Rethinking our strategy when correcting media misstatements about the reverse mortgages

I’ll be honest. I used to get pretty hot under the collar each time I saw an inaccurate new story covering reverse mortgages. “How dare they”, I would say to myself. Why don’t they simply do their research first? 

While there are fewer grossly inaccurate reverse mortgage stories in the media it’s important to correct the record when possible. What I found is firing off a heated email to the columnist is counterproductive and does nothing to advance the shared interests of our industry.

What does work? The sandwich approach. 

Recently I came across a column with a few factual errors. Not massive misrepresentations, but significant errors nonetheless. So I took some time to form my thoughts before emailing the columnist.

What I did was applaud the accurate points made. When there was a point of agreement, I would concur but add additional context. For example, I wrote the following to her point of the risk of reverse mortgage scams. “I agree wholeheartedly. We’ve seen a handful of scams but unfortunately, the vast amount of fraud against an older homeowner originates from the adult children or other family members. Truly sad to see”. 

I’m not denying the fact there are a handful of reverse mortgage scams perpetrated by bad actors, but I’m pointing out where most of the elder abuse comes from.

After agreeing with several of her points on the ‘dangers of reverse mortgages’ I corrected one misleading point. The columnist stated reverse mortgages have an increased risk of foreclosure. Such statements can cause undue concern from potential borrowers. 

I wrote, “I often read that reverse mortgages have a higher risk of foreclosure. However, the requirement to keep current on property taxes and homeowners insurance comes with any standard residential loan. This is not unique to reverse mortgages. I believe it’s important to mention this so the public knows that non-payment of property charges can result in a technical default (foreclosure) for any mortgage holder.”

I’ve found this approach is more effectively received than a frontal assault from an irritated reverse mortgage professional. 

Complementing them on the points they got right, pointing out any inaccuracies, followed by a friendly valediction embodies the essence of the ‘sandwich method’. Even better, offer to be a resource should they have any reverse mortgage-related questions in the future. 

Yes, many media outlets could do better when it comes to misstatements or misleading claims about reverse mortgages. But, we also can improve how we communicate when such circumstances arise.