Just about everyone is familiar with these events all were crises that were widely reported by the media. And all involved the services of public relations people.
A New And Exciting Specialty
"Crisis communications" has become an extremely important and exciting specialty within the public relations field. A career in this area will give you the chance to participate in problems of urgency and considerable consequence. You'll be in the midst of tomorrow's headlines and trying your darnedest to influence them!
If you have a background in law, political science, sociology, psychology or other social sciences, becoming a crisis communicator probably is more appealing than a career as a product publicist, special events coordinator, or other seemingly mundane jobs.
The fact is that while practitioners involved in product recalls, industrial accidents and other tragedies must have the same ability to write speeches, testimonies, news releases and other materials as any public relations professional, these journalistic skills must be utilized quickly and intelligently in times of crisis. There's never time for dozens of rewrites.
The public relations people who are involved in crises must be prepared to counsel top executives with wisdom, patience and creativity, and then execute the plan that evolves with the efficiency that comes from finely-honed experience.
It's not easy, but it can be extraordinarily rewarding.
Can You Learn How To Handle The Bad News?
There's an old journalism adage: "Dog bites man" is not news; "Man bites dog" is. The media generally thrive on the irregular, atypical and unusual, so there's always more bad news than good news. And we all know that bad news tends to have a greater impact than good news.
It used to be that companies released good news on Monday morning and withheld bad news until Friday afternoon. This was based on the fact that Saturday newspapers in many cities are thinner and have somewhat smaller circulations and news released Friday afternoon may miss the deadlines of the newsweeklies or even be considered old news by the time The Wall Street Journal published its Monday morning edition. The truth is that it's awfully hard to manage bad news, though, as we'll see, there are some situations in which the timing and method of its release can work to a company's advantage.
In this era of product recalls and governmental agency vigilance, there is more bad news than ever before. I don't have the panaceas, but in this article, I'll try to review how others have coped, survived and succeeded, and I'll share what I've learned from my own experience.
For the last few years, Carole Gorney, an assistant professor and director of the public relations program at Lehigh University, has conducted a two day workshop, titled "Minimizing Negative Publicity," in which she states:
"All sizable organizations corporations, colleges and universities, health care institutions, public service and government agencies occasionally face problems and events that can cause negative publicity.
"Unless the organization reacts promptly and appropriately, the publicity itself may become the major problem. It can make an organization's operations more difficult, erode community support, because funding sources to dry up, and, if it is serious and prolonged, even threaten the existence of the organization. A related problem is the need to manage the deliberate release of bad news so that it is clearly understood and its negative impact is controlled and minimized."
If you want to continue your study of this subject beyond this brief article, you might want to take Professor Gorney's course (or one like it at your own school).
Management And A Bad News Situation
In general, the handling of a bad news situation first involves management's decisions regarding an overall strategy. For example, after proper investigation and deliberation, management may decide to deny and reject the charges and allegations.
Second, management can decide to acknowledge the problem, but attempt to communicate the difficulty of solving it and/or indicate the remedies that are already being considered or investigated.
Third, management can acknowledge the problem and propose or administer a remedy or solution.
The bigger the problem, the more people are likely to be involved. In many cases, the crisis situation involves a team of lawyers, engineers, advertising people and other experts. Management must make major decisions, ranging from recalling the product, reformulating or repackaging it, replacing it, or, as happened with tampons as a result of toxic shock syndrome and other problems, withdrawing it entirely.
The Involvement Of The Public Relations Practitioner
In all of these situations, public relations people can be involved in the decision and its implementation. The resulting campaign can turn things around, depending on the skill and in some cases, luck of the public relations people. Unfortunately, it may simply produce more bad news by keeping the charges in the public eye.
Sometimes you can do everything right and still not win. An example is the long term problem Procter & Gamble has had with its logo, which some people continue to insist is associated with Satanism. For a while, P&G's aggressive public denials and its actions, which included suing some of the perpetrators of the malicious rumors, seemed to be successful. However, the rumors just wouldn't die P&G finally had to modify its logo.
The Right Way And The Wrong Way
Here's another unusual situation: A few years ago, the Mobil Corporation decided to cancel its advertising in The Wall Street Journal, literally boycotting the newspaper by denying its reporters interviews with any Mobil officials. (It's important to note that this seemingly radical action took place after some five years of what Mobil claimed were problems of working with the Journal.) Nevertheless, its action was poorly perceived and roundly criticized.
Now contrast the generally poor marks given to Mobil in its handling of the Journal with the extraordinary praise heaped upon Johnson & Johnson in connection with its two Tylenol crises the first in 1982, the repetition of the same problem in 1986. Johnson & Johnson's response to one of the most devastating incidents in American corporate history was simply a reaffirmation of its corporate credo, which emphasizes its responsibilities to its various publics. Incidentally, the good side of the Tylenol tragedy is the subsequent comeback of the product in terms of share of market.
Perhaps the greatest industrial tragedy of recent years was the Union Carbide explosion in Bhopal, India. The verdict is still out with regard to how Union Carbide handled the situation and the final outcome. However, Union Carbide received considerably less criticism with regard to its public relations than did Exxon, which was blasted for its poor communications immediately after its 1989 oil spill in Alaska. The Exxon public relations department is renowned for its many skills and successes, particularly related to its corporate support of education and cultural projects. It appears that the Exxon top management initially thwarted its public relations department.
Accidents Happen, PR Professionals Explain
In general, crisis response programs feature three phases: Identify the problem, develop the solution, and communicate the action to all of the public.
There have been situations in which a company went bankrupt, such as Johns Manville, and then made a comeback, in part due to efficient communications.
Other situations have been seemingly handled well by the public relations people, but the patient died. One example was the crash of Air Florida in Washington, DC and the subsequent demise of the airline, despite what appeared to be excellent execution by a very small public relations department.
Robin Cohn, who was the public relations director at Air Florida, noted in pr reporter that there are three phases in an accident of this kind:
Phase I begins with the initial incident and continues for a brief period during which information is at a minimum and media clamoring at a maximum.
Phase II begins when you have the information to disseminate, at which point top management or other spokespersons should be offered to the media. And Phase III is the aftermath, when the facts are known and speculation and analysis about the cause of the problem fills the pages.
Handling Product Recalls
During the last year or two, there have been many product recalls and monumental instances of bad news involving quite a few companies.
At General Foods, problems with products are relatively rare, in spite of the enormous size of the company. But in 1985, they recalled three brands of cheeses. You probably weren't even aware of it the recall was handled quickly, thoroughly, and with a minimum of bad news.
Another major company that had more than its share of bad news is Bank of America. In a speech at the Public Relations Round Table, Ronald Rhody, Senior Vice President Corporate Communications, stated: "It seems to me there are only two schools of press relations and public information, crisis or no crisis. One is the 'take charge school. The other is the 'sit on it' school.
'The former is characterized by openness, candor, and accessibility. Its postulate is: Take the initiative. Be in control of the information flow. Tell it like it is and to the widest audience possible, as rapidly as possible.
"The latter school of thought operates on the basic assumption that it's none of their business and doesn't feel compelled to reveal anything, unless forced by circumstances or law.
"Clearly, I favor the former, and I think the latter is not only deadly but dumb in today's environment. In the 'take charge' mode, you have the best chance of getting the story told right, because you tell it right and you tell it first a tactical advantage of note, because by telling it first you define the problem, you set the context, and in many cases you preempt criticism.
"The 'sit on it' school is merely arrogant and almost always succeeds only in delaying the day of reckoning. It does so because it ignores a basic truth of corporate America: There aren't any secrets."
Donald Stephenson of Dow Chemical Canada stated: "Perception of an impending disaster can create more public alarm than an actual catastrophe". So never underestimate the potential for damage in any situation...real or perceived. The media often have a vested interest in catastrophes because they make news. Reporters don't necessarily wish for one, but they are looking for signs of one in many situations. People's perception of a situation is more potent than facts. Management of public perceptions is what public relations is all about. Perception is made up of emotion plus facts. Together they lead to motion what moves people."
Some Rules For The Successful Crisis Communicator
Everyone agrees that the role of the intelligent public relations practitioner is to know the facts and get them out quickly. Unfortunately, sometimes management hides the facts from its own people and the public relations person is one of the last to know. Well, life is filled with frustrations and compromise, but there are some things you can do as a (potential) crisis communicator to be better prepared and, once confronted with a crisis, handle it efficiently, professionally and ethically:
- Meet with the potential spokespeople and available experts and provide them with media training and other communications coaching.
- Go over all of your fact kits and other materials. They should be up to date and approved by management, so that they can be released by you as needed. While you rarely are in a position to be the judge and jury, be absolutely certain of the facts, even if it means slowing things up a bit. Try to stick to what you know is the truth, and, if possible, the whole story.
- Don't trust secondary sources, don't assume, and don't rush or be pressured by the media.
- Learn how to say, "No comment, we are investigating and will get back to you," in as polite and cordial and truthful a manner as possible.
- Try to avoid comparisons, as your problem then may be linked with worse problems.
- A situation may call for an aggressive stance, possibly a rebuttal or counterattack, but keep in mind that such action may simply keep the charges in the headlines and cause the situation to last longer. Of course, in some cases you may be able to deflect potentially embarrassing questions and, in the process, look and sound good, but don't forget that the media will persist if the story is important enough.
In recent years, both the print and broadcast media have become more aggressive and enterprising, particularly with regard to investigative journalism. They will stick with a story and retaliate if they believe they have been deceived or subjected to unnecessary or excessive secrecy. Lies will invariably generate skepticism and hostility from the media.
- Keep a log of all incoming phone calls, including those you handle and those you don't. Before you reply, think carefully about the questions the media are likely to ask. Write down your answers and rehearse them.
- If you are involved in a situation in which you have to issue corrections, retractions and apologies, think carefully about whether it's really necessary to do so or whether such actions will simply be repeating the bad news. To put it another way, are you prolonging or quantifying the blunder?
- On the other hand, how you present a "no comment" can itself be incriminating we've all seen individuals frantically trying to cover their faces as they are escorted into a police station, which to most of us insinuates guilt. (Pleading the Fifth Amendment, though every citizen's right, often results in the same conclusion.) So consider a vigorous denial, but one that stops short of an all out counterattack.
