Tag Archives: litigation

Litigation PR — Good Marketing or Good Legal Strategy?

Is the courtroom the place where legal issues are decided?  Or, is it decided in the court of public opinion managed by public relations and marketing pros?  The lines have become muddied.  It seems that before a case gets into the courtroom, it has been decided on TV by pundits who give legal analysis without the minor advantage of having any legal background.

It is often difficult to divide politics from legal issues.  They spill over to one another.  Cases involving illegal immigrants don’t become cases of law, they become cases of opinions on legal or illegal immigration.

That’s why attorneys have learned to get their positions heard and seen on the media before the court. And that’s where public relation practitioners come in.   If they can persuade public opinion to their side, then more often than not, they won’t even have to go to court.  They will win by the compromise brought about by public pressure.

 

The PR of Sexual Misconduct

There seems to be no end to stories of newsmakers being accused of sexual misconduct.  It makes headlines when it is a celebrity or politician, but one can be certain it reaches into every corner of the workplace.

The latest and most high profile is Minnesota Senator Al Franken who has been accused of groping and inappropriate actions and remarks against a host of women.  Yesterday the former comic and Senator faced the media — briefly — to say what he’s been saying since the allegations, and photograph, came to light.

But while the media hurried in a frenzy to cover, Franken said nothing new.  He said the same thing he said since the allegation was made public.  He also said the same thing every accused says.

There seems to be a playbook of what to say and what not to say in these situations.  Most will admit wrongdoing and promise to never do it again.  They know denial will just give more life to the story.  So it’s best to admit they did wrong and hope the story dies.

It is typical PR strategy.  The first step is to get ahead of the story, if you can, but you don’t want to create a story that might not happen.  When and if it does, then protect yourself legally, admit to wrongdoing, go to therapy, apologize and hope your fans and constituents move on.

It seems likely this is a story that will live on forever.  Men in positions of power levy their power for their own gain and satisfaction.  The stories we have heard are probably a small fraction of the stories that exist.  But unless legal action is take, as it is with Harvey Weinstein in one case, there is not much to do other than hope people will eventually forget about it.

 

When PR gets in the way of the message

All of us want to be loved.  Well, at least liked.

This is apparently no more the case than with our president.

President Trump is obsessed with what people say about him; what people think of him and his popularity.  This is not a political statement.  He has admitted it and displayed this obsession by watching what seems to be countless of hours of cable television to see what the media say about him.

Obviously, much if not most of it, is not good.  So how does he change that?  How does President Trump manage his own PR so he markets himself in a way that will improve his likability and make him happy?

There is only one way, and it is not through polished statements read off a teleprompter.  (Not his strength.)

The President needs to stop worrying so much about his image and start getting things done.

Certainly much of what he wants to get done people disagree with.  I won’t rehash the list, but we know what they are.

But one thing is for sure.  Everybody wants a stronger economy.  Everybody wants a job.  Everybody wants healthcare  If he can achieve this, and it won’t be easy, then his misstatements and political pitfalls will be easier to forgive.  At least for some people.  For many others there is nothing he can do that will redeem him.

He also needs to remember that presidential criticism is part of the job.  There has never been a president when everything he did received 100% approval.  Maybe Trump is facing more of an uphill battle than prior presidents, much because of his own doing, but he needs to swallow it and roll up his shirtsleeves.

So if he can, and that is a big IF, he should turn off the TV and get to work.  Americans want a better life, not someone who can deliver a pretty speech.  Doing both is better, but people will take what they can get.

And right now, people aren’t asking for much.  They just want to pay their bills, raise their families in peace and have the dignity of a job.

If he can do that, his PR and image will rise.

IF he can do that.

 

 

Something we (finally) all can agree on

In today’s divided country and world, it is a breath of fresh air when there is something we all can agree on.

And it happened today.  The solar eclipse was cool.

For a few hours, people stopped fighting with one another, writing hateful messages and levying threats.  Even the media made room for the one event that everybody in the world could witness on the same day, with or without those special glasses.  And it had nothing to do with politics.

Maybe that’s what we need more of.  Natural occurrences that are undeniable and that we all can witness at the same time and agree upon.

Hopefully something like this will come along again before another 100 years or so.

 

Trump’s PR problem

This post is not pro or con President Trump. FMG’s political views are irrelevant. What is important, is Trump’s communications policies, imaging, branding his PR, and what we can learn from President Trump’s success and failures.

Prior to running for President, Donald Trump thrived attention. He became one of the best known private citizens in the world. He did this not only through his business success and television show, but the fact that he relentlessly sought media exposure.

His name recognition undoubtedly contributed to his ability to run an effective political campaign for the highest office in the land, and winning. Rather unbelievable, but studies prove that name recognition is a major asset for anyone seeking a political life.

But how much attention is too much attention? How much Tweeting is too much Tweeting? Is it helping or hurting him? He obviously contends it helped him win and continues to help him push his political agenda. On the other hand, his incessant Tweeting has resulted in jokes for misspellings, misstatements, and is being used against him in Congressional hearings.

So the lesson has to be balance. Far be it for us to give President Trump advice, but we would recommend using all forms of communication not only wisely and often sparingly.

New PR target: airlines

It seems you can’t turn on your computer without the latest cell video of someone being abused by an airline.  Passengers being dragged off flights to make room for airline employees, families thrown off because the child’s name doesn’t match the ticket, and passengers simply frustrated at being treated with disdain by flight attendants and pilots.

The strange thing is the airlines are almost always right: legally.  They do what their manual tells them they must do or be fired.  And they blame the FAA as the culprit. These flight mishaps, that end up on CNN and all over social media, are not because the airline is doing something wrong.  It is the way they handle the situation.  Again, as in most crisis communications scenarios, it is not the act, it is the coverup.  It is not asking someone to leave a plane, it is how it is done.

When incidents hit the media, and result in public outrage, the airlines cave in.  The CEO goes on Good Morning America to issue an apology and the case usually ends up with the passenger much richer.

What is missing from these crisis scenarios is some common sense.  If flight attendants and pilots worked on alleviating an escalating situation rather than bulldozing their way to follow the manual, nobody would be filming the situation and nobody would think that airlines have become the most non-customer relations sensitive business in the world.  Right now, people would but airlines at the bottom of the list for customer service and in many cases rightfully so.

Issuing apologies and paying passengers millions of dollars doesn’t solve the PR problem.  The airline admits guilt and stupidity and is out a lot of money.  The answer is to stop a PR crisis before it begins.  Give flight attendants and pilots authority to solve problems on the ground before they escalate.  Don’t call the police whose job is to do whatever it takes to get a passenger off the plane.

And have better staff training in how to deal with passengers who have done nothing wrong other than buy a plane ticket.

 

 

 

The PR plan: Don’t start a campaign without it

You wouldn’t embark on a cross country car ride (do people still do that?) without giving some thought to a route, would you?  With GPS today, it is certainly easier than in past years, but still, you want to plan your journey.  If you’re going to drive 3,000 miles, why not give some thought to whether you want to see the mountains or the desert?  Landmarks or just open road?

The same holds true when planning a PR campaign.  It is not enough to do PR and marketing just for the sake of doing it.  You need to know your objectives.  What are you attempting to achieve?  Is it to increase sales or brand your company?  Create a reputation or protect the one you already have?  Or, all of the above?

There are two schools of thought when planning a PR and marketing campaign.  You can do lots of things a little bit, or a few things well.  In most cases the latter is the better choice.  Select a few activities that your organization has the talent, time and budget for, and focus on them.  If you take this approach, you will be sure to achieve success in some areas, rather than limited success in many.

“Walking back” — the new darling in media terminology

With the presidential race in full swing, news stations (primarily cable) are in 24/7 mode talking with and interviewing “experts” and “surrogates” for both candidates Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump.

As both sides send out their PR, marketing, polling and media experts, these poor souls have the unenviable task of having to explain the positions of their bosses (the candidates) and more often than not, “clarify” what the candidate meant to say but didn’t.

This holds true for both Trump and Clinton.  Trump with the immigration issue and Clinton with her email issue.  Both make large statements at large gatherings, and when what they say sinks in, the media want to know why they both keep changing their positions.

