254: Ne-Yo's Yo-Yo Apology: How to Balance Belief and the Backlash

Last week it was Lizzo. This week it's Neo. And if you haven't heard about this apology retraction yet, it's addressing the sensitive topic of child gender transitions. Here's how that went.

What's going on, loved ones, this is Neo. All right, listen, I normally don't give too much of a damn about what y' all think, about what I do, what y' all have to say about what I say, whatever. I normally don't care because like I said, opinions ain't special. Everybody got one. However, this is something I feel very strongly on and I need y' all to hear this from the horse's mouth, not the publicist computer. So check this out.

Welcome to the Indestructible PR Podcast, where we use current events and tested media and PR strategies to help prevent or manage a crisis and build an indestructible reputation. In this episode, let's get into the intricacies surrounding Neo's contentious remarks on child gender transitions. A candid interview spiraled into a PR challenge after a strong rebuke from the L. LGBTQIA community and many others. An initial attempt at reconciliation took a bad, bad turn because in today's fast paced media environment, celebrities and their teams, they often have to traverse this labyrinth of public discourse, personal beliefs and the weight of public opinion. So let's talk about how does anyone survive public discourse when personal beliefs are mixed with public opinion? Neo, the Grammy Award winning R and B singer, songwriter and producer, has recently found himself in the middle of a heated controversy over his views on child gender transitions. What started as a casual interview turned into a PR nightmare for the artist. Now some of you listening could be saying, knee who. Who is this? Some of you could love him, some of you may find him irrelevant. That would be the response from someone in my household when I asked, what do we think about this person? That was the word that came back to me in the text. Irrelevant. But anyway, so the singer found himself in this controversy after he sat down for an interview with Gloria Velez. Now she's with Vlad tv. She used to be, from my research, I was watch videos on this. She used to be more of a video person and now she does these interviews. I couldn't pull any of the clips from the interview because it's behind a paywall. It's just for members only. But I can grab some clips for you if you want to get a sense of how Neo's comments came over. Came across the Transom quote. I just personally come from an era where a Man was a man and a woman was a woman. End quote. How often have we heard that quote? There was two genders and that's just how I rocked. You could identify as a goldfish. If you feel like I don't care, that ain't my business. It becomes my business when you try to make me play the game with you. I'm not finna call you a goldfish, but if you want to be a goldfish, you go be a goldfish. We live in a weird time, man. If you let this five year old boy decide to eat candy all day, he's going to do that. When did it become a good idea to let a 5 year old, let alone 6 year old, let a 12 year old make a life changing decision for themself. End quote. Oh yeah, we can't heap everything on NEO on this because how many times have we heard the almost the identical words as it relates to child gender transitions? It's the same argument over and over and over again. I mean, eating candy. Would you like to hear some more? Let's I don't know if this is true, but I heard a rumor that they either passed or trying to pass a law in LA that states if your child comes to to you and asks to do some of these things parens drugs and surgery and you say no, they could take your kid from you. Now I took that quote from buzzfeed and what they had stated that he was likely referring to misinformation surrounding a bill that passed in the California assembly earlier this year. AB957 it's likely that NEO is referring to misinformation surrounding a bill that passed in California earlier this year. It is AB950 and it stated that the bill proposes that child custody and visitation cases should, quote, include a parent's affirmation of the child's gender identity or gender expression as part of the health, safety and welfare of the child. End quote. So if it was passed, it would be just one part of all the information used when making a decision about parental custody. So that bill is about parental custody. So that was yet another piece of misinformation out there. Now for the record, Scientific American points out that major medical organizations including the American Academy of Pediatrics, the American Academy of Child and Adolescent Psychiatry, the American Medical association, the American Psychological association, the Endocrine Society and the American Psychiatric association have published policy statements and guidelines on how to provide age appropriate gender affirming care. And all of those medical societies find such care to be evidence based and medically Necessary. Okay, back to Neo. Now, once that interview became public and the public started to weigh in and many people in the public weighed in negatively, Neo initially tried to apologize and mend faces. So this was the previous Sunday evening. So this was last week. Neo, in quotes, posted a statement on X, which is formally Twitter, and this is what it said in the tweets. What are tweets called, by the way? Are they X's? Ugh. I would like to be an ex of Twitter. I really, I. I have such an issue with Twitter. But we gotta do what we gotta do. All