Public relations is all about reputation management–your credibility is the coin of the business realm. We’re pretty hard on companies and brands that take a cavalier attitude about their credibility–because once you lose that, it’s all over. Or is it?
Admittedly, we have strongly implied that you can’t buy your way out of a PR disaster, but the oily BP sure makes us think twice:
Before BP could stem the oil gusher at the bottom of the Gulf of Mexico, it unleashed $100 million in ad spending, largely on network TV, to stem the damage to its image. But it also started spending heavily where it had never spent much before: buying ads in Google’s search results.
How much did BP spend on search? In two months, BP went from spending very little on search advertising — about $57,000 a month — to becoming one of Google’s top advertisers, dropping nearly $3.6 million in the month of June alone, according to an internal Google document obtained by Advertising Age. That pushed BP into the upper echelon of search advertisers, in a league with Expedia, which spent at least $5.9 million in June, Amazon, which spent at least $5.8 million, and eBay, which spent at least $4.2 million.
This is a significant outlay, even for BP, which spent $94 million on advertising in 2009, and $78.7 million in the first six months of 2010 alone excluding search, according to Kantar Media. Search advertisers only pay when their ads convert or get a click, and in June the crisis was still at full-boil, driving clicks on BP&’s ads. But if BP kept spending at this rate, search would’ve become one of its bigger advertising line items by the end of the year, up there with network, cable or spot TV.
[...]
BP’s increase underscores how important Google has become for reputation management, and in the battle for public opinion. In the wake of the spill, Google was a natural first stop for people seeking information, and BP bought up dozens of keywords associated with the disaster such as “oil spill,” “leak,” “top kill” and “live feed” as it vied for clicks with news stories, images of oiled wildlife and plaintiff attorneys trolling for clients.
BP’s ad strategy now follows the typical trajectory of crisis PR, he says. It didn’t start out that way. BP was slow to connect with consumers and gulf residents right after the spill. Tony Hayward’s numerous gaffes didn’t help the company’s image, which came across as inept and out of touch. There’s little question that his mismanagement of the company’s public image led to his ouster as CEO.
So how’s the advertising paying off in PR improvement? A recent AP poll says that “some 66 percent of those surveyed continue to disapprove of BP’s performance, down from a whopping 83 percent in June.” Though still dismal, it does look like the ad spending is helping. However, it’s also certainly due to the fact that time has passed and the oil spill isn’t leading the newscasts anymore. The public has turned to the latest Sarah Palin Facebook pronouncement, Paris Hilton’s cocaine possession arrest and even something important, like the president’s new rug.
Sure, we’ve seen the TV ads BP is using to rebuild its tattered, oil-stained image–that was as predictable as a blob of oil on the beach at Destin. But who would’ve thought they would have spent all that coin on Google search ads?
Think people don’t read something in to everything about the way you look and present yourself? Think again:
Those seeking clues as to what’s going on inside Procter & Gamble during these challenging economic times might do well to take a look at the firm’s just-released 2010 annual report to shareholders.
Right up front is a photo of Bob McDonald presiding over his first annual report as chairman and CEO of the Cincinnati-based consumer goods giant. It’s shot in profile, with McDonald wearing a conservative, dark, pin-striped suit, and looking off-camera.
That’s a big shift from the photos in recent years of A.G. Lafley, who had been chairman and CEO for eight years before his retirement in February. Lafley favored open-collared shirts and hadn’t appeared in a suit and tie since 2003.
The change in style is obvious. And glossy annual reports tend to be tightly controlled to convey precisely the messages and images that corporations want their shareholders, employees, and customers to receive. Few companies, if any, are more protective of their reputations than P&G.
P&G spokesman Paul Fox said people shouldn’t read anything into McDonald’s change of dress for the annual report photo.
“Tie or not, our purpose to touch and improve the lives of more consumers more completely in more parts of the world remains unchanged,” Fox said in an email.
Still, corporate annual reports are key tools for making strategic impressions, said LisaMarie Luccioni, a professor of communications at the University of Cincinnati and certified image professional. Whatever message McDonald’s photo conveys, it’s safe to assume it was meant to convey something, she said.
“I do think it is deliberate. When you’re talking about an annual report, you’re talking about the prime piece of nonverbal literature that represents not only the company but its vision, its leadership,” Luccioni said. “I am convinced that every picture, every word was very much scrutinized in an impression-management way.”
