With the rapid growth of AI, it can be confusing if it hurts or improves people's social skills. I think we're quick to say no because you're not getting that traditional face to face interaction, but I think we need to dive a little deeper into this topic.

I believe that we need to understand the flaws it can have and why most people would think it’s a negative.

First we're just not getting that face to face conversation.

Second, the conversations in a way are scripted and aren’t natural.

Lastly, it doesn't give us the human feel of a real conversation.

But if we think about it in a different angle: it can be a tool to help build our confidence through no risk interactions to where we can feel comfortable interacting with people. Basically they listen and they don't judge.

And they're available 24/7 with instant response.

BUT nothing will replace real human to human interaction! Just think that we can possibly relook at the angle of AI and social interactions. What do you think?

What's up, everyone? I'm employed but seeking career growth and exploring new opportunities, possibly moving from south Texas to Austin.

I have a Bachelor's in Marketing and experience as a marketing/social media manager for a soccer academy, handling sponsorships, customer payments, socials, graphics, and photography.

I then worked as a media communications specialist for a city, developing multi-channel strategies, creating content, managing digital platforms, and social media.

After three years, I've applied for marketing or communications roles, reaching later interview rounds but not getting offers yet.

I'm looking for roles with greater responsibility or growth potential and would appreciate advice on suitable positions based on my experience, as well as good places to apply in Austin. Given my background and experience, I am interested in marketing, communications, and PR. Thanks!

it was an internal update about a project that had gone sideways. nothing catastrophic but a timeline had slipped and some stakeholders were going to be disappointed.

my first instinct was to soften it as much as possible. bury the bad news in context. lead with what was going well. make the delay sound like a strategic pivot.

i wrote three drafts doing exactly that. all of them felt wrong.

the fourth draft just said what happened. the timeline slipped because of x. here is what we are doing about it. here is the new date. here is what you need to know.

four sentences. no spin.

i almost did not send it because it felt too blunt. sent it anyway.

the response was the most positive i had ever gotten on a project update. people thanked me for being direct. one senior leader said it was refreshing. nobody pushed back on the delay itself.

what i learned is that people are not usually angry about bad news. they are angry about feeling managed or misled. when you just tell them what is happening they can deal with it.

the instinct to protect yourself through careful framing often creates the exact problem you are trying to avoid

spent the first two years of my comms career thinking the job was about accuracy. get the facts right, write them clearly, send them out. done.

then i watched a perfectly accurate internal announcement cause genuine panic across a whole department because of how it was timed and framed. every word was true. the message was a disaster.

that was when i started actually understanding what communications is.

being heard is a completely different skill from being correct. it requires thinking about who is receiving the message, what they already believe, what they are worried about, and what they need to feel before they can process new information.

most communication failures i have seen since then were not about wrong information. they were about right information delivered to the wrong emotional state, at the wrong moment, through the wrong channel.

the craft is not in the writing. the writing is the last step. the craft is in understanding the room before you open your mouth or hit send.

i still see people in this field treat communications as a production role. write the thing, send the thing, done. and then they are surprised when accurate messages land badly.

curious whether others had a specific moment that shifted how they thought about this

Contemporary AI systems promise adaptability, prediction and optimization. Yet many of the concepts behind today’s data-driven technologies already emerged in the cybernetic art and design experiments of the 1960s and 1970s. The crucial difference lies in their cultural function. While postwar artists and designers developed open systems to expand perception, contemporary AI increasingly transforms systems into instruments of behavioral stabilization and control.

I earned my BA in history with a minor in English at a small, private college. I earned the BA about 10 years ago, and went to work in insurance. Now, I have recently finished my first graduate semester in a communication MA program at a much larger, public university. I have done well for the first semester (A's and getting a jump start on a thesis); however, I need some guidance in research in communication.

Has anyone ever made this jump from humanities research to social science research? What made the transition easier for you and what insughts do you have?

The Joke is on them, my communications do not work, but I pay Nothing.

Here is a list of all my communications again, remember none of it works for me. I get nothing and they get nothing for thousands of dollars per-month. Forty-two-years I have never had real communications. Here is the list:

They are human? They piggyback on cheryls and other peoples' cell phone accounts with or without their knowledge. They set up voice and text messaging, as though it is me. Now you see why they use this tactic, it is endless in possibilities and the lazy man can do it. They use corporations to do this to me as well. They use 'dummy' invoices as though I have accounts. NONE OF MY COMMUNICATIONS WORK, NONE.

Figure this, I have no boss to check in with and I am not under the gun, as they are.

