The matter of communication and clear wording is vital to many aspects of political life. Speeches, slogans, declarations and campaigns are all under constant surveillance of public opinion. Throughout history, communication has remained a decisive factor in politics, as it can determine the success or failure of negotiations, the formulation of laws, and even the establishment of peace. So, what happens if a vital press conference is badly prepared? What impact can one single ambivalent word have?
A CRITICAL POINT IN HISTORY
A historical example which has proven the relevance of clear communication and shows a failure in stakeholder-synchronisation, is the accidental declaration of the end of the Deutsche Demokratische Republik (GDR) in 1990.
By the fall of 1990, the political tensions of the Cold War were so high that the Sowjetunion began to disintegrate, and the GDR with it. The divided country of Germany yearned for unification, the right to travel and a united future as one.
While this political decision might have been carefully negotiated, the question of how this should be communicated to the public remained open. The authorities wanted to prevent chaos and unite the country in an ordered, controlled and safe manner, however the communication strategy, media-relations plan and message management were insufficiently aligned.
TERMINOLOGY IS EVERYTHING
Günter Schabowski was in charge of the famous press conference, which would announce the end of Germany’s division. He acted as the spokesperson and took the stage for the media advisory event. He explained the procedure for the opening of the border and the bureaucratic steps that were in action.
After he delivered the carefully crafted press release and answered questions from the press, an Italian journalist, Riccardo Ehrman asked the simple question: “When will these measures become effective?“
Due to a lack of preparation, inadequate briefing-dossier and absence of clear key messages, Günter Schabowski replied with the word “unverzüglich”. His choice of wording led to an epic miscommunication which changed the course of history.
The word “unverzüglich” can have multiple meanings and can roughly be translated to “as soon as possible” or “immediately”. While Schabowski probably intended the first option or something similar to “without undue delay”, the public took advantage of the multilayered meaning of the word, and stormed to the famous wall.
The pictures we all know and love of ecstatic joy, people claiming the wall at night, waving flags and celebrating this sudden end of division — were all due to a feeble choice of words, which left the information chain between state and citizens unclear.
THE VITALITY OF COMMUNICATION
Thousands walked to the wall and started climbing, tearing it down and finally reuniting with loved ones on the other side. Thirty-two years of division, tension and separation were terminated with the words of Schabowski.
While these happy images are widely seen as a positive expression of freedom and liberty, the immense risks and responsibilities attached to the state’s communication have become very evident.
The influence of that statement unleashed an entire nation within hours. It serves as a potent reminder that precise terminology, clear messaging and aligned stakeholder communication can fundamentally alter political realities. When ambiguity replaces a defined activation timeframe, misunderstanding and accelerated reactions become inevitable.
CIMO 