Of course, that excerpt is a rather extreme example–P&G is a huge company with loads of cash riding on perception–but it should give you pause when you consider your presentation to clients, partners, employees–heck everybody.
This isn’t about changing who you are. Certainly, you gotta be you (See: Writing, Redhead or Kramer, Shelly or Godin, Seth ). This is about putting your best foot forward, and thinking of how you will be perceived and what effect that perception will have on your bottom line.
Be reasonable. If you make your living as a banker, you better look like a banker. Doesn’t mean you can’t have style or be a tad irreverent at times–just remember nobody (especially these days) wants anyone being irreverent about their money. You’re a cook with long hair? Wear a hairnet–please. Sell real estate? Show clients around in a clean car.
I don’t shave everyday. It’s a thing with me–I hate shaving and my wife says a little stubble is attractive (honest!). However, I can assure you if I’m pitching to a conservative prospective client, I shave and will likely wear a suit. Maybe someday when I’m making huge coin that will be different; but for now, I shave. (It almost goes without saying; but if I am acting as a spokesperson for a client, of course I shave and look my best.)
Just as you shouldn’t show up to casual day at the office in sweat pants and a tube top (guys and gals), don’t run afoul of your business norms if it’s going to scare away the customers. Be yourself–but be smart about it. The default position is to present your best, most polished self.
We do a lot of “talking” about public relations on this blog–but we also want to listen.
We’re looking for you small business owners, non-profit execs, corporate PR pros, politicians, consultants, authors and musicians (and really anyone else) to weigh in with your biggest public relations challenge. Do you feel like you’re always climbing a wall, pushing a boulder–yet getting nowhere?
In your public relations efforts, is there something holding you back or getting in your way?
Is it:
Hiring the right PR pro?
Finding budget for PR?
Finding your message?
Moving from tactical to strategic efforts?
A bad image?
No image?
Rebranding?
…or something else?
Please share your challenges in the comments section below. We may feature your challenge and some suggestions on how to address it in an upcoming post. You can also remain anonymous by emailing us with your challenge at team@alexgpr.com.
So let’s hear from you–the PR program you save could be your own!
We just read an article with some great advice on hiring a PR firm. We recommend the entire article, but this section on fees is especially worth a read.
Phase in the fees.
Retainers for smaller agencies run $2,000 to $5,000 or so per month. But don’t begin on retainer. Set up a specific project with a price tag attached so you can evaluate results.
Paying for customized services is another option. For instance, hire a publicist to write press releases on an hourly basis for about $100 to $250. You can also contract with a PR pro to work in-house for you. Rates vary with experience, say, $50 to $200 per hour. Some PR companies, such as Pinnacle Worldwide, provide a network of international independent agencies, so you can contract for services in any country or city.
We totally agree with their stance on retainers. AlexanderG PR welcomes the opportunity to show what we can do on a single project or closed-ended time period before we “earn” a retained relationship.
And yes, the retainer fees mentioned in the article are industry standard. We get paid for our work like any other professional. Most reputable PR firms and consultants can command ever penny of that retainer because they offer a great ROI.
Project fees are also a good way to go, too.
Here are some warning signs that usually indicate you will not get what you pay for:
A firm promises “guaranteed results.” No one can ensure press coverage or other specific outcomes. (Editor’s Note: emphasis ours)
A firm does too much research. “There should be a balance between planning and doing,” says Dave Kowal, whose agency is based in Northboro, Mass.
There are proposals with no specifics. You should know exactly what’s planned.
You’re charged an unusually low retainer. This probably means you can’t expect much work.
We hasten to add, however, that an unusually low retainer is often accepted–and plenty of work is done–because many clients will not or cannot pay more. Not all firms that accept a low fee are dodgy; many do it in hopes of establishing a longterm relationship.
That’s tricky, though. Once a PR firm gets into a “lowball” situation with a client, they may never get paid what they’re really worth and end up losing money in the long run.
Be advised…you get what you pay for. If you pay a PR firm a non-professional wage, you’ll likely get non-professional results.
“When you’re in the mix of these really obtuse situations where nobody really knows the facts, in some sense the facts are less important than your posture toward the facts,” says Mr. Reeves, the former Merrill Lynch media relations executive.
