a stand or taking a pass?
This analysis helps companies stay out of trouble and makes their efforts more constructive if they do choose to rumble. But the default position should be silence.
Sticking to Business
Strategic silence on political issues does not surrender relevance or responsibility. Sticking to business does not require turning away from important societal issues or ditching DEI/ESG commitments. There’s plenty to do within a company to make the world a better place without lecturing the public.
It’s enough of a challenge and reward to make sure you’re treating all employees fairly, manufacturing safe, sustainable products that deliver value to all your customers, and contributing to the health and prosperity of the communities you serve.
The Ipsos report confirms communicators are getting the message: Staying out of the briar patch of politics is good for them, their CEOs, their companies and their communities. As for the 16% still “courageous” enough to jump in, this may be a good time to polish their resumes.
