Archive for the ‘Crisis PR’ Category

Three Questions to Determine if You are Taking the Right Road in Crisis PR

Monday, August 9th, 2010

The Right Turn?

Posted by Tom Gable

When unexpected events or outside forces suddenly impact your operation, rapid, reasoned response is essential to protecting the brand and organizational image for the long term. You gather facts, analyze the impacts on all constituents and then determine your strategic management and crisis communications plans going forward. But options exist. You have reached a critical fork in the road to the path toward continued trust and credibility or possibly something less. How do you decide which road to take?

At Gable PR, we’ve used a quick litmus test over the years in handling a variety of crises (hostile take overs, threats to public safety, food-borne illnesses, religious scandals, etc.) – three questions to focus on the essentials:

1. Is the strategic plan true to the brand or organizational values and what you stand for?

2. Will it solidify your reputation for the long term, despite short-term issues?

If the answer is no, maybe not, or hedged in any way, ask:

3. How will this be played in the media and by your competitors?

The recent Apple “antennagate” and BP oil spill crisis provide good case histories where the organizations may have let ego, arrogance and perceived invincibility get in the way of critical thinking about strategy. An NBC San Diego reporter got to the point when he asked me in an interview about crisis as a metaphor for company values.

“How you operate in a crisis is probably a better indicator of the quality of a corporation than (how you operate) during good times,” I replied.

A wide range of business, technical and PR media noted that Steve Jobs puts a crack in the rarely sullied brand image of Apple when he admitted that in the smart phone world, “phones aren’t perfect.” And that consumers were guilty of the lost signals because, well, we held the phone to make a call.

Jobs said the issue was all so “blown so out of proportion,” then proceeded to add his own momentum to the blow out.

He dragged Motorola, Samsung and Droid into the fray by showing they too could have problems. Using the famous Kindergarten Defense, Jobs basically said that since everyone else is doing it, what’s the big deal?

Motorola had a great time with it, running ads that promoted a phone with “no jacket required.” As quoted from a recent Fortune brainstorming panel, Motorola co-CEO Sanjay Jha was asked how he felt about Apple posting video showing its own “death grip” testing of Motorola’s new Droid X Smartphone, and if he thought it was a fair business practice. Jha answered: “You know, I heard (probably apocryphal) that the most popular voice message on iPhone4 was, ‘Sorry I can’t answer your call, because I am holding my phone!’ I don’t think this is an issue with Droid X,” reported Fortune writer Seth Weintraub.

The Motorola ad noted: “At Motorola, we believe a customer shouldn’t have to dress up their phone for it to work properly.”

The press conference videos disappeared from Apple’s site shortly after the Hitler meme and other parodies blanketed the Internet. A College Humor video (NSFW) offered one of the cruder send ups of the Apple iPhone press conference and Steve Jobs attitude.

The Register (UK) nailed it:

“…Apple thrives by saying that its products are simply better than everyone else’s, and anyone who can’t see that is clearly not cool enough. Running down the competition is very uncool, and it’s not the Apple way of doing things.”

Lesson learned: which fork did he take? Did ego override sound crisis PR strategy? A review of comments by assorted experts found general agreement that Apple should have simply owned up to the problem and offered the bumper fix immediately via a press release rather than an odd video press conference, with follow up interviews. The approach would have protected the integrity of the brand and reduced risk to the CEO, with no follow up parodies and “antennagate ads.”

In contract, the concept of owning up and moving on was demonstrated clearly by Google when it announced it was discontinuing Wave. It offered a straightforward assessment and showed the integrity of a company and a culture dedicated to taking changes and not being afraid to fail. For an attitude toward failure, my favorite quote is from Thomas Edison, who said: “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”

Next: similar and obvious lessons from BP.

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Brilliant Counsel, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Horizon Management, Hype Free PR | Comments Off

COP-16 Climate Change Panelists Told to Avoid Media; NYT Chides IPCC for Bunker Mentality, Bad PR

Friday, July 16th, 2010

IPCC Media Training

Posted by Tom Gable

Imagine that you have been selected and agreed to participate with other noted scientists in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess climate science and policy options related to global climate change, with a major event set for late November 2010 in Cancun where the world would be watching.