right, here's the tweet. I'd like to express my deepest apologies. Ellipsis. And then there is a photo of him. And here is the statement above it. We're over it. After much reflection, I'd like to express my deepest apologies to anyone that I may have hurt with my comments on parroting and gender identity. Any of my followers here know the problem that I have with that statement or with that sentence? I'll keep reading. We'll come back to it. I've always been an advocate for love and inclusivity in the LGBTQ I+ community, so I understand how my comments could have been interpreted as insensitive and offensive. I. I chuckle because I can't even read it without thinking, there's no way he wrote this. It's impossible. Gender identity is nuanced. And I can honestly admit that I plan to better educate myself on the topic so I can approach conversations with more empathy. At the end of the day, I lead with love and support everyone's freedom of expression and pursuit of happiness. I'm so sorry to laugh. And the pursuit of happiness. I feel like now we're talking about the Declaration of Independence. Maybe the publicist who wrote this, maybe they majored in history. I don't know. So here we go. That was the statement. Now, Neo did not like that statement. Now, if you saw that post on X, there was a post next to it that said, in a more recent video posted to Instagram, Neo asserts that this apology was written and posted by his publisher, and he does not apologize for holding these views. So chuckling continues oh, boy. All right, now let's go back to that statement for a moment. We can't blame him for it, because we know he didn't write it. We know that he didn't write it. And I had said in a TikTok post from last week, I said, publicists are starting to get this right. Yet there are publicists that get this wrong. After much Reflections. So listen, for what I'm going for here, I'd like to express my deepest apologies to anyone that I may have hurt with my comments on parenting and gender identity. First of all, we would say who? They're qualifiers. They're qualifiers. That is such a throwback apology. The qualifier, it's words. When you are apologizing to only the people who you offended or I'm sorry that I offended you. I'm sorry you took it that way. I'm sorry I did X, but you kept doing Y. That's just gaslighting. That is just plain and simple gaslighting because you're blaming the victim. But these types of qualifiers, when they end up, when they show up in these types of apologies, it makes them null and void. You've or the publicist has nullified the apology. It means nothing. Which is exactly what Neo said because he changed his mind. And it's very difficult when you change your mind because now not only have you been dinged once for what you said, now you're being dinged again for retracting it. Now, Neo didn't just change his mind about that apology, he went all in and went to Instagram. Let me play more of the clip from Neo's non apology apology retraction. Here we go.

First and foremost, I do not apologize for having an opinion on this matter. I am a 43 year old heterosexual man raising five boys and two girls. Okay? That's my reality. Now if my opinion offended somebody, yeah, sure, I apologize for you being offended because that wasn't my intention. My intention is never to offend anybody. However, I'm entitled to feel how I feel. I'm absolutely entitled to feel how I feel. The same way you are entitled to feel how you feel. I ain't asked nobody to follow me. I ain't asked nobody to agree with me. I was asked a question and I answered the question.

Now let's contrast Neo for a minute with Jamie Foxx, who last week apologized for posting something on Instagram that many felt was anti Semitic. The post, which is now deleted, Fox wrote, they killed this dude named Jesus. What do you think they'll do to you? Fake friends, fake love. Now, it wasn't clear what prompted that post, but I know when I read that post I felt it was directed towards one person in particular. Towards one person. Jamie Foxx was betrayed by someone. Someone was a Judas to Jamie Foxx. However, that is a statement that many call, you know, they killed this dude named Jesus. What do you think they'll do to you anti Semitic? Horrifically anti Semitic is what a wider frame, which is a newsletter that discusses Jewish world news. They immediately came after Jamie Foxx because of that post. And then a friend entered the chat, and that would be Jennifer Aniston. And because she liked the post. And then she had to reply to that and her apology, which she put in an Instagram story which goes away after 24 hours. And who even knows? Actually, it could have gone away sooner than that. I bet you anything. I don't know how long it stayed up, but I bet it was less than 24 hours. And she wrote this quote, this really makes me sick. I did not like this post on purpose or by accident. And more importantly, I want to be clear to my friends and anyone hurt by this showing up in their feed. Again, another qualifier. I do not support any type of antisemitism, and I truly don't tolerate hate of any kind. The word, period, period, end quote. Now, again, it qualifiers, she's just being clear to her friends. And I guess it's Instagram friends or anyone hurt by showing up in this feed of wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong, wrong. So she did almost like a Neo retraction, because Aniston likely offended Jewish people. It was likely people who were offended by that statement because it felt anti Semitic, but she also offended a lot of black who turned