“People are reasonable. They know companies make mistakes, and people will forgive an honest mistake. They will not forgive a dishonest cover-up.”
The internet can be either a boon or boondoggle to companies when it comes to the monitoring of their online brand presence.
For companies that pay little attention to their online storefronts, the rewards are continual brand hijacking, abusive pay-per-click tactics and outright attacks on brands.
MarkMonitor, an enterprise brand protection firm, offers solutions and services to safeguard brands, reputation and revenue from online risks. In their white paper “Online Brand Protection: A Step-by-Step Guide to Creating a Proactive Strategy” MarkMonitor recommends a series of protective measures, including:
Identifying all domain names in your portfolio
Manage your portfolio proactively
Monitor for potential abuse
Respond to abuse
Great paper–in particular, we recommend you take a look at the section on monitoring for potential abuse. You can do this inside your company, or there are several online services that offer affordable methods to do this for you. No matter how you do it, the key is never-ending vigilance.
Creating an ideal domain portfolio is a good start to establishing and protecting your corporate brands online. However, it is just the beginning. While defensive registrations enable you to own and control the domain names that may be abused by third parties, it is simply impossible for any corporation to register every potentially harmful domain name. Therefore, the next critical step for defending your brands online is to establish a strategic monitoring program that constantly searches the internet for potential abuses, including:
Cybersquatting
Domain kiting/tasting
Trademark infringement
Traffic diversion schemes
False associations with unrelated third parties
Pay-per-click abuse
Sponsored in abuse
Logo/image abuse
Offensive content
Channel non-compliance with brand guidelines and/or pricing
Many small–and even larger–companies cannot afford to hire a person devoted to these critical tasks. This is what the bad guys count on. Again, a monitoring service is worth the price if it can save you the damage of brand equity loss, not to mention real money gone forever due to internet banditry. (They can also help you identify new customers–but that’s another post).
Brand managers should assess the degree to which website traffic is diverted to sites that abuse its brand and the amount of lost advertising revenue that is diverted to fraudulent pay-per-click sites, You should look at quantitative and qualitative indicators, including:
Degree of fewer “negative impressions” due to successfully shutting down web site which degrade your brand
Improvement in website traffic due to successfully shutting down traffic diversion tactics (Cybersquatting, pat-per-click sites, paid search ads)
Better quality response rate to online advertising due to successfully shutting down fraudulent pay-per-click sites
Productivity gains and/or hours saved per week in detecting and responding to infringement by leveraging available technologies and solutions
From the public relations perspective, monitoring is critical in protecting your brand’s reputation and credibility. One of the services we provide at AlexanderG Public Relations includes online brand monitoring and image management. This helps us head off potentially bad PR by identifying and addressing problems before they become full-blown crises; it also helps our clients determine where best to apply their messaging and online resources–often increasing market share in the process.
Nasty stuff outlined in this post is happening to oblivious companies everyday. The message is simple: if you don’t know what’s going in your online storefront, it’s the same as someone setting up a fake store just around the corner from yours in real-life –selling low quality goods and ruining your good name.
Our continued look at recent P.R. crises made worse by stupidity turns today to BP. We’ve already written extensively about BP, so we’ll refer back to the recent New York Times article for the most important point–there’s only one thing you absolutely must protect in a crisis–or all is lost:
Putting aside the limitations of crisis management, those in the trade generally share a sense that the companies at the center of recent events committed grievous errors. At the top of the list is BP.
“It was one of the worst P.R. approaches that I’ve seen in my 56 years of business,” says Mr. Rubenstein. “They tried to be opaque. They had every excuse in the book. Right away they should have accepted responsibility and recognized what a disaster they faced. They basically thought they could spin their way out of catastrophe. It doesn’t work that way.”
[...]
“BP lost a lot of credibility when it turned out they weren’t being forthright about how much oil was spilling out,” says Lucio Guerrero, who, as former spokesman for Rod R. Blagojevich, the impeached governor of Illinois, has intimate knowledge of the art of trust management. “Once you lose credibility, that’s the kiss of death.”
