People working in PR often have to face a rather negative reputation being associated with the act of spin. The PR practitioners that mostly have to cope with this image are probably those in position of the communications director of a political person. It is their duty and responsibility to change, kill, cover up or weaken negative stories about the person they are working for and ensure that these people are shed in positive light in front of the public.
Although ‘spinning’ is viewed as a highly unethical act “it is the most common form of PR as electoral politics and is political news management between political parties, government and the electorate.” (Moloney, 2000, p. 105). Moloney continues referring to Freidenberg (1997), pointing out that within the last few years, political consultants have achieved a status other than their actual position implies – being hyped by the media as celebrities themselves (Moloney, 2000, p. 106). One of these very “well-known celebrities” is Alistair Campbell who used to be Director of Communications and Strategy for former Prime Minister Tony Blair. Campbell is officially known and called “Spin doctor” among the public, especially after the scandal of the “September Dossier” in 2002 and the “Iraq Dossier” in 2003. These two documents were intended to gain great support by the public containing falsified and misleading information that “justified” the invasion of Iraq.
Spin used to be and will continue to be ethically wrong. Spin will never be approved of but will always be used – especially in politics. It is questionable if those people using spin will ever set themselves or stick to certain simple ethical boundaries instead of doing whatever they (in their eyes) have to do to achieve a certain goal – like Alistair Campbell who made the whole public think that going to war is the right thing to do.
The issue of spinning will always be a “hot topic” and a worry to those PR practitioners that operate in other sectors. They might do everything else but spinning and if there is not a drastic change, the image of a “spin doctor” will probably always be glued to their job, damaging the overall reputation of the profession Public Relations.
Tuesday, 22 February 2011
Sunday, 13 February 2011
NGO's - Frenemies to Corporates?
NGO’s and non-profit organisations are usually not connected with negative thoughts. They stand, work and fight for good causes, call attention to these causes and educate the public about them and how they can actively get involved in doing something good for a cause. When a corporate company joins together with an NGO, it is usually intended to give the corporate company a positive image.
However it is often not considered that a collaboration with an NGO also can turn into a negative situation for the corporate company. This could be the case when the individual interests and activities of the two collaborators don’t coincide or just clash. The NGO will not be ashamed to make these internal discrepancies public, while the corporate company might fear a negative image and damaging reputation among the public.
In cases of a conflict, NGO’s often use the following tactics to draw public attention to the problem that exists with the corporate company intending to make it change its ways of operating and behaving:
1. Non – violent Direct Action (NVDA)
2. Rogue websites
3. Surveys
4. Reports
5. Mass Events
6. Stunts
7. Letters to officials
8. Soundbites
9. Social Media (YouTube, Twitter, Facebook)
When deciding on a collaboration, corporate companies need to carefully select the NGO’s they want to join together with and need to be aware of their common interests and the possible conflicts that could arise during the partnership. If there are no problems at all, a co-operation with an NGO will most likely help shed positive light on a corporate company’s name and image and build a positive reputation among the public.
However it is often not considered that a collaboration with an NGO also can turn into a negative situation for the corporate company. This could be the case when the individual interests and activities of the two collaborators don’t coincide or just clash. The NGO will not be ashamed to make these internal discrepancies public, while the corporate company might fear a negative image and damaging reputation among the public.
In cases of a conflict, NGO’s often use the following tactics to draw public attention to the problem that exists with the corporate company intending to make it change its ways of operating and behaving:
1. Non – violent Direct Action (NVDA)
2. Rogue websites
3. Surveys
4. Reports
5. Mass Events
6. Stunts
7. Letters to officials
8. Soundbites
9. Social Media (YouTube, Twitter, Facebook)
When deciding on a collaboration, corporate companies need to carefully select the NGO’s they want to join together with and need to be aware of their common interests and the possible conflicts that could arise during the partnership. If there are no problems at all, a co-operation with an NGO will most likely help shed positive light on a corporate company’s name and image and build a positive reputation among the public.
Thursday, 10 February 2011
Grunig's situational theory
One of the most important aspects companies have to deal with and pay great attention to are stakeholders. Today there are various models suggesting the best ways on how to deal with them. One of the most well known Public Relations theorists James E. Grunig has developed the situational theory which concentrates on changing publics. Its concept involves non – public, latent public, aware public and active public.
Non – public refers to the public that is not affected by an organisations decisions, behaviour or problems. They might be recognized but don’t play a very important role for a company. The latent public applies to the public that might unconsciously be aware of a company’s or organisation’s moves but does not recognize them. The aware public is a public, which is aware of the effects of an organisation’s matters and recognizes them. The active public refers to the public that recognizes a company’s or organisation’s moves in full context and wants to react and act in response and organise to do something about the problem or situation.
Grunig’s situational theory can well be applied by companies and organisation as it is but continues to be developed.
Non – public refers to the public that is not affected by an organisations decisions, behaviour or problems. They might be recognized but don’t play a very important role for a company. The latent public applies to the public that might unconsciously be aware of a company’s or organisation’s moves but does not recognize them. The aware public is a public, which is aware of the effects of an organisation’s matters and recognizes them. The active public refers to the public that recognizes a company’s or organisation’s moves in full context and wants to react and act in response and organise to do something about the problem or situation.
Grunig’s situational theory can well be applied by companies and organisation as it is but continues to be developed.
Monday, 31 January 2011
Crisis Management
There is a time when every company or organisation may find itself in an uncomfortable situation facing a more or less dramatic crisis. With such an easy accessible tool like the internet it is getting more and more difficult to prepare in cases of a crisis. Anyone with a camera (mobile, camcorder, or digital camera) can make “undercover” films and post them on platforms like YouTube, Facebook and similar ones. Confidential or damaging material can therefore easily be distributed causing a great harm in a company’s reputation.