The lie/hide/cry, and manipulate facts and truth and they are scared. Willie Jones, in the shelter on Third and Virginia, Seattle, WA-The Family Adult Service Center, is where I stay. You should see Willie Jones he is scared and he taunts me and tries to get me kicked out. He flashes his money in my face and he picks on me when the whole shelter is asleep, he comes to my mat. He wants me to become a wimp/lady as he is, he looks at my chest with lust, the Corporations created my boobs and man have they spent quadrillions of dollars. Willie Jones flashes his thousand dollars he has at me, it means nothing to me. He did this last night and kicked another persons mat three times and wanted protection as I confronted him face to face, he wanted to get a free shot on me, but could not. Willie Jones has immunity and I will not hit him and I will not 'taunt' him as he taunts me. He really has been arrested by the cops and everyone knows he has friends and the cops will want to believe him more than me. I am not a coward, he has immunity and he has a lying tongue.

You ought to see the men breaking.

They realize my communications are not worth a 'poop' yet I am still here. I get nothing and I get nothing, no harm. All this and more is working on them. They cannot force me to hang with the worms at the shelter suring the day, and the day on the street just increased. The ones' real

ly involved are broke mentally and Willie is not the only one. Everyone is a handler and I have no friends at the shelter, except the victims themselves?

The Inquisitions are here, the Spanish/religious and the Secular Inquisitions.

I am wearing a dagger cross given by the First United Methodist Church at breakfast on Sunday. This is a symbol that we are in dangerous times, it is not a devil symbol to me. All this money and time spent for naught.

I am currently a Comms major, going into my senior year. I'm looking for some hands-on experience in the comms field, but not super sure what specifically. I am interested in PR, editing, internal comms, healthcare, community service, education, etc.

Ideally I would find some sort of remote/hybrid job or internship with a comms department at an organization. Currently looking into American Red Cross or something adjacent

hellooooo. i'm currently a junior, my major is Multimedia (focuses on media, communication & journalism). i'm planning to study abroad in Japan for master degree, mostly cause i like japan and the fee is reasonable. my family budget is up to 5500$/year, living expenses not included.
i need some suggestions on which university and department to apply for.
ive been searching and listed out some: shizuoka university - information society design; osaka university - arts & media; osaka metropolitan university - sociology; waseda - international culture & communication studies. are there any better options that fit the budget? TvT thank you for helping huhu

Any Canadians here who went into Public Health/Epidemiology in the U.S.?

I’m currently researching MPH and MSc Epidemiology programs in both Canada and the U.S., and I’m trying to understand the most realistic path toward eventually working in the U.S.

My background is a BA in Communications with a minor in Sociology, and I’m interested in transitioning into public health/epidemiology. I am also currently trying volunteer roles in community centre’s, Red Cross, public health centre’s and food banks

For anyone who has done this route (especially international students/Canadians), I’d really appreciate hearing about your experience.

Some things I’m trying to figure out:

- Did you study in Canada or the U.S.?
- Was it difficult getting a job in the U.S. afterward?
- How did the visa/work sponsorship process work?
- Was an MPH or MSc Epidemiology more helpful for employment?
- Were you able to get scholarships, funding, assistantships, or financial aid?
- Was U.S. tuition worth the cost/debt in the end?
- If you studied in Canada first, were you still able to transition into the U.S. job market later?

I’m especially interested in hearing from people who were NOT already U.S. citizens and had to navigate the process themselves.

Thank you!

I don’t know where else to share or “offload” so Reddit, here ya go!

I am wallowing in self inflicted cringe. I spent far too many hours trying to create a 45 second inspirational video on the benefits of wellness at work (in honor of Mental Health Awareness month). I was leading a short workplace virtual session using only three slides with three links to videos we can all watch together (one being the one i spent SO much time on)

How did I not know when I mute myself, the audio cuts off for everyone?? Ugh….i was so mortified and I was using a laptop I couldn’t navigate quickly to troubleshoot so there were what seemed like minutes of silence. I wanted this very short special thing to be really good and helpful and am left feeling incompetent and like I should have known the mute/audio/video issue. Someone eventually figured it out in the chat so the final video was fine so I think it landed better than it started.

Anyway, thank you for reading and any words of comfort would be appreciated.

A few weeks ago I posted here asking how long it takes your team to create a branded video from an event. The response was overwhelming. Almost everyone said the same thing. It takes hours, it is painful and most people doing it are not designers.
So I started building the solution.

You upload your raw photos and video clips from an event and it automatically creates a polished branded recap video in seconds. Your brand colors, fonts and logo applied automatically every time. No editing skills needed at all.
I am currently in early development with a co-founder who is an AI expert and we are looking for our first real users.

Two honest questions for this community:

Would you actually use something like this for your work?
What would you be willing to pay per month for a tool that saves your team two to four hours every time you need to create an event video?

Is anyone in Canada having issues with Talkwalker for share of voice (SOV) analysis?

I’m working at a company that runs SOV regularly across different cuts like YoY comparisons, monthly snapshots (for example April this year vs last year), and specific topic areas. We’re using Talkwalker, but even with fairly tight Boolean queries and filters for source type, country, and press releases, the results are still very noisy.

It pulls in a lot of irrelevant coverage and at the same time misses legitimate Canadian news, which is a bigger problem.

To compensate, the process has become very manual:

• Building long exclusion lists for each query to filter out irrelevant sites
• Exporting everything to Excel and manually reviewing each mention
• Cross checking against Google News to add missed coverage

Even after all that, I am not confident in the final numbers.

In a previous role I used Meltwater and found it much more reliable for earned media and SOV. When I joined this company, we actually tried to switch from Talkwalker to Meltwater, but were not able to get out of the contract.

At this point I am wondering if this is just a limitation of Talkwalker in the Canadian market.

Curious if others in Canada are running into the same thing, or if there is a better way to handle this.

I just don’t get it. I went to a well-known school. Communications degree with a minor in sociology. Distinction graduate. Had an internship. Have a portfolio. Yet every application for marketing, sales, coordinator, project manager, account manager - nothing. Absolutely nothing. Yet somehow most of the people I went to school with, seem to have jobs. It’s just so devastating. I have nowhere to go to express my outlet of frustration and shame without people thinking less of me. I just want to get my life started. It’s why I went to a good school. I just want a career so that I have a purpose in life besides making coffee for people. So that women think I’m a suitable prospect to actually date and form a relationship with, instead of seeing me as just a kid. So that my family can actually be proud of me. I just don’t get why the universe has to choose to punish me over and over and over. It’s already hard enough for me as an autistic man, like fuck dude.

I (26f) am considering going back to school for at the very least a certificate, if not my masters in public relations.

For context, I graduated with a BA in Telecommunications - Video Production in 2022 and was extremely lucky to find a job in my field immediately post grad. I have 3 years past experience in local broadcast/creative services, and 1 year and some change in my current role at a moderately successful, but niche, media network.

What has sparked my interest in going back to school is that I recently received a promotion and the role I now work is not even remotely what it was initially pitched to me as. It’s adjacent-ish to my skills and parts of the role I had already been doing, but with the title change (that I had no choice other than to accept) came a lot of administrative work and I am much better as a creative.

I’m not great at the email tag/spreadsheet management/data analysis/agenda building side of things. I’m a campaign building, producing, execution (and sometimes crisis-control) minded individual.

I’ll spare the details because every workplace has flaws, but in my case I’m afraid i’ve been set up to fail. I want to be able to fall back on something tangible if they decide I’m not good enough at a role they made up without really taking into account my skills and past experience.

Is school a good safety net? Should I look for a new job? I love the place that I work for everything other than the work that i’m now expected to be doing (plus it looks preeeetty good on a resume) I want to stay in digital media… I’m just lost on next steps.

Sustainability has become a core part of how companies present themselves. Almost every organisation now has some form of ESG narrative, whether it sits in a report, on a website, or across marketing channels.

The problem is that while communication has increased, trust has not followed at the same pace.

A growing number of companies are finding themselves caught between two pressures. On one side, there is an expectation to communicate progress, ambition, and impact. On the other, there is increasing scrutiny from regulators, media, and the market. The space between those two pressures is where most ESG communication starts to go wrong.

A strong ESG communication strategy is not about saying more. It is about saying the right things, in the right way, with enough clarity and evidence to stand up under scrutiny.

What ESG Communication Actually Means

At its core, ESG communication is about explaining how a company manages environmental, social, and governance issues in a way that is both accurate and meaningful.

That sounds straightforward, but in practice it requires translating technical data, regulatory frameworks, and long-term commitments into something that different audiences can understand.

These audiences include:

• investors looking for risk and return signals
• enterprise buyers assessing credibility
• regulators reviewing compliance
• the public forming perceptions of trust

Each group approaches ESG information differently, which is why generic messaging rarely works.

Frameworks such as the UN Principles for Responsible Investment, GRI standards, and TCFD or ISSB guidelines have all pushed companies toward greater consistency in reporting. But reporting alone does not equal communication. A 100-page ESG report may meet compliance requirements, but it rarely functions as an effective narrative.