Of course, CEO Tony Hayward spilled what little credibility the pitiful oil giant had left with his lack of sensitivity and epic foot-in-mouth disease:
On the highlight reel of BP’s missteps, strategists cite its effort to deflect blame for the spill by pinning responsibility on contractors. That made BP appear callous, as if it were focused on avoiding legal liability rather than doing right by those whose lives had been upended — the families of the 11 rig workers who died in the explosion, and communities that draw their livelihoods from the gulf. (BP declined to comment on such assertions.)
The company had to contend with a classic corporate quandary of balancing advice from counselors with starkly different considerations, according to people familiar with BP’s deliberations who requested anonymity because the advice was confidential.
Our look at P.R. missteps continues, inspired by an article in the New York Times about recent P.R. disasters. Today we look at the question posed early in the article:
Are some crises so dire that public relations victory is simply not on the menu? And, if so, what’s an embattled company to do?
Yup. There are times when no amount of good P.R. advice will make up for lousy decisions, a lack of planning or just plain evil-doing. Read on:
Eric Dezenhall, a communications strategist in Washington who worked in the White House for President Ronald Reagan, argues that the standard playbook is useless when the facts are sufficiently distasteful. (He would know. He once represented Michael Jackson after allegations of child molestation.)
Mr. Dezenhall is particularly scornful of the classic imperative to “get out in front of the story,” as if swift disclosure provides inoculation against all ugly realities. When the facts are horrible, he argues, the best P.R. fix may simply be to absorb the pounding and get back to business, while eschewing the sort of foolish communications gimmicks that can make things worse.
Consider Tiger Woods. His now-infamous fondness for women other than his wife enthralled the nation, all the while torturing corporate sponsors who paid gargantuan sums to associate their brands with his winning image.
“What was Woods supposed to do?” Mr. Dezenhall asks in an essay in the publication Ethical Corporation. “Call an immediate press conference and rattle through a list of lady friends declaring, ‘Tiffany, yes; Trixy, no, Amber, don’t remember …’? And if Woods had pre-empted with a confession, would this have caused the news media, bloggers, pundits, Hooters waitresses and everyone else to collectively reward him with their silence? Not a chance.”
What I’ve learned after nearly fifteen years as a crisis communications consultant and practitioner informs my recommendations on how to save your rear end when the effluent hits the rotary oscillator:
1. Tell the truth (or as much as you can without getting yourself thrown in jail–ask your lawyer if this is applicable.) This rule is a little different for celebs who wreck their cars and/or marriages than it is for a company caught cooking the books or polluting the water table; but the essence of it is the same: don’t dissemble, don’t lie. Here’s a pretty good statement for a celeb/politician who did a bad thing that hurt no one but himself and/or family:
“I have made a terrible error in judgment that has unfortunately hurt my [spouse, kids, significant other]. I have let my family, friends and supporters down, and there is nothing I can do at this moment to fix that. Though this incident is certainly of interest to those who have [followed my career, supported me, bought my albums, seen my movies, etc.], I would appreciate some time and space so I can work this out with my family. I would also ask for restraint from the media and remind them that there are real people caught up in this situation through no fault of their own who deserve as much privacy as possible. If we get to a point where we would like to share more, I assure you I will contact you. Thank you for your consideration, good day to you.”
[If you are crying, wipe your tears with a handkerchief. Walk away from the mic. Now. Take no more questions. NO MORE QUESTIONS. No rambling, Governor Sanford. ]
2. Shut up. You’ve made your statement. You’ve either said you are going to work this out privately with your family or your company has laid out what it is going to do to make the situation right (or you’ve lawyered up and said you have nothing to say due to pending legal action). So shut up about it and get busy. Resist the urge to use the media as a confessional. Save that for when your marriage/company is cleaned up and solid again.
The article shifts gears from personalities to corporations:
Much the same can be said for BP, Toyota and Goldman, he suggests, with attempts to win public affection almost certain to be viewed as insincere so long as real problems persisted — oil spilling into the ocean, cars crashing, Wall Street profiting while ordinary people suffered.
We talk regularly on this blog about pubic relations crises and missteps–not just for the gleeful rush of pointing the finger at bad moves and insipid sound bites–though that is fun; but to learn from these mistakes and inform our readers of ways to stay out of PR Hell.
The New York Times got in on the act with a very detailed story that looks at some of our favorite PR implosions of recent days: Toyota, Goldman Sachs and of course, the oily PR nightmare that is BP.
