EURSSCrisisCommunications

Why controversies might be good for brands—study

Wed, 22 May 2013 14:24:46 GMT

A lot of brands have taken flak over taking stands on political issues.

There was Chick-fil-A’s flap over the COO’s anti-gay marriage statements last summer. Starbucks, meanwhile, has publicly supported gay marriage. Hobby Lobby has chosen not to offer its employees contraception coverage. The list goes on.

Though PR people certainly remember those incidents, most in the public forget them soon after they happen, according to a report from marketing consulting firm WrightIMC. It found that, largely, brands that stick to their positions may face an initial dip in sales in the month or so after a controversy, but soon afterward, the increased attention the stance brought the brand is actually beneficial.

“Because a brand takes a stand, they get attention,” says Tony Wright, founder and CEO of WrightIMC. “You can’t buy that kind of press.”

As long as brands can tough out the initial pain, stay aware of who their audiences are, and don’t waffle, the outcome might be positive, he says.

Audience awareness

“In the research, one of the things that was very obvious to me was that there are a lot of people that agreed that a brand’s stand affected their purchasing decisions, but not a lot that strongly agreed,” Wright says.

What does that mean? People who aren’t really passionate about the importance of a brand stance will come back, if what you have to sell is good enough.

“Most of the ones that disagreed with you initially will drop off and forget. If your product is high-quality enough, they’ll continue to buy from you down the road,” he says.

Wright offers a caveat, though: Certain audiences care more about political stances than others. For example, consumers in the South tend to agree that stances are important, but not too strongly. In the Northeast, passions run a little higher. Age and income can make a big difference, too, he says.

The long-lasting effect of taking a political stand, Wright says, is lots of online articles about the brand. For companies that have a smart search engine optimization plan in place, that means an increased Internet presence that can supersede the controversy, if the right links make it to the top of search engines.

Making the right moves

Before stepping into the political arena, brands should make sure they have the resources to ride out the month or so of media coverage that will come from it. That includes having crisis plans in place.

“Chick-fil-A and Hobby Lobby, specifically, had more of a framework for how they were going to respond to things based on their culture and their company ethics,” Wright says.

The Susan G. Komen Foundation for the Cure, which revoked its funding for Planned Parenthood, then restored it, erred in doing a complete 180 on its position. That’s the worst thing you can do, he says.

“Companies need to have a personality,” Wright says. “It’s not enough anymore just to be a fly on the wall. Not everyone is going to like you, and that’s OK.”

With more conversation between customers and brands on social media, consumers have an expectation to hear what their favorite brands stand for.

“If you like a company and like what they stand for, you’re much more likely to have a brand affinity,” Wright says. “If a company stands for nothing, they very likely do not have passionate brand advocates.”

Companies shouldn’t force things, though; public stances have to come from the company culture.

“If your company doesn’t have a strong opinion on a specific item, I would not recommend taking a stand,” Wright says. “The point of the white paper is to not be afraid to take a stand because it’s something your company strongly believes.”

More research needed

One interesting detail about WrightIMC’s survey of 3,000 consumers is that the most common answer—about 35 percent of the total—was that respondents said they “neither agree nor disagree” with the questions.

Wright says that answer likely equates to “I don’t know” or “undecided.” WrightIMC used Google Consumer Surveys to collect the data, and the questions were a gateway to premium content. Quite a few users probably chose the middle-ground answer to get through the survey as quickly as possible, Wright theorized.

Because of that, more research is needed on the topic—research that doesn’t come with the limitations of the tool WrightIMC used.

“I would hope, down the road, that someone else would take this up, maybe in academia,” Wright says.

Matt Wilson is a staff writer for Ragan.com.

(Image via, via & via)

Edgy ads or just really bad taste?

Fri, 10 May 2013 20:28:23 GMT

Should advertising agencies start calling in PR firms before embarking on edgy mass-awareness campaigns?

After three renowned agencies recently developed advertisements resulting in public humiliation for their blue chip clients, one would think so.

In recent weeks, heads rolled over at JWT India for the apparent leak of an ad depicting the controversial Silvio Berlusconi driving a Ford Figo with three women bound and gagged in the trunk. Ford followed up with a public apology, setting sensitivities on high over potentially offensive campaigns.

Yet in the past two weeks, Hyundai Europe, Pepsico, and General Motors have all circulated public apologies for ads that fueled public disgust instead of piquing consumers’ interest.

“I believe that today, more than ever it is important to have a check and balance before pushing messages out to the public,” says Karen Swim, PR and marketing communications professional. “PR can help identify potential landmines and ensure that content does not diminish a brand’s reputation and credibility with the intended audience.”

Recently, Hyundai Europe generated a tsunami of negative buzz over its ad, Pipe Job. The ad, created by Innocean Europe, showed in harrowing detail a man’s failed suicide attempt while sitting in the eponymous car as exhaust fumes filled his closed garage.

Thanks to Hyundai’s clean emissions technology, the suicide fails.

As soon as the ad aired, the manufacturer took a public beating as consumers lit up their Twitter and Facebook feeds with messages of disbelief—including this poignant blog post from a woman who lost her father through similar circumstances.

“This ad is incredibly insensitive,” says Jodi Echakowitz, owner of Toronto-based Echo Communications. “I get the company has evolved somewhat and they want to be edgy in how they promote their vehicles, but to do so in such a hurtful way is not acceptable for any business.”

Then last week, Pepsico aired a Mountain Dew commercial now known as “the most racist ad ever” featuring a woman who was asked to pick out a criminal suspect from a lineup of black men and a goat. After mainstream and social media channels railed against the implications of the content, the soft-drink manufacturer pulled the ad and apologized.

