{
  "id": 1181966,
  "title": "OPINIÃO. Os erros dos CEOs ao falar com jornalistas",
  "url": "https://urgent.news/2026/08/16/opiniao-os-erros-dos-ceos-ao-falar-com-jornalistas",
  "topic": "business",
  "section": "Business",
  "published": "2026-08-16T03:10:08.000Z",
  "source": {
    "name": "Brazil Journal",
    "slug": "brazil-journal",
    "url": "https://braziljournal.com/opiniao-os-erros-dos-ceos-ao-falar-com-jornalistas/"
  },
  "original_language": "pt",
  "account": "After reviewing hundreds of interviews with executives and journalists, it becomes evident that the most common mistakes rarely stem from a lack of knowledge about the business itself. Generally, it is the opposite: CEOs know their companies too well, making it difficult to see them from the perspective of someone on the other side of the conversation. One of the most frequent errors executives make is believing that the interview is an opportunity to convey all the messages the company considers important. This is not the case. Journalists are generally looking for a story, and rarely does it perfectly align with the company's communication planning. Executives who arrive overly concerned about repeating key messages end up giving answers lacking identity and little usefulness. A good interview occurs when the CEO understands what the journalist wants to know and can connect this interest to what is truly relevant to report. Another mistake is avoiding difficult questions. It's natural that there are subjects about which a company does not want to or cannot speak. The problem arises when the executive tries to sidestep a simple question with a response that obviously does not answer it. Journalists notice this immediately. Often, a \"I can't discuss this topic for this reason\" is more efficient and conveys more security than several minutes of evasiveness. There is also a tendency to confuse complexity with depth. CEOs are surrounded daily by acronyms, indicators, products, and market peculiarities (as well as anglicisms, which should be avoided). The reader is not. An executive capable of explaining a sophisticated business in simple terms does not seem any less prepared. In fact, it's quite the opposite. Analogies, concrete examples, and figures placed in perspective tend to produce much more interesting sentences than explanations replete with jargon. Numbers, for their part, are another point often wasted. Saying that a company \"grew a lot,\" that a certain product \"was well received\" or that the market presents \"enormous potential\" offers little information. How much did it grow? How many customers? What was the number two years ago? What is the size of this market? Even when certain data cannot be disclosed, it's possible to look for references that give dimension to what is being said, broadening interest in that content. Perhaps the most delicate mistake, however, is trying to control the interview. A conversation with a journalist is not the same as a presentation to investors or a board meeting, nor is it a lecture. There is no pre-agreed script. Unexpected questions are part of the journalist's work and should be valued. CEOs who understand this dynamic tend to have better conversations because they listen and allow the interview to take paths that were not previously anticipated. This does not mean speaking without preparation. A good job done beforehand helps the executive know which information can be shared, which topics require caution, which numbers need to be at hand, and, most importantly, which are the two or three ideas the journalist should understand by the end of the conversation. Lastly, there is the error of forgetting that journalists are people. They have repertoires, curiosities, doubts, and different levels of knowledge about each market. Some of the best interviews begin when the executive stops trying to \"give a good interview\" and simply has a good conversation. Ultimately, speaking well with journalists has less to do with mastering communication techniques than it seems. It requires clarity, the ability to synthesize, a willingness to answer what was actually asked, and some understanding of how journalism works. For a CEO accustomed to controlling many variables around them, perhaps the most difficult part is accepting that in that conversation, they control only one: the quality of their own responses. Roberta Scrivano is a partner at Ovo Communication. The illustration above honors the work O Discurso ou El Tirano (1967) by Antonio Henrique Amaral. The post OPINIÃO. Os erros dos CEOs ao falar com jornalistas appeared first on Brazil Journal.",
  "summary": "Depois de acompanhar centenas de entrevistas com executivos e jornalistas, é possível perceber que os erros mais comuns raramente estão relacionados à falta de conhecimento sobre o próprio negócio. Em geral é o contrário: os CEOs conhecem tão profundamente suas empresas que têm dificuldade de enxergá-las do ponto de vista de quem está do outro […] The post OPINIÃO. Os erros dos CEOs ao falar com…",
  "key_points": [
    "Executives often believe interview is for broadcasting all company messages",
    "Good interview aligns journalist's curiosity with relevant company info",
    "CEOs must accept they control only quality of their own responses"
  ],
  "editors_take": "CEOs who master simple, clear communication and view interviews as conversations, not scripted events, tend to have more productive and engaging exchanges with journalists.",
  "illustration": null,
  "coverage": {
    "outlets": 1,
    "also_reported_by": []
  },
  "ai_generated": true,
  "disclaimer": "Summaries, key points and the editor’s take are written by software from other outlets’ reporting and may contain errors — always check the linked original."
}