DARA TRESEDER

Hypernormalization is when people are given stories that are only partly true, repeated so often they start to feel real. The term comes from politics, where half-truths and confusing messages are used so much that people struggle to tell what’s real. In marketing, it can work similarly: a brand may carefully shape the truth to make their message appealing, while avoiding anything that could make them look bad.

In this era of hypernormalization, audiences know they’re not always getting the whole story. This skepticism pushes brands to decide: Do they stick to “safer” messages that leave out hard truths, or try being more open at the risk of backlash? Dara Treseder, CMO of Autodesk, faces these dilemmas head-on. She believes brands can build trust by finding ways to balance truth with smart messaging. In this Top Voices interview, Treseder shares insights into how brands can stay honest, build lasting connections, and use transparency wisely.

In an age where audiences are increasingly skeptical, how do you determine which version of ‘truth’ to present? Is PR about shaping perception, or does it involve a responsibility to convey objective reality—and where does that line blur?"

As marketers, we face the challenge of presenting complex truths in ways that are both accessible and truthful. Our goal is to build trust by staying rooted in accuracy and integrity, even when simplifying information for audiences. At Autodesk, I recognize that while perception can be shaped, authenticity should never be compromised. To this end, I ensure that my teams employ a "layered truth" approach—presenting the essential facts first and allowing customers to dive deeper if they wish, without masking complexities. This approach keeps us honest and transparent, aligning with our commitment to responsible communication.

While PR does involve shaping perceptions, it must be grounded in ethical truth. This means conveying our message in ways that resonate without crossing into manipulation. A strong PR strategy must honor the intelligence of the audience, offering them a transparent, genuine look at the brand’s intentions, successes, and challenges. It’s about aligning perception with an authentic reality rather than creating a disconnected image that could ultimately erode trust.

PR professionals are often asked to highlight positives, even if it means omitting certain facts. How do you balance your ethical obligations with the pressure to maintain a polished brand image? Can selective truth-telling still be considered ethical PR?

Selective truth-telling can be ethical if it aligns with the principles of transparency and respect for the audience’s right to understand the full picture. At Autodesk, we practice what we call "transparency with context"—sharing both the wins and the lessons learned, so audiences get a fair and balanced understanding of our journey. If we encounter setbacks, we address them transparently by framing these as part of our continuous improvement, which enhances credibility and deepens trust.

It’s crucial for PR professionals to avoid "spinning" stories to mislead. Audiences today are savvy, and they can detect inauthentic messaging, which could backfire and damage reputation. Instead, I would advise marketers to focus on providing insights into our strategic direction and growth while acknowledging areas where we aim to do better. This approach respects the audience’s intelligence and builds a long-term relationship based on honesty.

With disinformation and hypernormalized narratives becoming pervasive, how do you distinguish between an effective PR message and one that contributes to public deception? Is there a risk that efforts to simplify or frame stories inadvertently feed into public mistrust?

Simplifying messages for clarity is part of effective communication, but over-simplification can indeed risk distorting reality. To mitigate this, we implement a "fact-check and balance" approach at Autodesk, where our communication team evaluates each message for clarity, context, and completeness. We’re committed to providing clear but nuanced narratives that respect our audience's need for transparency without oversimplifying complex issues.

Additionally, we prioritize open channels for feedback, creating a feedback loop that helps us understand public perception and address any misunderstandings in real time. This two-way communication not only enhances our brand’s credibility but also allows us to correct course if we unintentionally contribute to misperceptions. My responsibility is to avoid narratives that may lead audiences to oversimplified conclusions, even if it requires more effort in crafting our messages.

In PR, messages are frequently tailored to meet audience expectations, but does this perpetuate hypernormalized narratives? How do you handle situations where public perception may reject the actual truth in favor of a more convenient narrative?

One of the greatest challenges in PR today is aligning truthful narratives with audience expectations. At Autodesk, we counter this by positioning education as part of our brand communication strategy. This involves sharing why we make certain decisions and educating our audience about the complexities that come with it. By framing campaigns with context and educational content, we encourage audiences to understand rather than settle for simplistic, potentially misleading narratives.

If we face a situation where the audience gravitates towards a convenient but inaccurate perception, we step back to provide a clearer explanation. One example involved our environmental sustainability initiatives, where we openly addressed the complex trade-offs involved. Instead of trying to shape an idealized narrative, we worked to explain the real-world constraints and opportunities, giving our audience a more balanced, accurate view.

PR campaigns are designed to persuade, but at what point does persuasion edge into manipulation? Do you believe it’s possible to create compelling PR campaigns that are entirely truthful, or is the nature of PR inherently selective and agenda-driven?

I believe that compelling campaigns can absolutely be built on truth. At Autodesk, we have embraced a model I call "persuasive integrity," where we ensure that our campaigns are both compelling and rooted in factual accuracy. This involves focusing on the unique strengths of our products and the tangible outcomes our solutions deliver without overstating claims or veering into exaggerated messaging.

While every campaign will emphasize specific attributes of a product or service, we draw a clear line at any tactic that might mislead. We conduct extensive testing on campaign messaging with different focus groups, evaluating whether the message remains authentic under scrutiny. This "authenticity check" ensures that persuasion remains aligned with integrity, allowing us to inspire confidence without risking the trust we’ve worked hard to build.

As PR professionals, we often amplify messages through influencers or spokespersons. How do you ensure these messengers stay authentic to the brand’s real values rather than simply feeding into hypernormalized messages that 'sell well' but lack substance?

Working with influencers can be a powerful tool, but it’s essential that their representation of the brand is authentic. At Autodesk, we carefully select influencers who share our core values and can speak credibly to our mission. We equip them with the context and key messages they need to stay aligned with our brand while encouraging them to express these messages in their authentic voice. We don’t script influencer messaging; rather, we provide them with a "story framework" that allows them to communicate their genuine experience with our brand.

Additionally, we conduct periodic check-ins with our influencers to ensure alignment and authenticity in their messaging. Authentic influencer partnerships are less about pushing sales and more about fostering connection with the audience through genuine stories. This approach not only reinforces brand integrity but also resonates better with audiences, who appreciate hearing real experiences.

Transparency has become a buzzword in PR, but absolute transparency can also lead to vulnerability. How do you navigate this delicate balance, especially when too much transparency could damage brand reputation or even harm stakeholders?

Transparency is essential, but so is responsible communication. At Autodesk, we strive to maintain what I call "strategic transparency"—a balance where we are open about critical matters while protecting sensitive information that could impact stakeholders if misinterpreted. For example, in product development, we’re open about our goals and progress, but we exercise discretion around unreleased features or timelines to avoid potential backlash over changes that may occur during testing.

We also approach transparency by prioritizing issues that matter most to our audiences, such as our environmental impact, diversity initiatives, and technological advancements. By focusing on transparency in areas where it builds trust and aligns with audience values, we can reinforce credibility without unnecessary risk. This balanced approach allows us to maintain stakeholder confidence while being truthful and clear about our intentions and actions.