Five communicators show what great communication looks like in practice: Warren Buffett, Arthur Page, Fred Rogers, James Burke and Mary Barra. Each did something specific and dated. Buffett apologized to Congress in 1991, Page wrote seven principles at AT&T, Rogers won over a senator in six minutes in 1969, Burke recalled 31 million bottles in 1982, and Barra apologized to families in 2014. What they share is plain speech, ownership and action.
By Ronn Torossian. Last updated: November 25, 2026. Every date and quote below is attributed to a named source. The reasons marked "I admire" are mine, and the checklist, rewrites and exercise near the end are my own editorial judgment.
| Communicator | Moment | What they did right |
|---|---|---|
| Warren Buffett | September 4, 1991 | Opened with an apology and set a plain standard for reputation |
| Arthur W. Page | From 1927 | Made public relations a management function built on truth and action |
| Fred Rogers | May 1, 1969 | Spoke to one senator as a person, in six minutes |
| James Burke | Fall 1982 | Recalled first, because the company's Credo had already ranked the priorities |
| Mary Barra | April 1, 2014 | Apologized, said what she did not know, then published the hard answer |
Why does Warren Buffett's humility make him a great communicator?
Warren Buffett's humility makes him a great communicator because he began with an apology before he made any case. On September 4, 1991, Buffett, the Berkshire Hathaway investor who had become interim chairman of Salomon Brothers, testified to a House subcommittee about the firm's Treasury bidding scandal, and Yahoo Finance reported that he apologized to the lawmakers.
According to the transcript of his opening statement, he said the nation has a right to expect its rules and laws to be obeyed, and he asked every Salomon employee to be his or her own compliance officer. His best-known line was a standard anyone could repeat: "Lose money for the firm, and I will be understanding; lose a shred of reputation for the firm, and I will be ruthless."
I admire this because humility is one of the most important traits in leadership today. Buffett did not defend the firm first. He named the problem and set a rule that every employee could apply.
What did Arthur W. Page teach about public relations?
Arthur W. Page taught that public relations belongs inside management and rests on truth and action. In 1927 Page became vice president of public relations at AT&T, which Everything-PR describes as the first such title at a major American corporation, and he held the post until the mid-1940s, according to the Page Society's own history.
His principles, as published by the Arthur W. Page Society, are: tell the truth; prove it with action; listen to the customer; manage for tomorrow; conduct public relations as if the whole company depends on it; realize a company's true character is expressed by its people; and remain calm, patient and good-humored. The Page Society, founded in 1983, is the association of chief communications officers that carries his name.
I admire Page as the role model of our profession, and a very strong one. His principles still work because they do not depend on a channel or a technology. Truth comes first, and proof comes from what the company does.
What did Fred Rogers show about plain speech?
Fred Rogers showed that plain, sincere speech can move an audience that expects to be unmoved. On May 1, 1969, Rogers, host of Mister Rogers' Neighborhood, testified to a Senate subcommittee chaired by Senator John Pastore of Rhode Island, against a proposal to cut federal funding for public broadcasting from $20 million to $10 million.
The testimony lasted about six minutes. At the end Pastore said, "I think it's wonderful. Looks like you just earned the $20 million," as quoted by Mediaite. The Corporation for Public Broadcasting's next major appropriation, in 1971, rose from $9 million to $22 million, according to WETA, citing CPB figures.
I admire how little he used. He had no deck and no trick. He spoke to one senator as a person, and that was enough.
What did James Burke do first in the Tylenol crisis?
James Burke recalled the product before he explained it. Burke, chief executive of Johnson & Johnson from 1976 to 1989, faced the 1982 crisis in which seven people near Chicago died after taking cyanide-laced Tylenol capsules, and J&J recalled about 31 million bottles at an estimated cost of $100 million, according to Wharton Knowledge.
Burke credited the company's Credo, a one-page statement written in 1943 that ranks patients and customers first and stockholders last. He said the Credo "gave me the ammunition I needed to persuade shareholders and others to spend the $100 million on the recall," as quoted by Wharton. The PR crisis examples page covers the case with the lesson it teaches.
I admire that the priority order was written down before the crisis. The decision took hours, not weeks, because the company had already decided whom it served first.
What did Mary Barra do when GM's recall became a scandal?
