Posts Tagged ‘government’

Air Force One and NYC – Risk Analysis Up Front Can Prevent PR Gaffes and Blunders

Thursday, April 30th, 2009
Air Force One Photo Opp Goes Awry

Photo Opp Goes Awry

Posted by Tom Gable

The Wall Street Journal reported that The White House canceled a planned second photo shoot of a jumbo jet used as Air Force One in Washington, D.C. next month with the nation’s capital as a backdrop after negative public reaction to Monday’s flight in New York with the Statue of Liberty as the icon, which made headlines in the WSJ, The New York Times and other media. The scramble by White House officials to retrace the steps that led to the gaffe generated other stories and blog coverage.

With foresight and basic risk analysis, the first flight might not have happened, saving the White House the need to jump into the post-event crisis PR and apology mode.

PR firms and internal staffs typically go through a somewhat simple but strategic process of analysis to determine the value and benefit of any special event, promotion, photo opportunity, stunt or other activity.

Here is the Gable PR check list, to which many other ideas could be added:

• Useful purpose of the proposed activity (write a vision statement or project goal)
• Logistics, staging (feasibility, issues, costs, timing, etc.)
• Participants
• Context (where does it fit in society, the public, mores)
• Desired outcome
• Cost/benefit
• The flip side – risk analysis

The risk analysis portion is most critical. What could go wrong? Is the proposed activity moral, ethical, sensitive to all outside interests and publics, drain on resources, a public safety issue or fraught with even the tiniest hint of potential disruption of the daily lives of those who would be involved, either directly or indirectly? Risk analysis can lead to a quick decision on go, no go, or modify.

When things go wrong, management needs to determine the cause. Was it an issue with authority, responsibility, controls, processes or even culture? Common sense also plays a huge role. If this incident were taken apart by Saturday Night Live on Weekend Update the bit might be: “What were they thinking?” And Seth Myers would say: “Let’s spend $300,000 of taxpayers’ money to fly a 747 and fighter jet at low level over Manhattan and scare the hell out of several million people so we can have a neat photo for our Web site.”

Photo by Jim Brown

Tags: , , , , , ,
Posted in Client Service Results, Crisis PR, Hypemeister Honor Roll | Comments Off

Fed Chairman Bernanke Turns to PR to Boost Image, Understanding

Thursday, April 16th, 2009

Posted by Tom Gable

The Wall Street Journal ran a lengthy feature on the strategy by Ben Bernanke, chairman of the Federal Reserve, to be more open about his thinking and “wage a public relations offensive that puts him in the starring role.” This is notable because the previous two chairmen, Paul Volcker and Alan Greenspan, were known for lack of clarity and openness.  Greenspan never took questions and “delighted in his ability to obfuscate.”

The change in PR strategy is essential because of the economic turmoil buffeting world markets and the general lack of economic insights and intelligence among the American public.  The issues are complex. Lack of understanding can create angst, uncertainty and declining public confidence in any institution, company,  government agency,  policy or anything else impacting our pocketbooks. According to the WSJ, Bernanke has long argued that markets operate more smoothly if participants understand central bankers’ rules and processes.  He started his campaign in February with a talk and Q&A at the National Press Club in Washington. His interview on 60 Minutes in March drew praise for its plain talk and candor. He recently spoke at Morehouse College on “Four Questions About the Financial Crisis,” which critics said was an excellent “Economics 101″ lecture.

The Fed is considering holding regular press conferences and other outreach efforts. Beyond that, adopting a pro-active, fact-based, strategic campaign to reach all target audiences with consistency through every tool of the trade will surely help overcome widespread confusion about what the Fed is doing and perhaps start moving consumer confidence in a more positive direction, to the ultimate benefit of the economic recovery as it beings evolving. Let the communication begin.

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

New Wisconsin Slogan? Deja Vu All Over Again

Wednesday, April 15th, 2009

bacardislogan1

Rebranding Wisconsin 

Creativity can be the shining light that helps clients get noticed and stand out from the crowd. But lack of creativity can garner attention as well, though not the type of attention you might want. As widely reported recently, the State of Wisconsin unveiled its new slogan, aimed at attracting tourists to the region: Live Like You Mean It. Only problem is, the slogan has already been used. By authors, motivational speakers, and even Bacardi!

More importantly, the slogan doesn’t seem connected with the “Wisconsin” brand. Authentic PR means going beyond fluff and spin to develop key messages, including marketing slogans, with the facts and figures to back them up.

Admittedly a slogan does not a marketing campaign make. But a clichéd slogan with little connection to the core brand (the characteristics and principles that make up a company — or a state) can unmake a marketing campaign before it even gets started. What does Wisconsin stand for? Maybe we will learn the next time around.

(Popular bumper sticker, perhaps originally proposed by David Letterman: Eat Cheese or Die.)

Posted by Erin Koch

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Client Service Results, Hypemeister Honor Roll, The Light Side | Comments Off

The AIG Hearing and News Coverage: Lessons in Crisis PR

Monday, April 13th, 2009
Two weeks ago, we asked PR professionals to weigh in on how well Edward Liddy, the CEO of AIG, did in his testimony before Congress on the controversy involving bonus payments to employees of AIG, which had suffered billions of dollars in losses and received bailout money from the U.S. Government. The survey also asked how respondents felt the media covered the CEO and his testimony and how they would rate media coverage of business in the United States in general.A link to the survey was sent to 287 individuals and 12 responded, or 4.2 %. Several of those responding sent personal emails that added more detail to their rankings. It was good to see pros with 15 to more than 30 years of experience taking the time to reply. They noted that breaking even or coming in just slightly tarnished versus trashed would be a great outcome in this type of media circus. These were good insights and reasonable expectations.

Bottom line: the CEO did a good job acknowledging the issues, but went downhill from there in terms of providing solutions, overcoming negative images of AIG and changing perceptions. Was it an impossible challenge? Imagine climbing out of a hole bigger than the Grand Canyon with extra baggage, into a storm and with hostile observers on the rim rolling rocks down the trails to knock you off your chosen path. Tough to train for, no matter how good your Crisis PR team.

Liddy did fare better than the automotive executives who were pilloried from all fronts for flying to the hearings in private jets and mostly looking and sounding alike. This was hardly central to the issue of saving the automotive industry but it provided great openings for critical sound bites from the media and also politicians hungry for media attention.

On AIG, respondents were very aware (91.7 %) and somewhat aware (8.3 %) of the issue. In rating the image of AIG before the testimony, 66.7 % rated it Very Negative, followed by Somewhat Negative (8.3 %) and Neutral (25 %). None rated it as Somewhat Positive or Positive.

On Liddy and his performance before Congress, the survey asked for ratings in eight categories:

  • Acknowledging issues: the rating average on a 1-to-5 scale was 4.0, his highest. Average, 16.7%; Above Average, 66.7%; Excellent, 16.7%
  • Identifying Problems: rating 3.25. Below Average, 25.0%; Average, 33.3%; Above Average, 33.3% Excellent, 8.3%.
  • Accepting Responsibility: 3.0. Poor, 8.3%; Below Average, 16.7%; Average, 50.0%; Above Average, 16.7%; Excellent, 8.3%.
  • Appearing Sincere: 3.5. Below Average, 8.3%; Average, 33.3%; Above Average, 58.3%.
  • Providing Reasonable Solutions: 2.83. Poor, 25.0%; Below Average, 8.3%; Average, 33.3%; Above Average, 25.0%; Excellent, 8.3%.
  • Answering Questions Under Fire: 3.67. Average, 50.0%; Above Average, 33.3%; Excellent, 16.7% (second highest).
  • Overcoming Negative Images of AIG: 2.5 (tied for lowest). Below Average, 58.3%; Average, 33.3%; Above Average, 8.3%.
  • Changing Perceptions: 2.5 (tied for lowest). Poor, 16.7%; Below Average, 41.7%; Average, 16.7%; Above Average, 25.0%.
  • After the Session and in Seeing News Coverage, How Did Your Opinion Change: 0.0, Much Better; 16.7%, Slightly Better; 66.7%, No Change; 8.3%, Slightly Worse; 8.3%, Much Worse.
  • In Reviewing Follow-Up Coverage, How Did You Feel the Media Treated the AIG CEO and His Testimony: 8.3%, No Opinion; 25%, Unfairly; 16.7%, Somewhat Unfairly; 25%, Balanced; 16.7%, Somewhat Fairly; 8.3%, Fairly.

The opinions on fairness of the coverage skewed slightly to the negative side. The final question was a follow up:

In General, How Would You Rate Media Coverage of Business in the United States: Anti-Business, 33.3%; Somewhat Anti-Business, 41.7%; Balanced, 0.0%; Somewhat Pro-Business, 16.7%; Pro-Business, 8.3%.