You are pleased as a scientist but wondering if it’s worth the commitment. Coverage of the previous meeting in Copenhagen, the Conference of the Parties (COP 15), was mixed, at best. Recently, global media questioned the authenticity of the climate change scenarios, citing hacked emails from English scientists who appeared to be conspiring to keep opposing opinions and contrary studies out of peer reviewed journals. Although outside studies cleared the scientists of wrongdoing (but urged improved communications and openness with those on all sides of the issue), skepticism did not wane.

Now, you are four months away from COP 16, to be held from Nov. 29 to Dec. 10 in Cancun and you receive a letter from the IPCC advising you to keep your distance from the media. The directions: refer questions to group leaders or the Secretariat. Do you feel stupid – your expertise, education and credentials not valued? Is IPCC afraid of new issues surfacing?  What are they hiding?

As reported by Andrew C. Revkin in The New York Times, several scientists worried that the IPCC bunker mentality would “do little to build its credibility after a trying year of attacks by foes of restrictions on greenhouse gases and skeptics of climate science.”

Revkin opined: “But any instinct to pull back after being burned by the news process is mistaken, to my mind. As I explained to a roomful of researchers at the National Academy of Sciences last year, in a world of expanding communication options and shrinking specialized media, scientists and their institutions need to help foster clear and open communication more than ever. Clampdowns on press access almost always backfire.”

Revkin asked for input from Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the climate panel. His response, as reported by Revkin:

“My advice to the authors on responding to the media is only in respect of queries regarding the I.P.C.C. Some of them are new to the I.P.C.C., and we would not want them to provide uninformed responses or opinions. We now have in place a structure and a system in the I.P.C.C. for outreach and communications with the outside world.
The I.P.C.C. authors are not employed by the I.P.C.C., and hence they are free to deal with the media on their own avocations and the organizations they are employed by. But they should desist at this stage on speaking on behalf of the I.P.C.C.”

Instead of a bunker mentality, adopt the tenets of authentic PR. In this model, research, preparation, fact-based communications and authentic engagement with the media (and all constituencies) can be the keys to success in building reputations and changing perceptions. For the IPCC, they have a wealth of talent they should be engaging in the communications battle. Scientists are used to presenting and answering tough questions, particularly when their work is subject to peer review. But working with the media requires different approaches, so investing time up front in education and training could make the engagements much more productive for the scientists, leading to more positive results in the media.

As the NYT and other coverage and comments in Discovery reported, the media from around the world will be seeking input from representatives from individual countries. Interest is high, particularly in third world countries where they feel they will be punished for the sins of the big polluters, such as China, India, the United States and other industrialized nations. They need energy to grow their economies. How will the global process translate to local impact?

As PR and news people know, readers and viewers want to know how decisions will impact them personally.

With some work, the IPCC organization turn its brilliant cadre of scientists into global ambassadors for the credibility and integrity of the IPCC process and advance local understanding. The scientists can be trained to easily transition away from IPCC issues and focus on individual areas of knowledge and expertise. They can refer to their own published works and those of their peers or other organizations as additional resources for the media.

With trained scientists, IPCC staff can serve as more than a news bureau and controller of messages. It can connect with the media in new ways by facilitating interviews with scientists, conducting interviews on key emerging topics on video and posting them to YouTube, holding a series of briefings with scientists from different regions of the world for select regional media and providing instant updates through Twitter, streaming videos and active blogging.

Instead of jumping into the bunker and getting defensive, the IPCC can use the Cancun meeting as an opportunity to open new lines of communication with the media and improve understanding of the issues and the nuances. Creating new media relationships with scientists from throughout the world can only help improve the overall quality of news coverage. Bottom line: an open, engaged program of pro-active media relations will have a positive impact on the long-term reputation of the IPCC, its people and the process.

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Brilliant Counsel, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Hype Free PR, In the Beginning, Social Media | 2 Comments »

The PR Hurt Locker: Ten Land Mines to Negotiate in a Crisis (six through ten)

Monday, March 8th, 2010

Bye Bye Reputation

Posted by Tom Gable

The previous post covered the first five of ten land mines to avoid in a crisis: guilt, no plan, lack of culture and core values, big hat (no cattle) and CEO ego. The following delve more into hazards to negotiate during implementation.

6. Attorneyitis – This land mine occurs when otherwise good messages and communications that the CEO and crisis team have approved get handed off for legal review and come back bruised, bloated and infected with the deadly disclaimer virus. Short, compelling copy turns fuzzy around the edges. Statements of fact become weighted down with convoluted clauses and abundancies of redundancies (In one set of Frequently Asked Questions that Gable PR crafted to explain a law suit our client filed against a magazine for libel and slander, a sharp 19-word sentence nailing the editor for deceit was turned into 100 words of circumlocution without a verb). The test: read a sentence out loud and if everyone’s eyes glaze over like you were reading from C-Span transcripts or they laugh so hard they herniated, start over. (more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Brilliant Counsel, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Horizon Management, Team Play | 1 Comment »

Ten Land Mines to Avoid in Your Next Crisis (one through five)

Monday, March 1st, 2010

Tred Lightly!

Posted by Tom Gable

Crises come in all forms and sizes, from global product recalls to local political scandal, the nuisance law suit about spilled hot coffee at a fast food restaurant, corporate malfeasance, alleged embezzlement in a not-for-profit, sexual harassment issues, hazardous waste spills, to manufacturing, transportation or other accidents that take human lives.

Skilled public relations professionals have been dealing with these issues and more for decades. They have honed best practices and tempered them under fire, increasing the odds of success in any crisis program. Good advice and case histories abound. But advances in how the world communicates instantly and in living color (photos Tweeted from cell phones, drive-by videos of transgressions, amateur news casts, rumors in the blogosphere, a consumer issue going viral via Twitter, etc.) have added new complexities to the art and science of crisis communications. The race is increasingly to the swift and, as detailed later, the trustworthy. (more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Brilliant Counsel, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Hoax and Fraud, Hype Free PR, Team Play | Comments Off

Crisis PR: Three Core Principles and Planning Checklist to Guide Your Actions

Friday, February 12th, 2010

Reputation Skewered

Posted by Tom Gable

Most major organizations create crisis plans in advance of need, update them regularly, have a strategic array of tools and tactics ready to go (hidden Web sites, video, audio, fact sheets, media kits) and even rehearse their responses. The better job an organization does before a crisis strikes – or at the beginning to quickly manage a crisis based on sound principles should a plan not be in place – the better the result. These fundamentals came to mind in tracking the Toyota recall, the changing communications strategies and lack of responsiveness early in the game.

In creating a crisis plan and carrying it out in any crisis communications situation, three basic principles should guide your actions:

One – Be honest and stick to the facts. Do not speculate, hypothecate or exaggerate. Those impacted by the crisis deserve nothing less – and your reputation may be damaged irreparably if you aren’t truthful and authentic. (more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Brilliant Counsel, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Horizon Management, In the Beginning, Team Play | Comments Off

Beyond Crisis PR: Can Toyota Change Its DNA?

Saturday, February 6th, 2010

Road to Recall

Posted by Tom Gable

The Toyota crisis PR case is not just about the recent recalls, global media scrutiny and potential Congressional action in the U.S. It has metastasized from neglected issues within the body corporate to impact vital functions in every fiber of the Toyota being.

Possible deeper issues were discovered by Ken Bensinger of the LA Times and others in major media. He started following the case after an off-duty CHP patrolman and three family members died when the accelerator stuck on their Toyota and they crashed in rural San Diego County in August 2009. Toyota’s president, Akio Toyoda, apologized. Soon, Toyota recalled 4.3-million-vehicles, its largest recall ever. (more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Horizon Management, Hype Free PR, In the Beginning | 1 Comment »

In Crisis PR, It’s Not Always How You Start But How You Finish

Tuesday, February 2nd, 2010

Shrinking image?

Posted by Tom Gable

The news media, auto industry analysts and elected officials have been aggressive in going after Toyota for its delays in responding to a growing crisis about sudden acceleration in some of its models from gas pedal and floor mat issues.

NPR opined that “the carmaker that could end up doing long-term damage to the sterling reputation it has painstakingly built up for several decades.” It cited a slow response time in dealing with the problem and communicating. (more…)

Tags: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Horizon Management, Social Media | Comments Off

Backlash on Gwen, the New “Homeless American Girl”; Can Cause Marketing Trump Crisis PR?

Wednesday, October 21st, 2009

Posted by Krista Rogers

As a little girl I was captivated by the American Girl book series and the accompanying dolls. The books presented a great platform to educate pre-teen girls on diverse lifestyles and challenges and allow them to relate across time to people living in dissimilar situations. The dolls tied into those same periods of history and provided a tangible link to the pre-teen girls living those lives.

After I read a series of books, my parents would reward me with the overpriced doll that I now had a literary connection with. At $95 a pop, these dolls were more than just plastic play figures. In contrast to headless Barbies soon housed in the ice-chest in the garage, my American Girl dolls had personalities. I developed a relationship with them and learned to relate to the various trials and tribulations they faced.

Enter American Doll’s newest addition: Gwen Thompson, the homeless pre-teen whose back story includes being abandoned by her father and living out of a car with her mother. Still priced at $95 for the doll itself, homeless Gwen is causing quite the controversy.

The reason: homelessness is a serious social issue. With over 10 percent of the U.S. categorized as homeless, the new American Doll does embrace an aspect of our culture that needs to be communicated. Gwen’s story allows girls of higher socioeconomic status (read: who’s parents are willing to fork up $95 for a doll) to relate to and understand the lives of the less-fortunate. Gwen can give perspective to privileged pre-teens and help them develop empathy.

However, capitalizing on the unfortunate circumstances of transients without any type of give-back to the homeless community is as the Huffington Post puts it, in bad taste. The Huffington Post article triggered pages of angry comments. Public outrage then went viral. The Twitterverse trended hot and heavy on the topic. Here are a few examples:

Going Viral

Going Viral

Two comments left on a CBS article echoes the general publics’ sentiment on the issue, “Greedy capitalists will go to any lengths to make money! $95.00 for a homeless doll? The wonderful results of a Sick Society!” and “At $95 it’s nice to know that American Girl, LLC can make money off of the homeless children of America. How about giving a few of these dolls out for Christmas. If they get a letter from a shelter from a family a doll goes there. Someone from the American doll company needs to do some goodwill. I won’t be buying an American doll for little girl this year because I am unemployed.”

It may be too late for American Girl to reclaim some of the goodwill lost in what many viewed as a cynical attempt to capitalize on a tragic situation. Something they should have before launching Gwen was to develop a cause marketing program where 10 percent or more of all Gwen sales would go to a national shelter program for the homeless, or some other relevant initiative.

To take it to a higher level and one that built reputation over time, American Girl could have launched an integrated, strategic program to educate more Americans about the homeless issue and generate new sources of income, much as 7-Eleven did for so many years in supporting Jerry Lewis and his annual telethon for muscular dystrophy. All Gwen promotional efforts, materials, social media blitzes and public relations outreach could have supported the effort, providing links to relevant agencies where the pre-teen girls and their families could step forward with their own contributions. The America Girl web site could have added a special educational page on the homeless issue and encouraged visitors to become activists in a national cause and donate online.

Cause-marketing is a proven way for building reputation and goodwill among different target audiences. Studies show consumers support companies that give back to the community. American Girl has a history of connecting positively with their target audiences (and parents!). Perhaps it is time to start connecting in new and more meaningful ways.

 

Tags: , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Social Media | 2 Comments »

FTC to Bloggers: Disclose Freebies, Payments. Blogestapo in the Works? Implications for PR?

Thursday, October 8th, 2009

FTC Finds Blogger Freebie
FTC Finds Blogger Freebie

Posted by Tom Gable

As reported by the Associated Press, The New York Times and others, the Federal Trade Commission on Oct. 5 voted 4-0 to approve final guidelines for regulating anyone who reviews a product, including bloggers. As the AP reported:

The FTC will require that writers on the Web clearly disclose any freebies or payments they get from companies for reviewing their products. The commission also said advertisers featuring testimonials that claim dramatic results cannot hide behind disclaimers that the results aren’t typical…For bloggers, the FTC stopped short of specifying how they must disclose conflicts of interest. Rich Cleland, assistant director of the FTC’s advertising practices division, said the disclosure must be “clear and conspicuous,” no matter what form it will take.

Bloggers have long praised or panned products and services online. But what some consumers might not know is that many companies pay reviewers for their write-ups or give them free products such as toys or computers or trips to Disneyland. In contrast, at traditional journalism outlets, products borrowed for reviews generally have to be returned…The FTC’s proposal made many bloggers anxious. They said the scrutiny would make them nervous about posting even innocent comments.

Consumer advocacy groups were quoted as saying lack of disclosure is a big problem in blogs. They suggested putting more pressure on bloggers to “behave properly,” according to AP.

As reported in The New York Times:

The new rules also take aim at celebrities, who will now need to disclose any ties to companies, should they promote products on a talk show or on Twitter. A second major change, which was not aimed specifically at bloggers or social media, was to eliminate the ability of advertisers to gush about results that differ from what is typical — for instance, from a weight loss supplement…For bloggers who review products, this means that the days of an unimpeded flow of giveaways may be over. More broadly, the move suggests that the government is intent on bringing to bear on the Internet the same sorts of regulations that have governed other forms of media, like television or print.

The buzz on the blogosphere ranged from taking umbrage and pleading First Amendment privileges to those who felt bloggers needed to be held accountable and readers deserved to have all the facts, including those of sponsorship and freebies.

Then there are the concerns about business bloggers and experts who comment on companies, industries and trends rather than products. What type of disclosure is required if they have been paid by the company they are commenting on, or a direct competitor or consulting firm with ties to the company, its competitors or the industry? One “mommy blogger” from the United Kingdom questioned how it would impact those who receive free books to review.

I review books because I love them, and getting some for free is a bonus – now the US is cracking down on us mommy bloggers…They call it blogola – payola for bloggers – the term for free stuff that bloggers get to review on their site and even the cash that some accept for those reviews. Those “offers” can also take place on micro-blogging sites such as Twitter, as exemplified by the recent controversy surrounding the #nestlefamily event – in which bloggers have agreed to take part in a promotional event organised by the multinational company.

PRSA looked at the FTC notice and offered some possible applications of the guidelines:

  • Bloggers who receive cash or in-kind payment (including free products or services for review) are deemed endorsers and so must disclose material connections they share with the seller of the product or service.
  • Any firm that engages bloggers by paying them outright to create or influence editorial content or by supplying goods or services to them at no cost may be liable if the blogger does not disclose the relationship.
  • Advertisements or promotions that feature a consumer who conveys his or her experience with a product or service as “typical” should clearly disclose what results consumers can generally expect or specify how the results were unique to the individual circumstances.
  • If research is cited in an advertisement or promotion, any sponsorship of the research by the client or the marketer should be clearly disclosed.
  • Celebrities who make endorsements outside the context of traditional ads, such as on talk shows or in social media, should disclose any relationship with the advertiser or marketer.

One thing absent from the debate so far: enforcement.

Is the pronouncement actually part of a clever strategy to grow the FTC bureaucracy? After all, government is one of our few growth industries.

Will the FTC create a new Blogestapo modeled after the Transportation Security Administration (TSA)? Staffers in blue uniforms will sit hunched over computers in new facilities throughout the land reading a zillion tweets, clicking through to a million blogs and news Web sites and looking for evil-doers. Next, a press conference featuring the media-savvy President Obama talking about the importance of saving our country from the new Axis of Evil: Twitter, Facebook and Blogging.

Tags: , , , , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Brilliant Counsel, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Hoax and Fraud, In the Beginning, Social Media | 1 Comment »

The Sequenom Case: In Crisis PR, No-Hype and No-Spin Should Prevail

Wednesday, September 30th, 2009

Posted by Tom Gable

Can authentic no-spin PR, even in a crisis, help a company maintain a semblance of credibility, protect its reputation on the downside and set a vision for the future that even supports its stock price?

Sequenom Inc. in San Diego won’t know. On Monday, it issued a news release via PR Newswire with the headline: “SEQUENOM Announces Completion of Independent Investigation.”

The lead paragraph:

SAN DIEGO, Sept. 28 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ — SEQUENOM, Inc. (Nasdaq: SQNM) today announced the completion of the independent investigation by a special committee of independent directors related to the test data and results for the company’s noninvasive prenatal test for Trisomy 21 (Down syndrome). The independent counsel engaged by the special committee interviewed over 40 witnesses and reviewed over 300,000 documents and emails.

Okay, so what’s the issue? Buried in the fourth paragraph is the bottom line of the investigation:

The company has terminated the employment of its president and chief executive officer, Harry Stylli, Ph.D., and its senior vice president of research and development…obtained the resignation of its chief financial officer…and one other officer… (and) also terminated the employment of three other employees. While each of these officers and employees has denied wrongdoing, the special committee’s investigation has raised serious concerns, resulting in a loss of confidence by the independent members of the company’s board of directors in the personnel involved.

How did the news media play it? Here are the headlines and first paragraphs from stories in the San Diego Daily Transcript, San Diego Union-Tribune and Xcomony.

Sequenom fires CEO and others after investigation (SDDT)

Sequenom Inc. says it fired its CEO and its research chief following an investigation into the mishandling of test results for its Down syndrome blood test. A total of four executives and three other employees were terminated or resigned, the company says.

… Sequenom said Harry Hixson Jr., 71, a member of its own board and a former president and chief operating officer of Amgen Inc. (Nasdaq: AMGN), will take over as interim CEO. Another board member, Ronald Lindsay, 61, will be interim CFO, and controller Justin File, 39, will be the principal financial and accounting officer.

…Sequenom’s (Nasdaq: SQNM) SEQureDx test, which screened maternal blood to discover Down syndrome in fetuses, was on track to reach the market in June until the company disclosed in late April that study data had been “mishandled” by employees. That made the data unreliable and lead to delays, hammering the San Diego company’s stock price.

Sequenom ousts CEO, other execs (Union-Tribune)

The San Diego biotechnology company Sequenom said yesterday that it has ousted its CEO and several other executives after an investigation into the mishandling of study data.

The discovery of the data problems in April led the company to postpone the launch of the test and to suspend four research and development employees. The test remains on hold, though the company has not disclosed specifically what went wrong…Now the company says the public should not rely on any of its previously announced data for the test, and it is not disclosing a timetable for development of eventual commercialization.

Sequenom Shares Tank After Executives Ousted Over Data Mishandling (Xconomy)

Sequenom shares plummeted 44 percent today in after-hours trading after the San Diego-based company said it has ousted CEO Harry Stylli and its head of R&D in the wake of an investigation into mishandling of data for its prenatal genetic test for Down Syndrome.

Sequenom shares fell $2.50, or 44 percent, to $3.20 in after-hours trading after the conference call. That’s a painful free fall for investors who bought last year on the enthusiastic news about Sequenom’s test, which drove shares up to $27.76 the day after the original announcement on Sept. 23, 2008.

How could this have been played differently by the company, to perhaps better results? One has to avoid the attempt to try short-term spin and think strategically about rebuilding credibility and creating a foundation to recover long-term reputation and valuation.

On positioning for the future, Hixson has impeccable credentials and credibility. During a conference call, he said the company is instituting new disclosure controls and procedures on all fronts, launching training in ethics and scientific processes and adding a new science committee on the company’s board of directors to oversee its research and development strategy and activities – definitely a positive direction.

The company said the data problems appeared to be confined to the Down syndrome program. It recently launched a separate test to identify parents with increased risk of having babies with cystic fibrosis, so is not a one-compound wonder, as happens with many biotech companies. The cystic fibrosis data, handled by a different unit than the one handling the Down syndrome data, has been validated by outside third-party collaborators. In addition, Hixson said the company still believes it has a valid approach to the detection of Down syndrome through genetic analysis of maternal blood. He said the company hopes to maintain its collaboration with Oxford University researcher Dennis Lo, who licensed his intellectual property to Sequenom for developing and commercializing its prenatal test.

He told the media that he and Lindsay were currently in the midst of strategic planning for the coming year and setting new priorities, with more to come as they get into it.

“We are determined to emerge from this experience stronger,” Hixson told the media.

What could have Sequenom done differently? One approach is to like a news organization rather than an attorney. How will the news be played? Then, be aggressive and pro-active in telling its story and making a few major points:

  • Sequenom has completed an independent investigation of issues involving the mishandling of data and release of results that were not accurate
  • As a result, the board has fired its CEO and removed others in top management and units involved with the mishandling
  • The company and its technology are sound Harry Hixson, former president of Amgen and a board member, is taking over and has announced plans to move forward aggressively in correcting internal issues while also continuing to pursue important research
  • The mishandled data related only to the Down syndrome studies and not to a promising study in identifying parents whose children could be prone to cystic fibrosis
  • The new Sequenom team will be doing all it can going forward to rebuild trust in the company, its people and the promise of its technology and research

Admittedly, there are issues with an ongoing SEC investigation and the raft of class action law suits that will follow, requiring some legal scrutiny of all communications and news releases. But being more candid from the outset and NOT burying the news in the fourth paragraph would probably have enhanced company credibility, started rebuilding trust and shored up the confidence of some investors by setting a vision for future change and, perhaps, success.

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Authentic PR, Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Horizon Management, Hype Free PR | 1 Comment »

« Older Entries
Newer Entries »