Some studies of data management services within academic libraries focus on best practices for structuring data services; others consider tools and training needed to successfully offer these services. However, these developments may be underutilized, as the ways libraries talk about data-related research are not always in sync with how scholars think about their work. This panel considers how libraries might strategically reconsider communications about data services.Researchers' debates over the merits of data sharing mention funder mandates only in passing, if at all. This suggests that librarians' focus on mandates for data sharing will connect with only a subset of researchers' data needs. First, Herndon and O'Reilly discuss this difference between librarians and researchers, then suggest different ways that libraries might frame data management services, and consider additional data services that libraries might offer.Next, Bennett and Nicholson consider the premise that \"bad information is processed more thoroughly than good\" and integrate that premise into an exploration of the alignment of library-emanating data management communications with the data-related expectations of researchers in different academic domains. How could the notion that bad information resonates better be used to inform the ways that libraries approach the promotion of data services across disciplines?