General Motors quickly followed suit ending an ad purchase for Chevrolet featuring the song “In the Land of Fu Manchu,” in which the girls sing “ching, ching, chop suey.”

“These ads became car wrecks that could have and should have been prevented,” says Jeremy Pepper, public relations and social media consultant. “From the outside it appears these were situations where advertising wasn't aligned with public relations or social media and no one thought beyond the clip for award season.”

Do you think ad agencies are ignoring the implications of bad PR for their clients in search of over-the-top creativity?

(Image via)

Brands distance themselves from Bangladesh factory collapse

Thu, 09 May 2013 14:39:47 GMT

Will consumers start to look at clothing tags to see where they were made, and pass on ones that say “Made in Bangladesh” or “Made in India?”

Some retail giants are scrambling to distance themselves from the apparel trade in Bangladesh, after a building collapse in Bangladesh killed more than 700 garment industry workers.

Others are taking a big gamble that the public will quickly forget the tragic event and get back to business as usual.

But it might not be that easy to overcome this latest in a series of disasters at clothing factories that’s tainting the billion-dollar industry. The public is getting smarter, and people are figuring out that they can influence corporate giants through purchasing power.

Claims by some manufacturers that their products weren’t even made in the collapsed building is turning out to be far from true, as their labels were found in the rubble.

The CEO of the Canadian company Loblaw— whose discount clothing brand Joe Fresh was made in the factory—stood out, going against the tide of denials by accepting responsibility and saying there were at least 28 other brands using the factories. He urged his counterparts at other clothing companies to end their “deafening silence.”

The one-off responses and denials are more effective individually, but taken as a whole they sound hollow. Responses kept to the theme of shock, compassion, and pending investigations, as well as potential safety measures.

• KiK, a German clothing company, said it was "surprised, shocked, and appalled” and that an investigation was pending.

• “We are continuing to work with the industry association, suppliers, brands and other interested parties to come to an appropriate resolution,” Kevin Gardner, a spokesman for Wal-Mart, said to Bloomberg News.

• Benetton's chief executive, Biagio Chiarolanza, told The Wall Street Journal that Benetton is working with labor leaders to improve working conditions.

• J.C. Penney told Bloomberg it will “take an active part in the dialogue that aims to come up with a comprehensive approach—that includes multiple stakeholders—to solving the factory safety issues in Bangladesh.”

On the far end of the spectrum is American Apparel CEO Dov Charney, saying business as usual has to stop. In a somewhat self-serving blog post, he urged consumers to buy American-made clothing, such as the ones his company makes at a Los Angeles factory.

"The apparel industry's relentless and blind pursuit of the lowest possible wages cannot be sustained over time, ethically or fiscally," Charney said. "As labor and transportation costs increase worldwide, exploitation will not only be morally offensive and dated, it will not even be financially viable."

Disney also came out looking good since it made a decision this year to restrict countries where its products are made. Bangladesh was on the restricted list.

Disney rethought the business-as-usual credo: “Disney is a publicly held company accountable to its shareholders and after much thought and discussion we felt this was the most responsible way to manage the challenges associated with our supply chain,” said Bob Chapek, president of Disney’s Consumer Products division.

Gil Rudawsky heads the crisis communication and issues management practice at GroundFloor Media in Denver. He is a former reporter and editor. Read his blog or contact him at grudawsky@groundfloormedia.com.

10 steps for managing an online crisis

Wed, 08 May 2013 20:38:00 GMT

In 2006, Wal-Mart was caught red-handed cheating its way through the Internet to receive attention.

Its PR firm hired actors to pretend they were traveling the country in an RV, visiting Wal-Mart locations as they drove, and blogging about their experience.

This was before anyone really realized how the social Web works, and many organizations were taking some risk to figure it out.

But in 2013? In 2013, there are many experts out there in the world who know what happens when you give a customer, an employee, or a journalist or a blogger a megaphone.

And yet…

Companies stepping in it

Wal-Mart was once again embroiled in a scandal—this time it involved bribing Mexican authorities to receive permits and to do business in the country. And then again when its PR firm (a different one from 2006) posed as journalists at a news conference to try to persuade union workers to allow them to open a store in Chinatown in Los Angeles.

Unfortunately, it's not just Wal-Mart that deals with online crisis and scandals that put them on the front page of The New York Times and every mainstream blog.

Other examples abound: Applebee's, Susan G. Komen, Penn State, Carnival Cruise Lines, and, most recently, Rutgers University.

If it seems that this is happening more and more, that's because it is. The Web provides a way for stories like this to spread like grassfire. And it's not good.

It used to be you'd hire a PR firm and have them write a crisis plan that was then put in the drawer and revisited once a year. An online crisis plan wasn't even considered.

Now? Now a crisis can erupt in mere seconds if someone has a bad experience with your organization.

Ten steps for managing an online crisis

1. Act swiftly. Perhaps you sell capital equipment or professional services or product packaging. Surely your organization doesn't have any issues. In today's digital world, an employee could say something racist online. A customer could have it out for you and spread lies through their Facebook page. A competitor might engage in whisper campaigns against you. The only way to win at that game is to be prepared, have a communications expert on your team (or have one on speed dial), and act swiftly. Not in a week, not in a month, not in three months. That same day.

2. Address the problem. It's no fun having to come out and say you screwed up or something bad has happened or you made a mistake. It kind of sucks, actually, but it's the only way to prevent a crisis. It's amazing how two little words work as well as they do: I'm sorry. Not, "I'm sorry, but…" Just, "I'm sorry."

3. Communicate the story. When a story gets out of control is when you haven't told your side and people begin to speculate. Like with Tiger Woods when the tabloids were speculating he was going in and out of a sex addiction clinic (he wasn't): He hadn't told his side so they began to make things up based on what little information they had.

4. Communicate where it happens. If an issue or crisis is exploding on YouTube, that is where you take to the waves to tell your story. When employees were caught sneezing and spitting in food on video, the Domino's CEO recorded a video and his team posted it to YouTube. He apologized in the same spot people were looking for the employee video.

5. Hire a communications expert. I'm not talking about someone who knows how to use social media. I'm not talking about someone who works for a company that has experienced an issue or crisis. I'm talking about someone who has deep and intense experience in managing an issue or crisis. Typically these people work in PR firms and specialize in crisis communication or reputation management. It's unlikely a company will go through enough issues or crises in its lifetime to give someone the expertise you'll need if something bad happens.

If you can't afford a communications expert, become friends with someone who can help you think through issues as they arise. Put them on your advisory board. If you have a paid board, add them to that. Have that person on speed dial.

6. Think before you act. Yes, things happen in real time. Yes, we live in a 24x7 world. Yes, it's fast-paced and you have to act quickly. But that does not excuse you from thinking. When we were kids, my dad used to tell us all the time, "Don't ever put anything in writing you don't want used against you later." That's very sage advice in today's digital world.

7. Empower your team. Let your team help. Set the expectations and boundaries, give them the tools and resources they need to be successful, and let them at it!

8. Say I'm sorry. I know we covered this already, but it's worth repeating. Of course, you have to mean it and it can't be accompanied with the word "but." When you practice saying "I'm sorry" in your everyday communications, it becomes easier to say it—and mean it—when an issue develops.

9. Back down when you're wrong. If you hold a position on something and someone points out there is a double standard or you're being hypocritical, reassess your policy.

10. Have a communications expert on speed dial. Oh, I already said this, didn't I? Whenever I repeat this to friends, colleagues, or peers, someone will text me with some smarty pants remark such as, "How quickly do you respond to communication crises?" Have someone on speed dial who has lots and lots and lots of experience with issues and crisis management. You might think you'll never need it—and maybe you won't—but Murphy's Law dictates the second you don't, something will happen. It's like having insurance: If you have it, you won't need it.

Now it's your turn. What do you advise a company do when the online fallout is so great it feels like the whole world is writing about it?

Gini Dietrich is founder and CEO of Arment Dietrich, Inc., and blogs at Spin Sucks. A version of this first appeared on the FCPA Compliance and Ethics Blog.

(Image via)

Critics squeal over billboard of man having sex with a pig

Fri, 03 May 2013 14:10:17 GMT

Perhaps the creative team just misunderstood the client’s briefing.

“Oink, oink” does sound remarkably similar to “boink, boink,” after all.

Regardless, cable provider Foxtel certainly achieved the “WTF” moment it was after with a recent billboard ad posted in Sydney for Australian TV network Studio.

Produced by SBS, and to the shocking dismay of many passersby, the outdoor ad depicts an offensive and bewildering image of a man having sex with a pig.

Expains News.com.au, the imagery was lifted from the controversial UK television program “Black Mirror,” which will air in June as part of Studio’s "Festival of WTF!"

Junkee reports that Foxtel quickly apologized, vowing that it would take swift action to take down the advertisement:

“It was intended to provoke, but it is clearly in appalling taste and demonstrates a lapse of judgment by Studio, and a failure in the approvals process at Foxtel … We [have] instructed Studio to remove and replace the billboard. This will happen as soon as possible.”

According to Campaign Brief, Studio general manager Chris Keely also added:

"While art can sometimes be divisive or provocative, we certainly did not intend to upset anyone with this campaign. We apologise for any offense that was caused by the billboard. We will be immediately replacing it overnight with another piece of our campaign."

RELATED: Brewer roils controversy with gay-marriage billboard

(via Adweek)

(Image via)

10 tips for avoiding Twitter hacks

Thu, 02 May 2013 14:58:20 GMT

2013 might just be the year of the Twitter hack.

Back in February, Burger King and Jeep both endured hacks of their accounts. Last week, the Associated Press Twitter account falsely reported a bombing at the White House after hackers gained control. Tuesday, The Guardian's Twitter account was also reported hacked, though no rogue tweets went out.

In response to the hoopla, Twitter issued a warning to news organizations, which Buzzfeed then published: "We believe that these attacks will continue, and that news and media organizations will continue to be high value targets to hackers," the memo stated.

Considering the hacks of Burger King and Jeep, non-media brands are almost certainly in the crosshairs, too.

In its memo, Twitter offered tips for preventing hackers from accessing a brand or media account. The company is implementing two-factor authentication, but it's offering a few simple solutions in the meantime. Here are the key tips Twitter suggested, along with helpful advice from other sources.

1. Change your password regularly. "Password hacking has become sophisticated to the point where passwords like 'love' or 'guest123' might as well be welcome mats to hackers," attorney Brett Snider wrote on the FindLaw blog. He and Twitter both suggest using random password generators and passwords that are at least 20 characters long.

2. Don't share passwords via email. According to AP reporter Mike Baker, the hack of its account came "less than an hour after some of us received an impressively disguised phishing email."

3. Limit access to your account. Writing at socialtalent.co, Holly Fawcett suggests having fewer than five people in the company who know the Twitter password. "I'd also advise you to draw these account managers into some sort of loss-prevention document where they are made painfully, and plainly, aware of the seriousness with which they guard the vaults," she wrote.

4. Be careful with mobile devices. Smartphones are easily lost or stolen, and if you're logged in to a corporate Twitter account on your phone, a thief could easily tweet away as you. "Once it falls into the wrong hands, the last thing you're thinking of is your Twitter account," Fawcett writes. "Don't trust yourself to keep a smartphone guarded with pre-programmed passwords for your corporate Twitter accounts inside it."

5. Be careful about logging in. If you aren't using a third-party Twitter client, be sure you've accurately typed in the Twitter.com URL before putting in your username and password. "Twitter recommends that you always check that you're at Twitter.com before you log in to prevent possible phishing," Snider wrote. Likewise, don't let browsers save your password.

6. Review your authorized apps. When you agree to give a third-party app access to your Twitter feed to retweet directly from a website, share social info or make other connections-you're agreeing to give that app a degree of access to your account. If you have apps that you're not using or that you don't recognize, get rid of them, Twitter warns.

7. Know what you're clicking. "Don't click on links from Twitter accounts you aren't familiar with," Snider writers "These links can contain malicious software that will silently download themselves onto your device and make your account vulnerable to hackers."

8. Make sure your accounts are official with Twitter. Twitter keeps tabs on bigger, official brand accounts. "Please send us a complete list of all accounts affiliated with your organization, so that we can help keep them protected," Twitter's memo stated.

9. Create a plan and use it. Twitter's memo recommends building a crisis plan specifically for hacks and using it when you suspect there could be a problem. For example, if you get a suspicious phishing email, change the password.

10. Keep an eye on your account. In a post about avoiding Twitter hacks not long after the Fox News account was compromised, Ethan Klapper at the 10,000 words blog said knowing you've been hacked as soon as it happens can greatly reduce damage. "The sooner you are able to spring into action in your response to an account that has been compromised, the less damage that can be done," he wrote.

Matt Wilson is a staff writer for Ragan.com.

(Image via & via)

Brewer roils controversy with gay-marriage billboard

Wed, 01 May 2013 15:10:12 GMT

"Dad's new husband seems nice. Yeah right."

That's the text of a billboard New Zealand-based beer brewer Tui posted in the city of Wellington last week. It's part of a nearly 20-year-long advertising campaign that uses the "Yeah right" slogan. Still, this particular billboard, which acknowledges the New Zealand Parliament's April 17 vote to legalize same-sex marriage, has sparked a debate that's gone on for days on the company's Facebook page.

Quite a few observers took to the page to call the billboard "homophobic" and "disgusting."

"What's with the anti-gay signs Tui?" asked one commenter. "They're creepy and uncool. I used to like your beer but I can find other brands that don't offend me and my gay friends."

After the billboard became national news in the country Sunday, lots of the company's fans headed to Facebook to defend the ad.

"The day I'm offended by one of your boards that's the day I know I'm taking life too seriously! Keep it up!" wrote another commenter.

For its part, Tui has tried to clarify the message of the ad.

"Our intention with the current Tui Yeah Right billboard, 'Dad's new husband seems nice,' was to highlight the common situation or uncertainty experienced when someone's parent remarries," the company's marketing manager, William Papesch, told the Wellington Dominion Post.

The trouble seems to stem from viewers' interpreting the billboard as describing a situation in which a dad who was in a heterosexual marriage marries another man.

"Anything that requires that much explaining is probably a bad idea," says Robert Holland of Holland Communication Solutions.

Jonathan Bernstein of Bernstein crisis management says the billboard controversy was "a totally preventable crisis." He adds, "Even the tiniest bit of market research would have predicted a negative reaction by a significant number of people."

Holland says Tui must have known its billboard would be read in the way many observers are reading it.

"What is most perplexing is why a brand would invite this kind of controversy," he says. "They had to know the billboard would be perceived negatively by a large number of people."

Matt Wilson is a staff writer for Ragan.com.

(Image via & via)

TV anchor drops on-air F-bomb—in his first telecast

Tue, 23 Apr 2013 14:57:25 GMT

Next time you have a rough day at work, think about A.J. Clemente.

Sunday was his first night on the anchor desk at KFYR-TV, the NBC affiliate in Bismarck, N.D., and within his first 30 seconds on the air, Clemente dropped an F-bomb and an S-bomb. Today, the station fired him.

Roll tape (careful—there's some foul language):

Gawker Media's Deadspin blog was the first to report on the gaffe.

After the telecast, Clemente tweeted:

That couldn't have gone any worse!
— A.J. Clemente (@ClementeAJ) April 21, 2013

Later, he tweeted his apologies for the gaffe:

Tough day,Thanks for the support,We all make mistakes. Im truly sorry for mine. I'll try my hardest to come back better and learn from this.
— A.J. Clemente (@ClementeAJ) April 22, 2013

KFYR-TV News Director Monica Hannan issued her own apology, as well as an explanation, on the station’s Facebook page:

“To all of you who are writing in ... I want to apologize for an incident that occurred prior to our early newscast this evening, when one of our employees used profanity on the air.

“He did not realize his microphone was on, but still, that's no excuse. WE train our reporters to always assume that any microphone is live at any time. Unfortunately, that was not enough in this case. WE can't take back what was said. The person involved has been suspended until we resolve the situation. All we can do at this point is ask for your forgiveness, and I can offer my personal assurance that I will do my best to ensure that nothing like this ever happens again under my watch.”

Most of the nearly 1,000 comments to the post, as well as the many tweets and retweets today, are supportive of Clemente.

On Monday morning, however, Clemente tweeted:

Unfortunately KFYRTV has decided to let me go. Thank you to them and everyone in ND for the opportunity and everyone for the support.
— A.J. Clemente (@ClementeAJ) April 22, 2013

Rookie mistake. I'm a free agent.Cant help but laugh at myself and stay positive.Wish i didnt trip over my "Freaking Shoes" out of the gate.
— A.J. Clemente (@ClementeAJ) April 22, 2013

Among the responses to Clemente's firing is this one from Craig Newman, managing editor at the Chicago Sun-Times:

Nooo!!! RT @matthewschwerha RT @deadspin Rookie news anchor whose 1st on-air words were "Fuckin' shit" has been fired deadsp.in/sCAYxC5
— Craig Newman (@craignewman) April 22, 2013

Maybe the Sun-Times' sports desk is hiring.

How social media managers should react when tragedy strikes

Wed, 17 Apr 2013 14:12:31 GMT

Social media has become such a part of so many of our lives that we often forget what made it so special in the first place.

It wasn’t the power to market to the masses, nor was it the opportunity for people to position themselves as experts in a particular field. Social media was and is, at its core, a vehicle for human connection.

That’s exactly what social media managers need to remember when dealing with horrible tragedies such as the Boston Marathon bombings. We often talk about having a communications plan in place for a crisis, and although that’s always important, the most important thing to remember is to act like a human being.

Beyond that, here are some brief guidelines:

Have a company plan in place. Meet with people in marketing, PR, communications, and social media, and anyone else who manages any kind of external, automated, and organic messaging. Make sure that everyone agrees that during a crisis, any automated messages unrelated to the crisis will be disabled. Also discuss whether you’ll be covering breaking news (depending on your industry) or whether you plan to post messages of sympathy but otherwise stay silent.

Put a monitoring system in place. To ensure that you’re always in the know, either have a news outlet that you check throughout the day or use an alert system. For example, I check msn.com for quick news before I post to social media. You might:

• Follow news outlets that provide updates on breaking news, such as CNN Breaking News (@cnnbrk) on Twitter, or follow news outlets on Facebook.

• Use a desktop tool, such as TweetDeck, to monitor news on Twitter. TweetDeck enables you to have tweets from handles, hashtags, or topics of interest that you've chosen to follow appear on your screen as they're tweeted.

• Set up Google Alerts for breaking news.

Inform employees and your community. As soon as situation arises, send an email flagged “urgent” or post information to your company’s intranet. Link to resources and let employees know what the plan is. For example, are you going to suspend tweets? Will your editorial department create a post to provide further information that employees can post/share?

Halt marketing/promotions. Again, be human. Disable any social media messages that are unrelated to the situation at hand. Turn off automated tweets, and disable email marketing and promos if you can.

Respond to criticism. If you were behind on the news and sent a tweet that some found offensive or insensitive given the situation, simply acknowledge that to your online community. Let them know that you’re suspending any unrelated messaging.

Be a resource. As a community manager, your No. 1 goal is to always be a resource, especially during a difficult time. If you do choose to tweet or post to social media, it should be only to offer condolences and share helpful resources.

Show compassion. If your views or opinions on the tragedy or crisis are controversial, consider waiting until after the tragedy—in consideration of people’s feelings—to further discuss the topic or the issue.

Samantha Hosenkamp is PR Daily’s social media director.

(Image via)

PR firms in Boston and nationwide react to marathon bombing

Tue, 16 Apr 2013 15:04:50 GMT

A number of employees of the PR firm InkHouse Media + Marketing were at the Boston Marathon on Monday, where two bomb blasts exploded near the finish line. One staffer was running in the race.

Although the InkHouse office was closed because of its proximity to the marathon route, the firm's owner Beth Monaghan reached out to her staff to ensure everyone was safe.

“For now, I am telling everyone to get home and be with their families,” she told PR Daily via email in the hours after the blast. “That is all that matters until we know that everyone is safe.”

At the time, Monaghan hadn’t accounted for all of her employees, some of whom were at the finish line. Thankfully, by the end of the day, she had received word that her entire staff was safe.

The two explosions that erupted near the race’s finish line killed three people and injured more than 100 people, according to published reports. The bombs detonated roughly four hours after the men’s race had begun.

“Today is a sad day for the City of Boston, for the running community, and for all those who were here to enjoy the 117th running of the Boston Marathon,” the Boston Athletic Association, which organized the marathon, said in a statement posted to its Facebook page. “What was intended to be a day of joy and celebration quickly became a day in which running a marathon was of little importance.”

The association extended its deepest sympathies to those affected by the tragedy.

“It’s so upsetting,” a race contestant from Chicago told PR Daily. She finished the marathon 50 minutes before the blasts, and she was able to find her parents, who had also flown to Boston for the event.

A number of marathoners and their families were stranded in Boston, but residents opened their homes to those stranded visitors.

PR entrepreneur Peter Shankman, a New York resident who founded the Web service Help A Reporter Out, tweeted the names of two PR agency owners in Boston who could help the stranded. Amanda Griffith, the owner of Bumble PR in Norton, Mass., near Boston, was among them.

Brands advised to halt social media updates

When a major crisis strikes, whether it's a hurricane or a school shooting, brands often display a tin ear by tweeting promotional or off-topic messages as the rest of the Twitter world fixates on the matter at hand.

With that mind mind, a number of people on Twitter reminded social media managers to halt their automated tweets. For instance, Scott Monty, the social media chief at Ford, tweeted:

If you manage social media for a brand, this would be a good time to suspend any additional posts for the day.
— Scott Monty (@ScottMonty) April 15, 2013

A number of PR firms and consultants instructed their clients to stop sending automated tweets.

“We recommended that all clients stop scheduled tweets to show respect for the tragedy that was unfolding,” Monaghan at InkHouse said.

Despite the warnings, Adweek found a number of tweets that brands sent on Monday that were insensitive, as well as several on topic.

Press conferences from Boston police department, White House

Hours after the attack, Boston Police Commissioner Ed Davis held a press conference in which he warned people to stay home and avoid congregating in large crowds.

“People should be calm, but they should understand that this is an ongoing event,” he said.

At 6:10 p.m. E.T., President Obama delivered a televised address, telling residents of Boston that the “American people will be with them every step of the way.”

“We still do not know who did this or why; people should not jump to conclusions,” he said. “We'll find out who did this and why they did it.”

Obama promised that those responsible will “feel the full weight of justice.”

Attack aftermath plays out in real time on social media

As television networks started their reporting on the bomb explosions, details from the scene were pouring in on Twitter, as people tweeted pictures and updates from the race site. A surge of tweets offered prayers and well wishes for the race contestants and spectators as well as residents of Boston. The hashtag #PrayforBoston became the No. 1 trending topic on Monday.

Our thoughts and prayers are with everyone at the #BostonMarathon right now. #PrayForBoston
— Men's Health Mag (@MensHealthMag) April 15, 2013

As the afternoon wore on, the topics of discussion on Twitter swung wildly from reports of additional bombings—a third incident at the JFK Library was not related as was originally reported—to media gadflies wagging their fingers at news outlets that filed incomplete or incorrect reports about the tragedy.

At one point, “Muslims” became a trending topic, as vitriolic tweets blaming the incident on Islamic extremists burbled to the surface, followed by even more tweets denouncing the speculation.

Officials also used social media to spread pertinent information regarding people’s safety. Google, for instance, launched a people finder site for those in search of someone at the marathon and for the people at the event to check in.

The Boston Police Department’s official Twitter account became a reliable source for information during the incident. Police have also used the account to appeal to the public for video from the finish line.

Anyone with information about the bombings to call is asked to call 1-800-494-TIPS.

RELATED: 8 communications guidelines for a crisis

Ragan.com staff reporter Matt Wilson contributed to this report.

Canada’s largest bank stumbles through PR disaster

Thu, 11 Apr 2013 15:37:51 GMT

Canada’s largest bank is struggling through a PR debacle that has Canadians up in arms and customers threatening to close their accounts.

The Royal Bank of Canada (RBC) was thrust into the media spotlight over the weekend when allegations of replacing homegrown staff with outsourced temporary foreign IT workers hit the news via a whistle-blowing website.

An investigation revealed the bank is replacing 45 employees with temporary foreign workers at the end of the month. iGATE Corp., a multinational outsourcing firm from India, employs the foreign workers.

Although outsourcing is nothing new, especially in the IT industry, the narrative by one RBC employee who complained about having to train and ultimately be replaced by a foreign worker played long and loud. And it has resonated loudly with the 1.3 million unemployed Canadians.

What happened next was nothing short of a mini-tsunami of public disgust; social media networks lit up with complaints of disgruntled customers, mainstream media jumped on the bandwagon, an anti-RBC Facebook page popped up, and even federal government opposition parties got in on the act.

In an attempt to stem the tide of criticism, RBC initially put its HR director in the media spotlight. Her corporate-speak explanation and histrionic hand gestures did little to articulate the company’s response and quell the uproar. In fact, they only exacerbated it.

A subsequent decision saw the bank’s president, Gord Nixon, carefully placed on selected news programs to try his hand at a company response. Though he appeared on one program known for its deep understanding of business, Nixon had to be goaded into another interview at the same media outlet by an irritated tweet.

The issue of outsourcing is now becoming the issue du jour of every Canadian company known to play on the global stage. The story is not going away soon, so all RBC can hope for is that the spotlight moves away from it and onto some other organization.

(Image via)

Apple is really good at apologizing—in China

Fri, 05 Apr 2013 15:15:29 GMT

Did Apple CEO Tim Cook make the right PR move by apologizing for the iPhone-maker's apparent arrogance toward its customers in China? Or did the company cave to China's state-run media? Or was it simply a smart business decision?

Does Apple’s apology create a dangerous precedent for American companies looking to make inroads in foreign markets?

From a strictly crisis response perspective, Cook's apology covered all the bases of a corporate mea culpa: It was direct, honest, and apologetic and outlined steps to fix the problems associated with its repair policies, warranty information, training of its service providers and overall customer service.

“…We still have a lot to learn on operating and communicating in China. We hereby assure you that the commitment and enthusiasm for China from Apple is not different than any other country. Our ideal is to give the best user experience and customer satisfaction, even more it is our promise. This has been deeply rooted in Apple’s company culture. We will make unremitting efforts to achieve this goal.”

In terms of communicating with a foreign audience, Apple avoided most of the obvious pitfalls. The apology was issued in Chinese, avoiding any awkward language issues. It avoided generalities that seem to only work with American audiences and it acknowledged the issue up front.

At the end of February, Amazon failed in its apology to German audiences when news reports came out that Amazon was accused of treating temporary workers inadequately. They were assailed for not factually addressing the issue and not having any compassion in its apology.

For Apple, it’s abundantly clear their apology probably had more to do with business in the Asian market than reputation management. TechCrunch reports that Greater China accounted for 13 percent of Apple’s sales last year, and it’s a growing market. That’s huge for a company whose stock has sat idle as its competitors have seen large gains of late.

Analysts and insiders say the apology by the Cupertino company is a sign that it’s worried about its grip on the Chinese marketplace.

While the initial response to the apology was critical by media outlets, claiming that the company was cow-towing to China’s state-run media, the tide has seemingly turned in Apple’s favor—at least by Chinese media.

The Global Times, published by the China’s People’s Daily newspaper, wrote, “The company’s apology letter has eased the situation, softening the tense relationship between Apple and the Chinese market.”

As far as setting a precedent for corporations apologizing to foreign customers, Apple may have inadvertently opened a door better left shut. The People’s Daily sent a shot across the bow to other companies in its response to Apple’s apology, saying: “Its reaction is worth respect compared with other American companies."

Already, there are reports Chinese state media is targeting Volkswagen, Mercedes-Benz, and BMW, running a similar investigation into their consumer care practices on state-run television.

Gil Rudawsky heads the crisis communication and issues management practice at GroundFloor Media in Denver. He is a former reporter and editor. Read his blog or contact him at grudawsky@groundfloormedia.com.

Should you respond or clam up? Here's a primer for businesses

Tue, 02 Apr 2013 17:19:50 GMT

Last month, Lululemon became a hot topic when it announced the recall of its popular black yoga pants. After a week of intense coverage, the Vancouver-based retailer clammed up.

A representative from ICR, which is handling media and investor relations for Lululemon during the yoga pants recall, was forthcoming with information and statements until last week, when the rep politely declined our request for comment

“We will not be providing comments at this time,” the spokesperson said.

One of the most important parts of a PR professional’s job is to counsel clients whether to respond to allegations or consumer complaints in mainstream or social media channels.

While the phrase “no comment” is generally verboten, or the more genial “we choose not to respond at this time,” the power and reach of media outlets plays a large part in the decision to respond, as is the author’s influence.

It’s becoming increasingly difficult for companies in the middle of a media maelstrom to tread the fine line between transparency and “we’re done talking”—and it’s a challenge PR pros are faced with on a daily basis.

But it appears the rules are different when it comes to mainstream vs. social media channels.

Social media

The ‘comments’ section—beware the trolls

“Trolls” is Internet slang for someone who posts remarks in an online community for the express purpose of provoking an emotional response. Often, they are anonymous authors with untraceable links; most PR pros advise their clients not to respond to trolls because their influence and reach is often low and/or unknown.

“The ‘comments’ section has become a breeding ground where anybody’s opinion can be heard,” said Jodi Echakowitz, president of Echo Communications in Toronto. “There's nothing worse than a heated discussion that a company or brand will regret after the fact,”

Echakowitz she will advise her clients not to respond to trolls. “It's typically not worth the time nor effort, and will not change the end result or influence how the troll is thinking.”

Mainstream media

Transparency is key

Mainstream media has its own inherent challenges, which are amplified by articles that are written by highly visible and potentially powerful reporters. The decision to respond takes on a different dimension; it’s also the place where traditional and digital formats collide.

“While there are exceptions to every rule, and assuming it is the client's issue to respond to in the first place, I would be hard pressed to think of a situation in which I would advise them not to engage with the media in some way,” said Warren Weeks, media trainer and owner of Eleven PR in Toronto. “Today, more than ever before, transparency is the only option. Every customer and employee with a smartphone is a media company. The truth will come out. And I'd rather get the company's message out there first.”

The person responding to a media outlet’s inquiries depends on the issue, according to Weeks. He suggested companies choose the a spokesperson based on his or her skill set, strengths, and a variety of other factors.

Set the record straight

Even when you know you are participating in a negative article, providing your organization’s point-of-view can create balance.

“If we are called by the press for a quote, we always provide one, essentially because transparency is so paramount to instill trust in our company,” said John Trader, a PR and marketing manager with M2SYS Technology, a biometric identity management firm based in Atlanta.

“I would never advise our C-level to not make a statement to the press,” Trader explained.

“In a field where we are trying to establish more credibility and transparency, it’s like shooting yourself in the foot. We want people to educate themselves on truths, not half-truths and rumors, and make up their minds for themselves.”

Responding in anger

PR professionals are often charged with diffusing a client’s anger when the media portrays the company in an unfair or harsh manner.

“If a client is angry or upset by an article, I will advise them to hold off responding until they have a clearer head,” said Echakowitz. “In such situations, I've also suggested they respond directly to a reporter with an offer to follow up by phone. Some responses—especially where comments may come across as either defensive or as an attack on a reporter—are better shared through a one on one conversation with a reporter.”

Are there any other situations where you would provide advice to clam up or respond?

RELATED: 5 alternatives to ‘no comment’

Retail fail? Store charges browsers $5 to prevent ‘showrooming’

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 14:16:53 GMT

Showrooming has become a significant problem for retailers of all sizes.

The word “showrooming” refers to the consumer practice of scoping out a physical item in a store, then ordering it at a lower price online. Over time, it has eaten into sales. Reversing the trend is top-of-mind for many businesses.

Companies are taking different approaches to coping with showrooming. For instance, Best Buy will match any price a customer finds online. This move “ends showrooming for Best Buy customers,” company spokesman Matt Furman said in a Business Insider article. Target, which found showrooming a big deal in its toy section during the holiday season, added QR codes to top-selling toys enabling faster and easier ordering and shipping to home addresses, upping the convenience factor.

