CBWCENTRAL BANK WATCHEROFFICIAL COMMUNICATION MONITOR
← BACK TO LIVE WIRE
Reserve Bank of AustraliaSpeechEN

Central Banks and the Press

SPEAKERFrom the Shadows to the Podium

PUBLISHED08/10/2024, 01:00:00
EVENT / LOCATIONNot stated
OFFICIAL VIDEOYOUTUBE
OPEN ON YOUTUBE ↗

Speech

From the Shadows to the Podium: Central Banks and the Press

Andrew Hauser

[

*

]

Deputy Governor

Remarks at the Business Journalism Awards

Sydney

–

8 October 2024

Audio

49MB

Q&A Transcript

Watch video: 'From the Shadows to the Podium: Central Banks and the Press', Remarks by Andrew Hauser, Deputy Governor, at the Business Journalism Awards

It’s a privilege to be with you today and to announce the shortlist for the 2024 Walkley Business

Journalism Award.

I am not the first senior official of the RBA to address this event – but, to put it mildly, our

central banking predecessors a hundred years ago would have been surprised to see us here.

The high priest of central banking in the mid-1920s was Montagu Norman, Governor of the Bank of England.

Norman was an extraordinary character – a devotee of mysticism, who wore a long flowing cloak and

travelled under the fake name of Professor Clarence Skinner. His communications strategy was succinctly

summarised in the pithy phrase ‘never explain, never apologise’.

He regularly put those words into practice. When asked by a Parliamentary select committee in 1930 to

rationalise a particular course of action, for example, he simply tapped the side of his nose three times

and stared into the distance.

Despite – or perhaps because of – this unusual behaviour, journalists loved him. A breathless 1932

New York Times

pen portrait, entitled ‘Banker and Legend’, purred: ‘Mr

Norman is all elusiveness, technique, finesse … he sits silent, discreet,

unseen … exercising a power unthought of by old-fashioned tyrants and only glimpsed by

alchemists of long ago poring over their crucibles.’ 1

Sadly, that passion went unreciprocated. Indeed, Norman made titanic efforts to avoid the press. Once,

aboard ship in rough seas, word reached him that reporters were gathering to question him at the next

port. He promptly leapt over the rails, shimmied down a rope ladder, and made his escape in a dinghy. 2

‘Never explain, never apologise’ permeated every aspect of the Bank of England’s operations

at that time. Not for them, the modern paraphernalia of glossy reports, explainers and press conferences.

For much of the 20th century, changes in official interest rates were communicated solely through the

medium of a large printed card, placed in the Bank’s ornate lobby, and a simultaneous verbal

announcement by the ‘government broker’ to traders in the government bond market. To effect

that announcement, the broker removed his top hat, stood upon a bench, and bellowed at the top of his

voice. 3

Fleet Street’s finest played no role.

Indeed, even when I joined the Bank of England in the early 1990s, the main job of the Head of the Press

Office was still said to be, with little irony: ‘keep the Bank out of the press and the press out of

the Bank’. 4

That mindset extended well beyond the United Kingdom.

The US Federal Reserve, for example, was established in conditions of such extreme secrecy, that those

meeting to agree its charter in 1910 tried to pass off their discussions as a recreational duck hunting

trip to Jekyll Island, Georgia. Three quarters of a century later, they were still at it. In 1987, Alan

Greenspan famously told members of the US Congress: ‘since I’ve become a central banker,

I’ve learned to mumble with great incoherence … if I seem unduly clear to you, you must

have misunderstood what I said.’ He was only half joking.

Over recent years, however, things have changed profoundly as central banks have emerged blinking into the

sunlight of greater transparency – a process dubbed the ‘quiet revolution’ by Alan

Blinder.

The revolution certainly began quietly. The RBA, for example, only began announcing changes to its policy

rate to the media in 1990. Prior to that, market participants were expected to draw their own conclusions

about what had happened by scrutinising the detail of the Bank’s market operations. 5

In the years since, however, the revolution has got louder. Central banks now produce a vast stream of

material, from written inflation reports, research material and policy committee minutes, to increasingly

interactive public appearances, including speeches, Parliamentary scrutiny, conference panels,

on-the-record interviews and press conferences.

All of that reflects two key drivers.

The first is the recognition that the huge powers conferred on central banks by the granting of

operational independence – powers that affect every citizen in the country – come with an

essential

quid pro quo

. And that is the obligation to account for our actions: to explain,

and to be scrutinised and challenged. That need for explicit public accountability has been further

amplified by the burgeoning scale, scope and complexity of central bank operations; by back-to-back

crises; and by the more demanding public expectations of public institutions generally. 6

But transparency and challenge isn’t just something we

have

to do: it manifestly also

drives

better

policymaking. Public understanding and trust in our mission helps to anchor

inflation expectations – a vital component of effective monetary policy. Knowing how central banks

see the economic outlook, and how policy will respond to changes to that outlook – our so-called

‘reaction functions’ – affects behaviour today. Indeed, for many economies, the vast

majority of the effect of monetary policy comes not from changes in today’s official interest rate,

but through expectations about how those rates will evolve in the future. So communications is everything

– or almost everything.