“…for members of the protective tribe known as the crisis management industry, the scandals capturing headlines in the corporate realm involve far higher stakes, threatening the lifeblood of global behemoths worth hundreds of billions of dollars. The calamities have served up a lifetime supply of case studies to be mined for lessons on best practices, as well as pitfalls to avoid when disaster arrives.
“The two things that are very hard to survive are hypocrisy and ridicule,” Mr. Dezenhall says. “It’s the height of arrogance to assume that in the middle of a crisis the public yearns for chestnuts of wisdom from people they want to kill. The goal is not to get people not to hate them. It’s to get people to hate them less.”
We’ve talked before about what to do when a reporter calls to interview you about something positive. Today we cover some basic information on giving an interview in a contentious, potentially confrontational setting–broken down into 8 key points.
The Scenario:You’ve been asked by a television news reporter to give an interview about allegations against your company.
The first question you ask yourself is: Is it best to give an interview, or lie low?
Answer: When you have nothing to hide (and no legal reasons not to) it’s good to be proactive and get your side of the story out there. Just remember to take care of how you present yourself and your side of the story:
1. TV reporters will generally want to interview you on their schedule, not yours. However, if you’re not prepared to speak, try and schedule an interview after you’ve had time to prepare. If that luxury is not available, take a few moments to huddle with your public relations or management team and decide what theme and key points you want your messages to convey in the interview. Prepare for the worst questions with your best answers. Developing three simple sound bites that sound natural and unrehearsed can get you through almost any interview.
2. Repeat your key message and points several times during the interview, if the interview is long enough for that opportunity. Even if you are asked a question unrelated to your key message, bring your key messages into your answer:
Key Message: Your company is the top-ranked firm in the Midwest for employee satisfaction.
Question: How do you respond to the allegations from two former employees that they were working in a hostile work environment?
Answer: We have consistently demonstrated the utmost in professionalism in our human resources practices. In fact, we’ve been named the top-ranked firm in the Midwest for employee satisfaction.
Retort: But these former employees say they were unfairly treated.
Answer: In any organization our size there are bound to be conflicts, but you don’t get named the top-ranked firm in the Midwest for employee satisfaction without treating people right.
Keep in mind, this isn’t about pleasing the reporter but about getting your message across.
4. Never repeat or initiate a negative. Notice in the answer above the interviewee reinforces the good without giving any reiteration of the negative.
An extreme example of this is President Nixon:
“I am not a crook.” If he wasn’t a crook, it was probably not a good idea to introduce that word into the public conversation.
5. “No Comment” is never the answer when asked a tough or hostile question. Use the opportunity to refer back to your key message: “I don’t know the answer to that, but I can tell you that…”
6. Always be honest and if you don’t know the answer to a question, then admit it.
7. Watch for efforts to put words in your mouth or the application of a negative “frame” around the situation. Some reporters may try to get you to tacitly agree to “allegations” by framing the question in a way that makes you seem complicit:
Question: As you have not denied allegations of hostile work environment, what will you do to meet the demands of the employees?
Answer: Our company’s reputation, as illustrated by our being honored as the top-ranked firm in the Midwest for employee satisfaction, is solid.
Retort: But you have not denied the allegations.
Answer: We’re not in the business of responding publicly to human resource issues. That would be irresponsible and not in keeping with our ethics and acclaimed employee satisfaction rankings.
8. Don’t take it personally. Even if the reporter is hurling the most heinous, unkind allegations at you (“Some people say that your company kills kittens…”), a thin-skinned show of temper, self-pity or weakness will be magnified and may go viral for all the world to see.
Be graceful, take your time and politely respond with your key messages. Attacking the reporter almost never helps. Most reporters are ethical, hardworking folks performing a vital public service–but your job is to take care of your company’s interests and yourself–they know that.
Just remember, the media can do a lot of harm (or a lot of good) to your reputation–but not without your help!
Public relations is all about reputation management–your credibility is the coin of the business realm. We’re pretty hard on companies and brands that take a cavalier attitude about their credibility–because once you lose that, it’s all over. Or is it?
Our look at P.R. missteps continues, inspired by an article in the New York Times about recent P.R. disasters. Today we look at the question posed early in the article:
