Is Your Reputation Being Built Without You?

I spend a lot of my time coaching other people on what to say, how to say it and, just as importantly, when to say nothing at all.

This summer, I had a few opportunities to practice what I preach.

Local reporters reached out for my perspective on three very different stories unfolding in Calgary and across Alberta. It’s always constructive to be reminded of just how high the stakes are when agreeing to an interview, particularly when I’m the one on the record instead of coaching a CEO, politician or organizational leader through it.

Your words matter. You don’t control which ones make the story. You only control what comes out of your own mouth. And you don’t get to take them back because you wish you’d said something differently.

So you do what I tell clients to do every day.

Know what you want to say. Write it down. Use down-to-earth language. Stay in your lane. Give the reporter something useful. Practice, practice and practice some more.

Three very different stories. One lesson about how narratives take hold.

When Corus Entertainment laid off staff across the province and misinformation spread quickly online about the future of local television in Alberta:

Corus rebuts misinformation about future of Global News in Alberta after layoffs

When Calgary Mayor Jeromy Farkas, was getting attention for taking his political voice directly to Reddit:

Fawning over Farkas? How Calgary’s mayor won over the city’s largest online community

And one about why Calgary is thought to be a key battleground for the upcoming Alberta referendum this fall.

How Calgary voters could shape support for Alberta separation in October referendum

Looking back, I realized the questions I was being asked were really variations of the same one.

Who gets to shape the story?

It’s a question I’ve spent much of my career thinking about.

First as a reporter asking the questions. Then in politics, where understanding how a story is moving could mean the difference between controlling an issue and watching it control you. And now as a reputation strategist advising leaders and organizations navigating increasingly complicated environments.

The platforms have changed enormously. Human nature hasn’t.

A vacuum will always be filled

The Corus story was perhaps the most obvious example.

Following layoffs and changes at Global News, speculation began circulating online that local news operations in Calgary and Edmonton were effectively shutting down.

They weren’t.

But by the time Corus responded publicly, the story had already taken on a life of its own. Employees were using their own social media accounts to reassure viewers that they weren’t going anywhere.

That’s the thing about a communications vacuum. It doesn’t stay empty.

If people don’t have information, they fill the space themselves. Employees speculate. Customers talk. Social media accelerates. Someone with an audience offers an interpretation. A reporter starts trying to establish what is actually happening.

And suddenly an organization isn’t simply communicating a decision. It’s trying to correct a story that has already formed.

This is where organizations often make critical mistakes. They assume that because something isn’t true, it won’t stick, but facts don’t automatically win.

The first credible explanation people hear has enormous power. And once people have accepted a version of events, correcting it is a challenge. Sometimes, it’s impossible.

Authenticity requires history

We often forget that the opportunity to shape the story comes long before there’s a story to manage.

Calgary’s mayor didn’t need to be reminded of that. By engaging directly on Reddit, a platform politicians haven’t traditionally treated as a serious communications channel, he began building familiarity and earning a place in the conversation.

What piqued my interest, though, wasn’t really Reddit.

It was the timing.

Farkas is taking the time early in his mandate, when there isn’t an election campaign asking something of the people he’s talking to.

That’s important.

You can’t arrive on Reddit, or any channel, a few weeks before an election and expect people to believe you’re there because you genuinely want to hear from them. Audiences are remarkably good at recognizing the difference between participation and performance.

Authenticity needs a history. The same is true for organizations.

You don’t build a relationship with a reporter the day you desperately need them to understand your side of a story. You don’t introduce your CEO to employees for the first time when you’re announcing layoffs. You don’t start listening to a community when you suddenly need its support.

Reputation is cumulative.

It’s built through showing up, listening, participating and being useful when there is nothing immediately in it for you.

That’s what makes the Farkas example interesting to me. The lesson isn’t that every politician should be on Reddit. They shouldn’t. It’s that leaders need to understand where the people they want relationships with are already having conversations and then find credible ways to be part of those conversations.

Reputation is built outside of the comfort zone

It’s easy to believe you’re shaping the story when everyone you’re talking to already agrees with you.

And that’s important to the Alberta separation story, specifically why Calgary could matter so much in a potential referendum on Alberta’s future.

Pollster Janet Brown describes Alberta’s political landscape as a three-legged stool with Edmonton on the left, the rest of the province on the right, and Calgary in the centre.

Leaders are naturally drawn to the audiences where they feel most comfortable. The room is friendlier. The applause comes faster. Your assumptions are reinforced and your messages land exactly as you hoped they would.

But that’s not necessarily where opinions are being formed, minds are still open or trust can still be earned.

It can also give you a dangerously incomplete picture of the world.

Building reputation means being willing to stretch beyond the audiences where trust already exists.

In this case, much of the visible pro-Canada conversation has been centred in Edmonton. But if the outcome could largely be determined by voters in the middle, particularly in Calgary, that’s where the hard work needs to happen.

You don’t win over people in the middle by talking louder to the people already standing beside you.

You have to understand what matters to them. You have to listen to their concerns, including the ones that make you uncomfortable. You have to make your case in language that resonates with their experience rather than your own.

The lesson extends far beyond a referendum.

Whether you’re leading a government, a company or an organization, reputation isn’t built by surrounding yourself with people who already believe in you and your cause.

The narrative doesn’t wait for you

And that’s what connected those three stories for me. In every case, the narrative was moving fast.

It’s critical to show up consistently, before you need something. Listen to people who don’t necessarily see the world the way you do. Build relationships when there is no immediate ask. And know when your voice can genuinely add something to the conversation.

I’ve spent a career moving between journalism, politics, communications and reputation strategy. The tools have changed enormously, and the places where conversations happen have multiplied beyond anything I could have imagined when I first picked up a reporter’s notebook.

But people haven’t changed nearly as much.

We still decide who we trust over time. We notice who shows up. We know when someone is genuinely listening and when they’re simply waiting for their turn to speak.

And we’re remarkably good at recognizing the difference between a relationship and a transaction.

With gratitude,