In November 2024, after years of using the same opening formula, Tagesschau discontinued the use of “Damen und Herren” (“Ladies and Gentlemen”) in an effort to make its language more inclusive and accessible. This change sparked an online debate, with some arguing that its going initially unnoticed suggests a lack of significance, while others view it as a step toward greater inclusivity. Drawing on the framework of analytic philosophy of language, this paper explores the dynamics of the strategic use of silence, examining whether this choice aligns with the speaker’s intended message and identifying the potential challenges and implications of such a decision. Specifically, I argue that current frameworks still struggle to adequately account for the meaning conveyed by this silence, and thus leave open various questions about the potential consequences, both positive and harmful, of this communicative choice. I argue in this paper that while the shift away from traditional formulas may have some merit in promoting inclusivity, it can also lead to unintended consequences, such as those explored in the analysis: the potential for the speaker to absolve itself of responsibility and the potential for the omission to subtly stigmatize the omitted phrase and influence listeners’ speech practices.