Mary Barra apologized, said what she did not yet know and then published the hard answer. On April 1, 2014, Barra, chief executive of General Motors, testified to the House Energy and Commerce Committee about the ignition switch recall, and Democracy Now quoted her saying, "Today's GM will do the right thing. That begins with my sincere apologies to everyone who has been affected by this recall."
Fortune reported that Barra did not yet know why GM took nearly ten years to reveal the problem, and that she gave former U.S. Attorney Anton Valukas free rein to investigate, saying she was not waiting for his results to make changes. His report found "a pattern of incompetence and neglect," and GM dismissed 15 employees, according to a KDVR report.
I admire that she told Congress what she did not know and did not guess. The corporate apology guide and the reputation management case studies cover how those parts fit together.
What do the five communicators have in common?
The five communicators share three habits: they spoke plainly, they owned the problem and they acted before they explained. None of them led with a defense, and each had something specific to point to, an apology, a set of principles, a recall or an investigation.
A leader can apply the same test to any statement. Could the point be made in the first sentence, and would the facts survive a reporter checking them? The crisis communications case study library and the reputation management pillar hold more cases that pass or fail that test.
How can a leader apply the five lessons?
A leader can turn each lesson into a question to ask of a draft statement. The table below is my own editorial template and not a method any of the five used.
| Lesson | From | Question to ask of the draft |
|---|---|---|
| Begin with ownership | Buffett | Does the first sentence name the problem and accept responsibility? |
| Ground it in principles | Page | Is every claim true, and is there an action that proves it? |
| Speak plainly | Rogers | Would a person outside the industry understand every sentence? |
| Decide the priorities in advance | Burke | Is there a written order that tells leaders whom the company serves first? |
| Say what you do not know | Barra | Does the statement separate what is known, what is not and what happens next? |
What does a rewrite using the lessons look like?
A rewrite replaces defensive wording with ownership, plain language and a date. The example below is a hypothetical for a fictional company, Northwind Foods, and not a real statement.
| Defensive draft | Rewrite |
|---|---|
| "Northwind is committed to quality, and we are looking into reports that some products may have been affected." | "Some of our products made between March 1 and March 14 may be unsafe. We are sorry. Please stop using them, and here is how to get a refund." |
| "We cannot comment on the cause at this time." | "We do not yet know the cause. An independent expert is investigating, and we will publish what they find by April 15." |
What mistakes did these communicators avoid?
The five communicators avoided the habits that turn a bad moment into a lasting story. Contrast helps: after the Deepwater Horizon explosion in 2010, BP's chief executive Tony Hayward called the spill "relatively tiny" and said he wanted his "life back," according to Time and Fortune, and the Associated Press reported that BP announced his replacement that July. The remarks shifted attention from the response to the speaker.
The guide to silence versus a bad statement and the guide to the first crisis statement cover how to avoid that pattern.
What is a 10-minute exercise for any leader?
A leader can practice the five lessons in 10 minutes with a real draft. This exercise is editorial judgment.
- Take your last public statement, or the one you expect to need.
- Underline the first sentence, and ask whether it names the problem or the company.
- Cross out every sentence that defends before it explains.
- Add one dated action and one thing you do not yet know.
- Read it aloud to someone outside the industry, and fix any sentence they cannot repeat.
Frequently asked questions
Who are the greatest communicators in business?
No list settles that, but Warren Buffett, Arthur Page, Fred Rogers, James Burke and Mary Barra each have a dated example in which plain speech and action decided the outcome.
What are the Page Principles?
The Page Principles are seven ideas drawn from Arthur W. Page's work at AT&T, beginning with tell the truth and prove it with action, as published by the Arthur W. Page Society.
Why does humility matter in communication?
Humility lets a leader name a problem before defending against it. Buffett's 1991 apology and Barra's 2014 apology both began there, according to Yahoo Finance and Democracy Now.
Can these lessons help a small company?
Yes. None of them depends on size: a first sentence that names the problem, a written priority order and a dated action are available to any leader.
Is plain speech the same as simple content?
No. Plain speech means short, direct sentences about complex facts. Rogers's six minutes and Barra's testimony both dealt with serious matters, and neither used jargon to do it.
The next time a statement is due, write the apology or the admission first, and add the defense only if a fact requires it.