Why ESG Communication Breaks Down

There are a few recurring patterns that tend to undermine otherwise strong sustainability work.

One is overgeneralisation. Companies often rely on language that sounds credible but lacks specificity. Phrases like “driving sustainable outcomes” or “committed to net zero” appear frequently, but they do not explain what is actually being done.

Another issue is imbalance. There is often far more emphasis on ambition than on execution. Targets are highlighted, but the pathway to achieving them is unclear or underdeveloped.

There is also a tendency to separate ESG communication from broader business strategy. Sustainability messaging is treated as a standalone narrative, rather than something integrated into how the company creates value.

These gaps do not always come from a lack of effort. In many cases, they reflect how complex ESG topics are. But complexity does not remove the need for clarity.

What to Say: Building a Credible ESG Narrative

A practical ESG communication strategy starts with a simple question: what can we confidently stand behind?

From there, the focus shifts to making that information clear, specific, and useful.

1. Be precise about impact

Instead of broad claims, communicate measurable outcomes.
For example:

• What emissions reductions have been achieved?
• Over what timeframe?
• Compared to what baseline?

Precision reduces ambiguity and makes it easier for stakeholders to assess credibility.

2. Explain the mechanism, not just the outcome

Many ESG claims focus on what is achieved, but not how it is achieved.

Explaining the mechanism adds depth:

• What does the product or service actually do?
• How does it create environmental or social value?

This is particularly important in climate and sustainability, where solutions can be technically complex.

3. Align messaging with recognised frameworks

Referencing established frameworks such as GRI or ISSB provides context and signals alignment with global standards.

It also makes it easier for investors and analysts to interpret information within familiar structures.

4. Connect ESG to business value

Sustainability should not sit separately from commercial outcomes.

Strong communication links ESG activity to:

• cost efficiency
• risk management
• revenue opportunities
• long-term resilience

This makes the narrative relevant beyond sustainability teams.

What Not to Say: Avoiding Common Pitfalls

If credibility is built through clarity and evidence, it is often lost through vagueness and overstatement.

1. Avoid undefined claims

Statements like “sustainable”, “green”, or “impact-driven” without explanation create uncertainty rather than confidence.

2. Don’t overemphasise future targets

Targets are important, but they need to be supported by a clear pathway. Without that, they can appear aspirational rather than actionable.

3. Don’t separate ESG from reality

Sustainability messaging should reflect what the business is actually doing, not what it would like to be seen doing.

4. Avoid over-simplification

Simplifying complex ideas is necessary, but removing too much detail can make claims feel superficial.

Turning ESG Reporting Into Communication

Most companies already have more ESG material than they realise. The challenge is not generating information, but translating it.

A practical approach is to extract key elements from reporting frameworks:

• metrics
• progress updates
• risk factors

Then reshape them into formats that are easier to engage with:

• short-form insights
• clear explanations
• focused narratives

This turns compliance-driven content into something that can actually support growth, positioning, and trust.

Final Thought

ESG communication is moving into a more mature phase. The expectations are higher, the scrutiny is sharper, and the margin for vague or unsupported claims is shrinking.

Companies that communicate with precision, clarity, and consistency are far more likely to build trust over time.

Those that rely on generalisation and ambition alone will find it increasingly difficult to stand out.

In this environment, what matters is not how much is said, but how well it holds up when examined.

Hi everyone sorry for dropping in but I’m totally burnt out. I don’t even have a degree in communications but I’ve worked in public affairs alongside internal and external communications. I’ve made my way to a Director Role but I’m totally burnt out. These people are driving me crazy, micromanaging me and belittling my role and experience. What are my career options, I only have a minor in writing and my degree is in a sociology field. I’m starting to despise my career. I enjoy technical writing but with the rise of generative AI those roles are becoming difficult to find and many other jobs in the field typically require a bachelors in Communications or a related field. Where can I even go from here?

I’m applying for junior communications / communications coordinator roles and trying to clean up my portfolio.

Most of what I have is execution work. Newsletter blurbs, social captions, event reminders, website updates, internal email drafts, and a few basic comms calendars. I think the portfolio feels very simple and doean't show much.

I’m trying to show some judgement around audience, channel, timing, or message priority, just some strategic insight. The issue is that someone else usually set the strategy. I was mostly making the message clear and getting it out. What makes a junior portfolio show good judgement when the samples are mostly newsletters, emails, and social posts?

Also, I’ve been rewriting project notes, checking comms coordinator job descriptions, and doing a few practice walkthroughs with ChatGPT and Beyz interview assistant. I keep getting stuck on how to explain the thinking behind small pieces of work without making them sound bigger than they were.