In such cases, crisis management is needed more than anything. New trust needs to be established among the public and the responsible parties need to be able to respond to the high pressure they will then be under. However a crisis is always an opportunity to show how well structured and prepared a company is in such situations. When videos of employees working at Domino’s Pizza were leaked on the internet showing disgusting actions they did while preparing the food, the company faced the problem immediately and dealt with it in an excellent way (Case study below).
Today companies, organisations and governments need to be prepared for a crisis any time. The need to have prepared strategies, already planned out before a crisis’ outbreak – and most importantly they need to be prepared any time as the internet never sleeps! That means they need to analyse potential risks and crisis situations and causes beforehand. Most importantly they should prepare and have and eye on their employees as these people are the greatest risk. They are the closest to confidential information and have access to all or almost all areas in a company. Furthermore great attention should be paid to the Internet and how to use it and several social media platforms in cases of a crisis. With the Internet the largest number of people can be reached and updates can be posted every hour or even every few minutes.
Here are my the Top 8 Crisis Management Tips:
1. Face the crisis!
2. Have clear roles on who is doing what in a crisis
(who speaks to the media, who is responsible for communication on the internet)!
3. Identify the four W’s (who what when where) before facing the media!
4. Prepare and rehearse your crisis management plans!
5. Don’t hide – be accessible for the media and the public
(on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, TV etc.)!
6. Train your employees!
7. Have guidelines for the employees how to use social media
(they should know how to make regular updates giving a positive image)!
8. Get third parties involved that have a positive influence and
support on your image among the public!
In such cases, crisis management is needed more than anything. New trust needs to be established among the public and the responsible parties need to be able to respond to the high pressure they will then be under. However a crisis is always an opportunity to show how well structured and prepared a company is in such situations. When videos of employees working at Domino’s Pizza were leaked on the internet showing disgusting actions they did while preparing the food, the company faced the problem immediately and dealt with it in an excellent way (Case study below).
Today companies, organisations and governments need to be prepared for a crisis any time. The need to have prepared strategies, already planned out before a crisis’ outbreak – and most importantly they need to be prepared any time as the internet never sleeps! That means they need to analyse potential risks and crisis situations and causes beforehand. Most importantly they should prepare and have and eye on their employees as these people are the greatest risk. They are the closest to confidential information and have access to all or almost all areas in a company. Furthermore great attention should be paid to the Internet and how to use it and several social media platforms in cases of a crisis. With the Internet the largest number of people can be reached and updates can be posted every hour or even every few minutes.
Here are my the Top 8 Crisis Management Tips:
1. Face the crisis!
2. Have clear roles on who is doing what in a crisis
(who speaks to the media, who is responsible for communication on the internet)!
3. Identify the four W’s (who what when where) before facing the media!
4. Prepare and rehearse your crisis management plans!
5. Don’t hide – be accessible for the media and the public
(on Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, TV etc.)!
6. Train your employees!
7. Have guidelines for the employees how to use social media
(they should know how to make regular updates giving a positive image)!
8. Get third parties involved that have a positive influence and
support on your image among the public!
Case Study Domino's Pizza
In 2009 the international fast food chain Domino’s Pizza faced a crisis when a video was leaked on YouTube showing two employees preparing Pizzas while doing pretty disgusting and unhygienic things to the food. The video is now no longer available but had almost 1 million clicks before it was put down.
Domino’s dealt very well with that crisis concentrating on social media to overcome this situations. First a video on YouTube was published showing the President of Domino’s Pizza facing the incident, apologizing, telling where the incident happened and how Domino’s will deal with it and thanking for support and trust. Also a Twitter account was created on which Domino’s kept contact with costumers, updated on a regular basis about the incident and promoted positive coverage. Also they apologized for what had happened and did not stop to thank their loyal costumers for their ongoing support.
The employees seen in the video were identified and lost their jobs.
This case shows how quick a company can be put into a crisis and how easy information that is not intended for the public or better kept within a company reaches a large audience.
Apology Video of Domino's President Patrick Doyle
Domino’s dealt very well with that crisis concentrating on social media to overcome this situations. First a video on YouTube was published showing the President of Domino’s Pizza facing the incident, apologizing, telling where the incident happened and how Domino’s will deal with it and thanking for support and trust. Also a Twitter account was created on which Domino’s kept contact with costumers, updated on a regular basis about the incident and promoted positive coverage. Also they apologized for what had happened and did not stop to thank their loyal costumers for their ongoing support.
The employees seen in the video were identified and lost their jobs.
This case shows how quick a company can be put into a crisis and how easy information that is not intended for the public or better kept within a company reaches a large audience.
Apology Video of Domino's President Patrick Doyle
Sunday, 23 January 2011
PR in times of War - where is the truth?
In the first class of Contemporary Theory and Issues in Public Relations, we watched the BBC documentary “War Spin” that reveals some of the PR strategies the US and UK governments used during the Iraq War in 2003. It is unlikely to change that any country that goes to war will give out only certain information to justify its action and maintain a positive image among the public.
Although it is one of the tasks in PR to keep, save or establish an image of an organisation, a company, a government or a single person, it is questionable where the moral boundaries in such critical situations like war lie. In the case of the Iraq war only selected bits and pieces of information were given out to the public by the US government. Most of the information were misleading and leaving the public with a complete wrong impression of the overall situation and a wrong image of the United States.
Most probably any government during times of war will always use war spin. However if we can’t trust our governments in cases of such difficult situations, who can the public rely on? It is important for PR to be kept in mind that the public has a right to information and the media have the duty to inform. What is needed is a strict moral standard for PR practitioners they have to be obliged to.
References: Jowett, G. and O'Donnell, V., (2006). Propaganda and Persuasion. 4th ed. Sage Publications Inc.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)