The throughline across December’s coverage was unmistakable: Credibility now hinges on discipline. Businesses are being asked to lead on societal challenges, but only where they have legitimacy to act. DEI entered a more exacting phase, with regulators raising the bar on rigor, documentation and design. Sustainability communications narrowed to a fine line between greenwashing and greenhushing, where clarity is no longer optional. Trust shifted decisively toward people — employees, creators and customers — making authenticity harder to fake and easier to lose. And as AI reshapes how reputation is formed and recalled, preparedness emerged as a strategic imperative, not a reactive one. In a year closing with heightened scrutiny and accelerating technology, the brands best positioned for 2026 are those that communicate with precision, purpose and proof.
You can download a pdf of this month’s edition of Cup of Corporate Comms here.
As the World Economic Forum approaches with its 2026 theme, A Spirit of Dialogue, recent coverage makes clear that expectations of business have shifted from neutrality to responsibility. The 2025 Meaningful Brands study found that 73% of people expect brands to act on societal challenges and 70% believe companies have a responsibility to improve health and well-being — a finding echoed in the 2025 Edelman Trust Barometer, which shows business remains the most trusted institution, but only when it leads where governments struggle. Forbes reinforced this shift, noting that Americans expect CEOs to speak out selectively and credibly, with mental health emerging as a priority issue. TriplePundit also reported strong, bipartisan support for corporate action on issues tied to community resilience — including mental health, family stability, education and workforce needs — offering clearer, lower-risk lanes for engagement. HR Dive linked this external pressure to internal results, highlighting research showing that leaders grounded in purpose and grit drive stronger engagement, performance and retention. Fast Company added that the most effective CEOs now treat philanthropy like strategy, aligning social investment with business values rather than dispersing it across disconnected causes. The message is unmistakable: Corporate engagement is no longer about visibility, but relevance, coherence and follow-through.
Bottom line: The question is no longer whether companies should engage on societal challenges, but how. Businesses need to focus on issues where they have credibility, align philanthropy with their values and operations, and prioritize areas with broad stakeholder support. Purpose-led action earns trust — and the license to lead.
After a relatively quieter stretch over the second half of 2025, DEI is once again drawing heightened attention from regulators and policymakers — a shift that echoes themes HAVAS Red flagged in prior editions of our Cup of Corporate Comms. The focus is shifting from whether DEI should exist to how it is designed, documented and defended. The Wall Street Journal reported that the U.S. Department of Justice is exploring the use of the False Claims Act to investigate DEI-related practices, signaling a more aggressive interpretation of how federal funds and compliance obligations intersect with workplace programs. That scrutiny is set to intensify. Reuters reported that the EEOC’s new leadership has framed 2026 as a “reckoning” year for corporate DEI, with renewed emphasis on civil rights enforcement and closer examination of hiring, promotion and incentive structures. At the same time, HR Dive’s review of where major companies — including Apple, Disney, JPMorgan and Target — landed on DEI in 2025 revealed a more nuanced landscape: fewer headline-grabbing rollbacks, more recalibration and a clear shift toward legally durable, skills- and performance-based approaches. ESG Diveillustrated the risk of missteps, detailing how Starbucks’ DEI programs became the subject of a lawsuit alleging unlawful race-based practices and underscoring the growing consequences of poorly structured initiatives.
Bottom line: DEI is entering a more exacting phase. For communicators and business leaders, the imperative is rigor over retreat: ensure programs are compliant, clearly documented and rooted in job-related criteria. Precision, transparency and confidence will define which organizations withstand scrutiny — and which invite it.
As sustainability claims face intensifying scrutiny, recent coverage made it clear that how companies talk about their green initiatives can be just as risky as what they do. The Financial Times reported that advertisements from Nike, Lacoste and Superdry were banned for greenwashing, underscoring how regulators are cracking down on vague, exaggerated or insufficiently substantiated environmental claims. What once passed as aspirational language is now being treated as a potential legal liability, particularly when claims cannot be clearly tied to measurable actions or outcomes. Yet overcorrection brings its own dangers. MIT Sloan Management Review warned of the “greenhushing” trap, in which companies stay silent about sustainability efforts to avoid scrutiny — only to risk skepticism, lost credibility and accusations of inaction. The article argued that withholding information can erode trust just as quickly as overstating progress, especially among stakeholders who expect transparency and evidence-based communication. Adding a legal lens, DLA Piper’s sustainability reviewhighlighted the rapidly evolving litigation landscape, noting that enforcement actions, investor scrutiny and consumer lawsuits are increasingly shaping how companies disclose environmental commitments. Together, the coverage signals a narrow but navigable path forward: neither hype nor hush, but disciplined, defensible clarity.
Bottom line: Sustainability communications must strike a careful balance, avoiding broad, feel-good claims that cannot be substantiated, without retreating into silence. Every message needs to be grounded in verifiable data, clearly explainingscope and limitations, and communicating progress with humility and specificity. Credible transparency is now the safest — and strongest — strategy.
As brands work to deepen trust in a crowded, skeptical media environment, recent coverage reinforces a theme we flagged in our 2023 behind-the-brand prediction: people-led content drives connection — when it is done with care. The Wall Street Journal reported that companies are increasingly seeking “storytellers” who can humanize brands through lived experience rather than polished messaging, reflecting a broader shift toward narratives rooted in real people and real moments. That shift is also reshaping roles inside organizations. Another WSJ feature highlighted the growing demand for employees who can act as credible, social-first brand ambassadors, blurring the line between internal culture and external storytelling.Influence, however, cuts both ways. Harvard Business Review cautioned that influencer marketing only builds trust when it prioritizes relevance, transparency and long-term alignment over reach, warning that transactional partnerships can quickly erode credibility. That message echoed insights from WSJ CMO Today, where American Express’s CMO emphasized that brand authenticity starts internally — with employees who understand, believe in and consistently live the brand’s values. When internal reality and external storytelling diverge, audiences notice.
Bottom line: Authenticity is an operating principle. Businesses must empower employees, customers and creators alike to tell real stories, grounding those stories in genuine experience and clear guardrails. Trust is built when brands amplify people who believe in what they say — and lost when storytelling outpaces truth.
Recent coverage reinforces a shift we have been tracking: Large language models are fundamentally changing how reputation is formed, monitored and defended — not just during crises, but day to day. In Meltwater’s 2026 Marketing Trends report, HAVAS Red EVP Melanie Klausner captures this shift succinctly, predicting that PR and earned media will evolve into strategic inputs for AI-driven discovery as generative engines increasingly interpret, summarize and surface brand narratives. That reality is already playing out across recent coverage. Marketing Dive reported that generative AI is fundamentally upending the traditional crisis playbook, with LLMs acting as intermediaries between brands and audiences — often shaping perception before official responses are issued. In this environment, reputational risk no longer spreads solely through headlines or social media, but through how AI systems ingest and reproduce a company’s digital footprint. PRWeek underscored this shift by highlighting new data from Meltwater, which shows that AI-powered discovery is accelerating the speed at which narratives form — and harden. That reality raises the stakes for preparedness. Forbes added a complementary perspective, arguing that corporate online newsrooms have become critical reputation assets during crises, serving as authoritative, machine-readable sources that AI systems can reliably reference when misinformation or speculation spreads.
Bottom line: Reputation is no longer managed solely for human audiences. Invest in clear, credible and AI-readable content before a crisis hits, treat owned channels as strategic infrastructure, and assume that machines are now among your most influential stakeholders. Preparedness today determines credibility tomorrow.
Take the next step and reach out today.