Typically this would be called “changing a position” or “taking back” a promise.  Simple and straight-forward language.  But a new term has crept into this election.  It is “walking it back.”

What exactly does it mean to “walk back” something?  Well, apparently it means the same thing as changing a position.

So while Trump originally said he wants to deport 11 million Mexican aliens, his reps have to go on TV and “walk back” that statement and say what he really means, whatever that is.  And the same with Hillary.  When she said she turned over all the emails she had, and the FBI said no she didn’t, then her reps have to go on TV and “walk back” that statement and clarify what she meant to say, but for some reason forgot.

We live in a world of soundbites and a changing of language to keep up with the changing times.

Most of it is fueled by the media, who for some reason find simple, plain English just to boring to adhere to.

Now that’s a statement I will never “walk back.”

 

Why do smart people say stupid things on Twitter?

It appears to happen every day.  Someone in the public eye — whether a successful businessperson, politician, entertainer or other — sends out a 140-character tweet and within minutes tries to delete it because of the backlash it causes.  More than one smart, public figure has lost his/her job or come under intense criticism for using social media to vent, and not first using their brain.

When Trump campaign manager Corey Lewandowski was fired, Trump advisor Michael Caputo tweeted: “Ding dong the witch is dead!”  Hours later he was gone as well.

When Justine Sacco, corporate communications chief for InterActive Corp tweeted:  “Going to Africa.  Hope I don’t get AIDS.  Just kidding.  I’m White!” upon boarding a flight to Africa, was fired before her plane landed on the continent.

How can people, especially PR, and communications strategists who are supposed to be so savvy, be so stupid to say these things on Twitter?  Not to mention how can they think them at all?

The motto for everybody, whether in the public eye or not, is to be extra cautious with everything you put in writing.  Even former Secretary of State Clinton felt a sense of security with her private email server, and we’re seeing how that has worked out.

That’s why more and more people are using that thing called the telephone.  If you don’t want your words to come back and haunt you — the best thing is to not say them at all.  If you must say something in total confidence, use the telephone.

Twitter is one thing, because the user intends for it to be public.  But emailing is another.  Email has become our primary source of communication and people use it with a sense of confidentiality and security.  What more people should realize is that once something is put in an email, that record can be forwarded to others, or attached to a string of communications unintentionally.

The lesson here is common sense.  If you’re going to tweet or email, never do it in the heat of the moment.  If you need to get something off your chest, first take a few hours to cool off.  Chances are you will realize that lashing out in public or in writing will often do more harm to you than the person(s) you are venting at.

 

The courtroom of public opinion

Ever since the OJ trial, the media has discovered that courtroom drama sells.  Both cable TV and network TV are replete with programs about murder, white collar crime, and everything else you can think of that ends up in a courtroom.

One NBC producer recently said, “murder sells.”  And there is no lack of competition among stations’ like CBS’s 48 Hours and NBC’s Dateline to film and offer up the most dramatic and sensational true life stories.

Case in point is the recent Netflix series “Making a Murderer” which chronicled Steven Avery, a small town, unassuming man who spent 18 years in prison for a crime he didn’t commit.  When he was released, he sued Manitowoc County, Wisconsin for withholding evidence in his trial.  A year later he was arrested and tried for the murder of a young woman reporter and was convicted.

Every week whether it is a network or CNN, crime seems to sell.  But it isn’t just blood and guts.  The show American Greed is a hit by documenting how people create Ponzi schemes and bilk their friends, neighbors and relatives out of millions of dollars.

What does this have to do with PR and marketing?  Simple.  For every crime story there is a long period between the arrest and the trial.  During that time the media have at it, debating with one another the guilt or innocence of the person(s) at the center of the case.  How the accused can get a fair trial with saturated media coverage is a good question.

That’s why media consultants, or PR pros, are often brought it to get one side of the story told before it goes to trial.  No PR person can convince a reporter to not tell the truth or to overlook facts.  But they can get their side of the story out, and that’s the primary purpose of telling a story in the court of public opinion.