How to operate in an environment where the media doesn’t like business and business thinks the media is biased? Results from this quick litmus test of perceptions are mirrored in many surveys with high confidence levels, including one from the Edelman Trust Barometer and another from the Media Research Center.

All of the above raises some thoughts for issues management in what could be no-win situations: analyze the situation from the media and other outside perspectives (political, regulatory, shareholder, consumer, environmental, etc.); prepare for the worst possible questions; run your answers by outside experts, colleagues and consultants (politicians float trial balloons before going public with their ideas); rehearse, rehearse. rehearse; acknowledge whatever problems that exist at the beginning; provide reasonable and logical solutions; speak in a human voice (no spin or corporate speak); counter hostile personal attacks with historical precedents, facts and data, delivered confidently and non-emotionally; when faced with outrageous statements and material taken out of context, use a little ju-jitsu to ask for the source of the data and information; do a short closing statement with a thank you and visionary statement for moving forward; do a post-event media briefing; provide your facts and materials immediately through every means possible (email, newswires, Web site, blogs, social media); follow up directly with all media, particularly the most critical; analyze the results; and get ready for the next round.

Posted by Tom Gable

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

Little Issues Can Grow into Big PR Crises When Ignored, Damage Reputations

Friday, April 3rd, 2009

When running for mayor of San Diego in 2005, retired police chief Jerry Sanders promised that he wouldn’t be “double dipping” at taxpayer expense by accepting the full mayor’s salary while collecting his police pension.

The mayor worked for three years of his first term for about $36,000 annually, about one-third of the approved salary for the office of about $100,000 (a small amount in itself given the job he faced!). Over three years, he saved the city about $192,000, which went into the general fund for the cash-strapped city.

On Dec. 8, 2008, the day he was sworn in for his second term, he began taking his full salary. Now for the little issue getting big: he never announced it.

The story came to light during media questions to the mayor and city council during budget hearings. The San Diego Union-Tribune broke the story on April 1. The story quoted the Taxpayers Association and the Municipal Employee’s Association who said the move was fine. Taxpayers asked the big question: why didn’t he inform the public?

The Union-Tribune reported that Sanders said he didn’t know how to address it because it didn’t feel appropriate to hold a news conference or issue a news release.

The online daily, Voice of San Diego, went highly critical with its first headline on the story: Sanders Caught Trying to Hide Again. It was subsequently changed to be more Socratic: Sanders Couldn’t Announce Pay Increase? The Voice opined on the outcome: “A simple three-line press release would have pre-empted all of this. Someone might have argued that the mayor didn’t deserve his salary. But they would have looked pretty weak. Now they can argue that the mayor tried to deceive us. And they’d be right.”

From a public relations standpoint, would a simple three-line press release have been sufficient, particularly given the major budget deficits facing the City of San Diego and ongoing decisions by city government to cut services and staff and make other reductions?

Did the change to full salary require a press conference?

Probably not, but being forthright and forthcoming in timely fashion are two of the fundamental qualities of authentic public relations, and the foundation from which future image grows (or suffers).

Posted by Tom Gable

Tags: , , ,
Posted in Client Service Results, Crisis PR | Comments Off

Potential Split of FDA or “Peanut Butter vs. Pills”

Thursday, March 26th, 2009

 

Future FDA Regulatory Target

Future FDA Regulatory Target

Science Progress reported this week on the potential split of the FDA into two agencies, one focused on maintaining food safety and the other on reviewing and approving new drugs. This is great news for many biotech and life sciences companies with business before the FDA – and for many patients awaiting the approval of life-saving drugs.

In the past, according to the Associated Press, the FDA has become bogged down in managing understandably more-urgent food safety issues like the recent peanut butter scare, pulling resources away from drug reviews and approvals.

From a PR point of view, it will be interesting to watch how the FDA communicates on the split with the public as well as with stakeholders in the pharmaceutical/life sciences industry and medical professionals. “FDA-approved” is an extremely powerful label. To maintain public confidence in drug safety, the government will have to carefully research and manage its communications plan surrounding any announcement of a new agency. For example, renaming the new agency the “Federal Drug Approval Administration” would allow them to maintain the “FDA” label … a good first step in what will be a very complex and important communications strategy.

With two agencies, we hope that in the near future, we’ll be able to have our cake and our “FDA-approved” diet pills too!

Posted by Erin Koch

Tags: , , , ,
Posted in Client Service Results, Horizon Management | Comments Off

Newer Entries »