on her because in black culture, this phrase of they killed this dude named Jesus, what do you think they'll do to you? Many attribute it to being anti Semitic, but many people in the black culture attribute it to how people treated black people. I am a white person, so I cannot say one way or the other what it is. What I can say is this. I did a post on TikTok and I had a lot of comments on it. A lot of people saw the post for what it was, which is a PR lesson. It was just an analysis of Jamie Foxx and Jennifer Aniston and navigating that kind of cultural divide. How you do it, it's very, very difficult. A lot of people saw it that way. A lot of black people and Jewish people appreciate the nuance of what I was trying to address. That it's not easy. But then I had black people and I had Jewish people both come at me and tell me I was racist, I was anti Semitic and I was racist. So it's really, really difficult. So that's why this finding out about this whole Neo thing, the timing of it, I can appreciate. And I wanna talk about how anyone can navigate this. So Jamie Foxx, though, came back and wrote an apology that I feel is going to sum up the advice that I'm going to give in this podcast. And it's only advice. This is not what you need to follow 100%. This is just my opinion on how you can do it. So, I mean, let's just discuss. You navigate the minefield in the modern media nowadays. How do you balance authenticity with accountability? So we're in an era of digital immediacy. So this landscape of public discourse has now morphed into this pulsating ecosystem. Okay. That is always demanding answers. When someone says something and someone does not like what someone says, it's like people demand to know exactly what they meant. People are automatically put on thin ice. It doesn't matter if you're an influencer or a celebrity. And I have to tell you, I'm morphing the two. Even though I'm mentioning celebrities here, people on the Internet are celebrities as well. If we're just loosely calling celebrities someone in the public eye, influencers on social media are, quote, unquote, I guess, celebrities, they could fall under that. I'm going to loosely. And we're talking capital L. I'm going to put myself in that category, not as a celebrity, but I put content on the Internet. And I also found out tonight via Google, I had a knowledge bar on Google. Someone created one for me, like my own little profile. And they called me an Internet personality. So I guess that means I qualify because there's a lot of people who comment on my stuff as well. And I feel I have to navigate this too. So I need to do it. So I'm gonna pass it on to you. So what do we do when we feel like we're on thin ice? So, as the saying goes, with great power comes great respons. That's also taken from the Bible. Yet how does one strike the right chord between beliefs, your personal beliefs and public opinion without hitting that sour note and landing on thin ice? So the first step is you want to balance authenticity with responsibility. And remember that word, responsibility. So if you are a public figure or if you are speaking in public, if you are speaking at a meeting, if you're speaking at an annual meeting, if you're in an interview, you could be a private citizen, but you could be in a public space. You could be speaking at a town meeting. You could be saying something on Facebook. Whether it's a fan or followers or someone who just knows you, fans, though, they connect to genuine expression. They connect to stories, they connect to vulnerabilities. That make celebrities and influencers relatable. But yet with this authenticity lies the challenge, the responsibility towards diverse demographics of fans and followers and critics. So in other words, I mean, here's the crux. So a person's personal, personal beliefs can clash with societal norms and these emerging cultural paradigms. And what Neo is bringing up in this apology. I have a link in the show notes so you can listen to the entire apology. He does actually creep into some common sense because as he states, you know, everybody has a right to their own opinion. They do. Everybody has a right to their opinion. And everyone has a right to express their opinion wherever they want to express it. However, if you do that, you are opening yourself up for the backlash. And where people go sideways, in my opinion, is in two places, is when they give their opinion, they go strongly on their opinion, like the quotes I was just reading with Neo. But it lacks empathy. If you give your opinion, but you also have equal parts of empathy, you can start to share your opinions and lessen the backlash. So a way to handle backlash. There is an art to listening, and we're going to call it responsive listening. Social media platforms have this immediacy to it. So whether it's a single tweet or an interview, or in this case, a candid interview, these opinions can trigger, oh my gosh, a tsunami of backlash. You'll also get support, but that backlash tsunami usually overwhelms that support. So when you're faced with criticism, it's essential to differentiate between constructive feedback and noise. Because I have to do this. This happens to be on TikTok. Whenever I see people just blast me, I just ignore it. I look for reasonable people who are explaining something to me. Now, there is a natural response to be defensive. It never works. Can I tell you? It never, ever works. It exacerbates the situation. I've gone down that road where you try to explain yourself and it comes across as defensive and it just doesn't work. Even if you're right, even if what you're saying is 100% right, if it seems defensive, people are gonna jump on it and they're gonna tear you apart anyway. What you wanna practice is responsive listening. And this is what I do on social media. What this involves is understanding the root of the concern. It's if you understand the root, you understand the pain point. And when you understand the pain point, you understand the hurt. And when you understand the hurt, you understand the feelings. And when you understand the that people's feelings are hurt, you need to make amends. Now even better, before you even speak, that's what you have to think about. When you say what you're going to say and you believe it, you go, I believe this. But who's going to be hurt by that? What's their pain point? Now, if it's someone that you know, let's say the pain point is convicts, people who kill dogs or people who hurt children, then we don't care, Right? Then you may not care if it hurts. But if you are making a statement to the public and anyone could be in there, and it's a statement about personal beliefs, you just have to know you're going to offend someone and you're going to offend more than someone. It's going to be someone's, it's going to be a group. Now, what Neo did, which is worse, and how can it be worse, is when you walk back and you retract it. So when you walk back on a public apology, it does have significant repercussions. I mean, both for your credibility and just the larger narrative surrounding that instability incident. Because when you apologize for something, you are making a commitment to acknowledging what happened and taking accountability for it. You are saying that you understand the impact of your words, your actions and what it meant to others. As soon as you retract it, you are undermining that apology. So now your message is one of insincerity. And it further erodes the most important thing that you need to have in any type of, of relationship with the public or your stakeholders, and that's trust. So in this age of digital media, where every statement is archived, easily accessible inconsistencies in your communications can be magnified because you could have a post and someone could still grab it and still play it. Sometimes even on TikTok, you could delete a post, but someone will still see the COVID page of it. But we'll see that it was deleted and with the backlash, and your critics are gonna see that you've retracted. So now could it be another sign of manipulation or lack of remorse? So retracting the apology, it not only diminishes what you said, it completely wipes it away. It's all gone. It's gone. So you don't want to retract it. Now, another caveat I wanna add in here. It's the woke label. This comes up a lot. One of the reasons why Neil retracted the apology, I was reading that his critics were saying, oh, man, you went woke. You went woke. Now, this idea of woke culture, I think, has just been overblown and it's attached to everything when someone calls for an apology. Now the term, if you did not know this, it originates from African American vernacular English. So it originally pointed towards this idea of heightened awareness of social injustice, particularly to people relating to race. But over time it's broadened to encompass like all social issues and like extreme conservatism. I mean, they're using woke all the time. And when you use the term woke or when you see it, what it signals is an undermining for inclusivity, equity and understanding in our society. So when you say the term woke, it may seem like a throwaway line, but it really isn't. It's the opposite of diversity, equity and inclusion. So it's vital to differentiate between societal growth, where diverse voices seek acknowledgement, they seek respect. And when they hear the term woke, it really diminishes all of it. It becomes a scapegoat. People use it as an excuse because they don't want to speak the truth. They'd rather gaslight it and say woke. It's just a way to trivialize it. And it's really, it's insulting to many, many people. I can't stand the term, to be honest, because again, it's weaponized. It is absolutely weaponized. So that's another tip. If you're going to use woke, know that it comes with damage. A lot of, a lot of collateral damage. Now to cover from these PR missteps, even the most well intentioned celebrities and public figures can make a slip. Now when any type of PR blunder occurs, whether you're Jamie Foxx, Jennifer Aniston or Neo or Lizzo, transparency is crucial. So you want to swiftly acknowledge the error. You want to demonstrate understanding. You want to take corrective action to mitigate that damage. These are all talking points that I said in various interviews last week regarding Lizzo. But again, when you retract statements or delete posts, it can be seen as insincere or cowardly. So genuine apologies backed by actions. These are the steps that will quickly help people get through a peer crisis. So yes, people fall into the crises easier nowadays, but they get out of them a lot easier too. How? With one of these apologies and making it genuine. Now, there is a silver lining to making these mistakes. Whether you're a celebrity or not, there is a silver lining. When you're trying to navigate public opinion and personal beliefs, these types of missteps are inevitable. I've made them. I've made big ones, I've made small ones. Sometimes I Haven't even made a misstep. But people will still educate me on something. They'll give me another level of it, and it's incredibly helpful. It's a lesson that's one of the benefits of being on social media, I think, is just that, feedback. So public figures have a very unique opportunity to turn these missteps into moments of growth. And it's not just for themselves, but for their fans and for society. If you engage in open dialogues and you for some celebrities, they can join educate seminars, they can partner with other groups. They can really walk the walk while they talk the talk. So that blunder can actually be a mark on a timeline that shows growth. How bad is that? Remember, with every PR crisis lies an opportunity for growth. Okay, now to sum it up. Yes, the sand is shifting. The sand is sinking. The foundation is shifting. In the media environment, people are always going to land in hot water because everything is always changing. But if you are a public figure, a celebrity, or you're online or again, people are watching you and what you're saying, you need to take a balanced approach that combines authenticity, who you are and how you feel, but with empathy. And if you do make the mistake, engage in responsive listening. Listen to the critics. You can ignore the trolls, but listen to the critics. Acknowledge your mistakes. Own it. Explain what happened. Explain your growth. And then promise to do better. Promise to be more understanding, promise to be more inclusive. Because growth isn't just about one person. If one person says what how they've grown, it impacts everyone. We've all grown. And in that journey, every voice, every lesson, including that of celebrities, plays a pivotal role. Now, I mentioned in the episode that I would read Jamie Foxx's apology that he put on Instagram. It's still on Instagram right now. And again to go back, he had posted on Instagram, they killed this dude named Jesus. What do you think they'll do to you? You fake friends, fake love. And then Jennifer Aniston got in the mix of it. And what she ended up doing is in her attempt to apologize, not apologize for liking Jamie Foxx's post, which she said she did not like. So it was a full non apology filled with the qualifiers. It was awful. But Jamie Foxx's apology, he states, quote, I want to apologize to the Jewish community and everyone who is offended by my post. I. My choice of words have caused offense and I'm sorry. That was never my intent to clarify. I was betrayed by a fake friend. And that's what I meant by they not anything More. I only have love in my heart for everyone. I love and support the Jewish community. My deepest apologies to anyone who's offended. With three red hearts. End quote. Nothing but love always, Jamie Foxx Hart Fox prayer hands. That's an end quote. That apology I think is a good apology. He owns up to it. And without a qualifier, he makes an explainer. I want to apologize to the Jewish community one and everyone who was offended by my post. Okay, calling everyone, calling everyone out there. He explained what happened. He meant that it was a fake friend. And honestly, I mean, we don't know the truth, but it seems reasonable that it was against one person. But the mistake, and it is true. Yes, they use it in black culture. I mean, I had many, many people tell me that Jamie Foxx did not go on to explain that he could have and chose not to to. However, what's missing in those types of statements, even if it is used in black culture, it's having an understanding of empathy, that there are people who will be offended. So that's why people get into these apologies. And so when Jamie Foxx apologizes, then people call him Woke. But again, forget the woke, forget the sides, forget the extremes. It's all about empathy and understanding. Now, in every episode, I include an indestructible PR tip. It's a gift of a one easy to remember nugget to help you build an indestructible reputation. And here it is. It's a metaphor. Empathy is like a compass. So in the age of social media, when you're trying to navigate swift reactions, amplified reactions, it's important to always lead with empathy. So before you share a stance or you respond in a controversy, don't put yourself in the shape shoes of a diverse audience. Think about the people who could be offended by what you have to say, who could be hurt by it, who have fears around it, who may have different perspectives. If you approach these situations with empathy, you can communicate with sincerity. It will also reduce the potential for misunderstanding. It also creates a space for constructive dialogue. So you can express a belief. You absolutely can. Use the framework while you do it, own it. You could say, I know some people may find this belief to be controversial. And I know that many people are hurt by this belief. However, I don't mean to hurt anyone. And I recognize that people can be triggered by this. But let me tell you, when I grew up, this is something that I heard and this is something that I was taught, taught. And this is something that I've always believed. But now that I'm starting to listen more and have a little more empathy for more people. I can understand why comments like that can hurt people. It just never occurred to me before. But you know what? Moving forward, I promise one to always stop before I write anything and think about not just myself, but other people who I could possibly hurt. So I can never make this same mistake ever again. See something like that so you can express a belief, but if you do, you don't want to do it if you're hurting people. Because if you do, just rewind this podcast and listen again. All right, everyone, that's all for this week. Thanks for listening. Bye for now.