But those benefits only accrue if we get our message across – not just to the modern descendants of

those top-hatted bankers, but to the public at large. And that’s where we need all of you in this

room. Because, let’s face it, central bankers globally have had a mixed track record historically

when it came to clear and effective communications – even when they were trying. Back in 2017, Andy

Haldane – then Chief Economist of the Bank of England – estimated the minimum reading age

required for a range of public communications, including central bank publications, the

Economist

, Elvis Presley’s lyrics and Donald Trump’s speeches. He found that

Trump’s speeches could be understood by three-quarters of the population, and Elvis’s lyrics by

only slightly less. But the complexity of most central banking communications at that time meant they

could reach at most only 10 per cent of the public. 7

That is no basis for building

broad-based trust, credibility and understanding.

It was clear we could do better – and we are. Research from the European Central Bank (ECB) shows

that its current President, Christine Lagarde, uses language that is far more widely comprehensible than

her predecessors, on Haldane’s measures. 8

Similarly, the approach adopted by our own Governor,

Michele Bullock, at the RBA’s new press conferences has won widespread praise for its clarity and

simplicity.

But the fact is that most people still hear about us through you. Despite the increasingly fractured

landscape of social media and on-demand streaming, overwhelmingly the dominant source of information

about central bank policy remains the good old press, TV and radio. 9

So we need your skills as

translators and explainers.

More importantly still, we need your challenge. As public officials, knowing your analysis has to

withstand public scrutiny drives an enormous lift in the quality and robustness of that analysis. I saw

that up close at the Bank of England in the 1990s when we first embraced real transparency. Poor

arguments, which once went unquestioned in grey smoke-filled rooms, did not survive the rigour of public

examination. So, whatever may have been alleged in some quarters, both I and the RBA strongly welcome

challenge, scrutiny and debate.

Of course, it’s sometimes less fun when robust press scrutiny bleeds over from the purely

technocratic to the personal. That’s certainly familiar to someone, like me, who comes from a

country whose press managed to summarise a particularly salacious episode in the central bank’s life

as ‘It’s the Bonk Of England’, filmed a live runoff between a recent prime minister and a

decaying lettuce, and followed the Bank of England Governor to the office every day for a week during

Covid in a somewhat confused attack on the Bank’s policy on working from home. Some past RBA

Governors have had to face similar treatment.

But all of us in public life must – and do – recognise the privilege that comes with our

roles, and the accountability we owe, via you, to the public at large. So I want to thank you – not

just for the vital role you play in helping to explain the complexities of economic policy, but also for

your informed scrutiny and challenge, which forces us to raise our game and stay accountable for the huge

powers we wield. If the cleansing effect of transparency is to continue to be effective, so must your

role.

With that, let me turn to my main task here today, which is to announce the finalists for the 2024 Walkley

Business Journalism Award. The goal of these Awards is to encourage journalists to pursue rigorous and

fearless reporting in the field of business, economics and finance. And they have certainly met that

brief this year!

And with that I look forward to our discussion here today. Thank you.

Endnotes

I am grateful to David Bold, Ann Collings, Sally

Cray, Stephen Cupper, Paula Drew, Bradley Jones, Sarah Middleton-Jones, Beth Tasker, Megan Thomas

and Greg Tyler for their help in putting these remarks together.

[*]

<https://www.nytimes.com/1932/04/17/archives/montagu-norman-banker-and-legend-again-elected-governor-of-britains.html>

1

Many of these stories come from the marvellous

Lords of Finance

by Liaquat Ahamed (Penguin Press, 2009). As the book describes, the

obsession with secrecy sometimes reached farcical proportions. When the Bank of England was

forced by rapidly mounting financial losses to take the United Kingdom off the gold standard in

1931 – one of the most momentous economic decisions of the 20th century – frantic

officials were unable to consult openly with the Governor because he was travelling by sea. The

attempt to send the message in code (‘sorry we have to go off tomorrow and cannot wait to

see you before doing so’) was badly misinterpreted by Norman, who thought it just meant his

colleagues were taking a well-earned break. When he realised his life’s work had been undone

in his absence, it took him days to get over the shock. 2

Kynaston D (2017),

Till Time’s Last

Sand: A History of the Bank of England

: Bloomsbury, p 273. 3

Capie FH (2010),

The Bank of England: 1950s

to

1979, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press. 4

Battellino R, J Broadbent and P Lowe (1997),

The Implementation of Monetary Policy in Australia

, RBA Research Discussion Paper

9703. It was another 17 years before media releases recording no-change decisions. 5

These and other points in my remarks are covered

in greater depth by Stevens G (2007), ‘

Central Bank Communication

’, Address to The

Sydney Institute, Sydney, 11 December 2007. 6

See Chart 17 in Haldane AG (2017), ‘A

Little More Conversation A Little Less Action’, Speech given to Federal Reserve Bank of San

Francisco Macroeconomics and Monetary Policy Conference, 31 March. 7

See Figure 4 in Blinder AS, M Ehrmann, J de

Haan, and D-J Jansen (2024), ‘Central Bank Communication with the General Public: Promise or

False Hope?’,

Journal of Economic Literature

, 62(2), pp 425–457. 8

See Chart 4 in Gardt M, S Angino, S Mee and

G Glöckler (2021), ‘ECB Communication with the Wider Public’, ECB

Economic

Bulletin

, Issue

8/2021

.

9

VIEW ORIGINAL OFFICIAL SOURCE ↗