But Celiac Supplies has taken a different approach. The Brisbane, Australia purveyor of gluten-free groceries will charge you $5 for looking without buying. What is essentially an admission fee to the store will be deducted from the bill when you buy something.

According to a sign in the store window, the policy has been enacted because “there has been a high volume of people who use this store as a reference and then purchase goods elsewhere.” The sign also claims the practice is “in line with many other clothing, shoe and electronic stores who are also facing the same issue.”

The up-front fee is common in wine tasting rooms, where you pay for the tasting but the fee is deducted from any bottles you purchase. But at least you get to taste wine, a tangible product. Five bucks for browsing? You’d think they’d at least give you five dollars’ worth of gluten-free cookies.

Policy has the opposite effect

Celiac Supplies’ policy could well drive customers to do their shopping online only, skipping the visit to the physical store altogether. In fact, this behavior may already be taking shape, according to Storefront Backtalk.

When I shared the image of Celiac Supplies’ sign on Facebook, my friend Ike Pigott asked, “Does that mean that when we come in to buy something, and they don’t have it in stock, that we not only get our $5 back but an additional $5 to cover our wasted travel costs?” Questions like that are also likely to keep customers from walking through the door in the first place..

On the store’s Facebook page, some customers equate the fee to paying for advice, which they support, even though I never have to pay to get my pharmacist’s advice.

While a CNet report on Celiac Supplies’ move notes that “some Reddit users mentioned knowing of clothing stores with showrooming fees,” charging money to walk through the door is not the solution. In fact, it will reduce foot traffic and dampen potential sales. Who, passing by, would want to pop in and see what the store has to offer if it means forking over $5 for the privilege?

Ways to prevent showrooming

Beyond Target’s and Best Buy’s solutions, there are other ways stores can beat back showrooming. One is to ensure customers know the advantages of buying from the brick-and-mortar store, such as easy returns and exchanges, financing, and getting the product right now. If you offer Wi-Fi to your customers, you can even make sure these points appear before a customer can visit a competitor’s site.

Other solutions include offering exclusive products customer can’t find anywhere else, emphasizing same-day in-store pickups to avoid shipping fees routinely assessed by online stores, and/or offering personalized prices. For example, Target customers can get daily-deal alerts and exclusive discount coupons via their smartphones. Equip staff with tablets they can use to respond in detail to any customer query and you add another reason to buy in-store.

“The more information customers can get out of store associates—including being steered to an alternative version of the product they want that may be less expensive than what they have seen online, but suits their purpose better—the more indebted they will feel to the retailer,” according to Shopkeep CEO Jason Richelson, quoted in a Vertical Systems Retailer article. “However, that won’t happen without technology.”

Retailers can also offer exceptional customer service buyers can’t find online, which requires better training of salespeople.

There are also technology solutions. Nearbuy Systems offers “indoor micro-location systems for in-store mobile shopping,” according to a Publishers Weekly piece about showrooming. Imagine a customer standing in the science fiction or fantasy aisle getting a notification on his phone—along with a discount offer—noting that a famous sci-fi author will be making a store appearance. The ticket to the event “could also be sold on the spot through a mobile purchase or added to a virtual cart that could be settled via a mobile payment or at the physical cash register.”

As Alex Romanov writes in a Retail Touchpoints piece, “Combined, digital signs and smartphones establish a two-way communication that allows marketers to send relevant and timely rewards and product information directly to the shopper while they’re on the floor and primed to buy.”

Regardless of the viable solution a retailer picks, punishing customers for wanting to come into your store is the worst possible remedy.

Shel Holtz is principal of Holtz Communication + Technology. A version of this story first appeared on his blog a shel of my former self.

(Image via)

Ford 'deeply regrets' mockup ads showing gagged women in trunk

Fri, 29 Mar 2013 17:18:32 GMT

Ford is saying it deeply regrets a series of disturbing print ads from advertising agency JWT India for the automaker's Figo model. The ads, which show various female celebrities bound and gagged in the trunk of a Ford car, were mockups and never meant to go public.

“We deeply regret this incident and agree with our agency partners that it should have never happened,” the company said in a statement. “The posters are contrary to the standards of professionalism and decency within Ford and our agency partners. Together with our partners, we are reviewing approval and oversight processes to help ensure nothing like this ever happens again.”

JWT India reportedly shared the mockups—which Ford had not approved—with website Ads of the World to “show off its creative chops,” reports Business Insider, which spotted the ads and wrote about them on Friday. The mockups were later removed from Ads of the World, but not before going viral. Major media outlets, from Forbes to Fox News, are covering the story this morning.

WPP, which is the parent company of JWT India, issued this statement:

“We deeply regret the publishing of posters that were distasteful and contrary to the standards of professionalism and decency within WPP Group. These were never intended for paid publication and should never have been created, let alone uploaded to the Internet. This was the result of individuals acting without proper oversight and appropriate actions have been taken within the agency where they work to deal with the situation.”

One ad depicts former Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi driving a FordFigo with three women bound and gagged in the trunk. The tagline says, “Leave your worries behind with Figo's extra-large boot.” Another ad features Paris Hilton at the wheel, with the three Kardashian sisters tied up in the trunk. Ford’s logo is emblazoned across both ads.

The automaker has not issued an apology on its corporate website, nor acknowledged the matter on its Twitter or Facebook accounts. By Monday morning, people were slamming the company on its Facebook page.

“What were you thinking?” the commenter said. “This is insensitive to women worldwide. There is absolutely no justification for such an ad and cannot believe the stupidity of all, including the women, involved in this. A total disgrace.”

(Image via)