July 10, 2026
Reporter: “That was the question – who did you end up supporting in the presidential election?”
Denzel Washington: “None of your business.”
Reporter: “None of my business?”
Denzel Washington: “None of your business.”
Most people would never dare to say something like that when someone asks an uncomfortable question.
They freeze, they overshare, they answer things they didn’t want to answer.
But there are actually three ways to handle any inappropriate question super smoothly.
Here’s the first strategy.
See how Obama responds to this tough question.
Reporter: “Uh how many cigarettes a day do you now smoke? Do you smoke alone or in the presence of other people? And do you believe the new law would help you to quit? If so, why?”
Obama: “Well, they uh first of all, the new law that was put in place is not about me, it’s about the next generation of kids coming up. So, I think it’s fair, Margaret, to just say that you just think it’s neat to ask me about my smoking as opposed to it being relevant to my new law.”
Did you catch it?
His strategy is to name and redirect.
First, he names the obvious. He says, “I think it’s fair to say, Margaret, that you just think it’s neat to ask me about my smoking.” But he delivers that in a very calm manner.
Now the whole room sees what the journalist is doing. And you can do the same.
You can say something like, “That is an interesting question given what we’re actually here to discuss.”
Or “I’ll just note that this feels a bit more personal than relevant.”
Just a calm observation that calls out what everyone is already thinking.
But then he immediately redirects and he says, “This law is not about me, it’s about the next generation of kids.”
Now the conversation is exactly where he wants it.
So, try the same and say something like, “What actually matters here is X, Y, and Z.”
Or “What’s more relevant is X, Y, and Z.”
Name it and redirect.
Now Obama’s approach is composed and strategic. But sometimes the situation calls for something completely different, which brings me to the second strategy.
Check this out. See how Kate Winslet handles this.
Reporter: “Whether or not you think women are really just looking for a man to come in and save them? And secondly, uh the film is very much about the pain of women having and then being denied children. And I’m wondering whether you think Jason had a particular insight into this and whether or not it’s an insight that you yourself share.”
Kate Winslet: “Holy shit is that all for me? Was that all for me? No, seriously, is that actually for me? Or can I not answer it?”
Her strategy is to call it out with humor.
She doesn’t answer, she doesn’t get angry. She laughs.
“Holy shit is that all for me?” It shows that the question is absurd and gets the entire room on her side.
And most people think that they need a super clever comeback.
Well, you don’t.
Just one light line that names that absurdity.
And you can say something like, “Whoa, that’s a lot in one question.”
Or “Whoa, that’s quite a question for Tuesday morning.”
Nothing aggressive or defensive. Just a calm observation with a slight smile that lets the room feel that this question is inappropriate.
But now onto the third strategy, which is my personal favorite.
Watch how this Canadian politician handles a few tough questions.
Reporter: “On the on the topic, I mean, in terms of your sort of strategy currently, you’re obviously taking the populist pathway.”
Pierre Poilievre: “What does that mean?”
Reporter: “Well, appealing to people’s more emotional levels, I would guess.
Pierre Poilievre: “What do you mean by that? Give me an example.”
Reporter: “I mean, certainly you tap very strong ideological language quite frequently.”
Pierre Poilievre: “Like what?”
Reporter: “Uh left-wing, you know, this and that, right-wing, you know, I mean, it’s that that type of ideological stuff.”
Pierre Poilievre: “I never really talk about left or right. I don’t really believe in that.”
Notice what he does.
The journalist keeps making these vague accusations. “Populist pathways, taking a page out of Trump’s book, ideological language.”
But the politician never defends himself against any of it.
Instead, he just asks for specifics.
He says, “Well, what does that mean? Or give me an example. Like, give me a page. What page specifically?”
So, every time the journalist makes one of those vague claims, well, he refuses to accept it.
And here’s what happens.
The journalist can’t because vague accusations almost never have anything specific behind them.
The moment you ask for specifics, the whole thing just falls apart.
So, try the same and ask, “Who said that specifically?”
Or, “Can you give me an example? Now, what are you actually basing that on?”
A few questions, that’s all it takes.
That’s it. Three different strategies you can use the next time someone asks you an appropriate question.
They work extremely well.
And if you want to make sure that when you do respond, your answer is clear, confident, well-structured, well, check out this next article.
Here, I talk about how to articulate your thoughts brilliantly.Â
See you there.
P.S. Want to become a stronger communicator?
Here are two ways I can support you:
👉 Want to tell more engaging stories? Join our next Storytelling Workshop.
👉 Want to speak with confidence and clarity? Check out our Communication Skills Training.
Both are fun, practical, and designed to help you grow fast.
Are you ready to transform your storytelling skills?
Discover how your storytelling skills score and uncover useful insights to help you become a charismatic storyteller:
