Ryan J. Taylor is the Founder and CEO of 440 Strategies in Washington, D.C.

Walking the highwire that connects politics and business is complicated, and mistakes can have real consequences. This is especially true every four years during the race for the White House. As a result of today’s bitterly divisive political environment, both large and small companies risk finding themselves in the crosshairs of presidential campaigns like never before. No company or industry is immune. Posts on social media, off-the-cuff remarks or coordinated campaigns by the candidates’ teams can affect a brand’s reputation, customers and profits. Being called out is something companies should prepare for proactively. To survive this storm, businesses need these four key strategies.

Know your strengths and your weaknesses
Every company should identify potential vulnerabilities that might attract political attention. It’s a good idea for each executive to review their respective business lines and corporate communications to understand the potential pitfalls. We live in different times now; any past mistake or oversight a company makes is fair game on the campaign trail. This is an involved process, especially for large, multinational companies, but the time invested pales in comparison to the cost of having to launch a crisis communications effort if caught unprepared. When business leaders do this work in advance, they’ll have a plan on hand, complete with a way to pivot from defending their brand to going on offense. That way, they can emerge from contact with the campaign trail with a larger, more loyal customer base and stronger market share.

As an example, in 2017, President Donald Trump slammed Nordstrom for dropping his daughter’s clothing line. Obviously, the post generated a lot of media attention and speculation about Nordstrom’s future. The company stood firm in its decision and communicated clearly that the decision was tied directly to sales performance. Nordstrom’s response was decisive, concise and difficult to argue with. Most importantly, the company avoided alienating the president’s supporters while simultaneously endearing itself to its existing customer base.

Do no harm
One of the most obvious ways to avoid being dragged through the mud while the entire world watches on national television is to avoid becoming ammunition for political adversaries in the first place. This seems easy on the surface but requires diligent work to understand potential points of contention.

A great way to figure out what’s going on is to keep an eye on public sentiment through polling, focus groups and social media analysis. Science and art go hand in hand when it comes to using this analysis to plan scenarios and assess risks. Anticipating political events and examining potential outcomes from all relevant angles is another avenue to consider since those inflection points can have a huge impact on businesses, brand reputations and customers. These scenarios include government policy changes, public reactions to company statements and actions, and potential boycotts and protests.

Make a plan but stay flexible
There is an old adage that says, “prepare for the worst, hope for the best.” Nothing could be truer for business leaders with the 2024 presidential election just over the horizon. Start by setting up clear lines of communication and appointing spokespersons who know the company’s values and what’s going on in politics. At this stage of the planning process, pre-approved messages should be written to counter points of possible contention or to provide context for past mistakes. But remember, sometimes silence can be just as an effective response to political criticism.

In the past, one line of defense usually involved showcasing charitable giving practices, DEI and CSR commitments, or pro-environmental programs. This strategy used to work, but in today’s campaign cycle could create additional headaches. Rather than reflexively engaging, instead focus on the company’s core business and consider the following questions:

1. Do the critics matter?
2. Will the controversy blow over?
3. Is the best counter a rebuttal or a redirection?

The answers to those questions will determine whether the best course of action is to release additional statements, pitch the CEO to be on television or opt for silence to avoid adding additional fuel to an otherwise dying fire.

Make some friends
There is power in numbers. Creating a network of key stakeholders, like employees, customers and community leaders, is crucial in times of crisis. This alliance of third-party validators, which sometimes includes a bevy of strange bedfellows, can be a buffer against political hostility. Building this coalition and maintaining it will take time, treasure, and persistence. It starts by communicating regularly with them paying attention to their concerns and addressing their issues promptly. Taking these steps will foster goodwill, strengthen the company’s position in the community and ultimately defend it against political attacks.

Lastly, companies must be willing to engage in constructive dialogue with politicians, regardless of political differences. Taking a defensive stance invites unnecessary conflict and is at odds with the whole purpose of running a business, which is to make a good product that people want while turning a profit with the help of a well-trained team of employees. Ultimately, the ability to engage in meaningful discussions can turn potentially damaging situations into opportunities for business growth.

This isn’t rocket science, but it will take diligent work and potentially difficult internal conversations. Having a crisis communications plan, conducting risk assessments, building a strong network and engaging in constructive dialogue make it possible to handle political crossfire and come out stronger on the other side. A company’s ability to weather storms like these is more than just a strategic advantage, it’s a necessity for its long-term success.

The post 4 ways business leaders can prepare for presidential criticism appeared first on PR Daily.

Following weeks of speculation and questions, Catherine, Princess of Wales, revealed Friday that cancer was found following her January abdominal surgery and has been undergoing chemotherapy, the BBC reported.

Many communications professional have been watching the Princess Catherine situation closely after an edited photo of Catherine and her three children was retracted by wire services, causing a PR scandal and deepening the mystery around the princess’ absence.

But the reason is now all too clear.

Catherine said in a video message that the unspecified form of cancer was discovered after a previously disclosed abdominal surgery. She needed time to recover from that operation and has only recently begun chemotherapy, she said.

Read more: After the Princess Catherine photo disaster, have this conversation with your clients

In the video message, she said, “William and I have been doing everything we can to process and manage this privately for the sake of our young family.”

“I am well and getting stronger every day,” she added.

A message from Catherine, The Princess of Wales pic.twitter.com/5LQT1qGarK

— The Prince and Princess of Wales (@KensingtonRoyal) March 22, 2024

In addition to Catherine’s diagnosis, her father-in-law, King Charles III, is also undergoing treatment for cancer.

Why it matters: It’s not easy being a royal. Yes, they get fairy tales and fancy lives but lose all semblance of privacy.

We now know that the radio silence and lack of public appearances by the princess were due to serious illness rather than something more nefarious. But while a regular person has the right to conceal their illness if they choose, that same luxury is simply not afforded to a monarch-to-be.

In the absence of information, the frenzied, fevered rumor mill filled in the blanks with the worst, most conspiracy-laden theories possible.

From the outside, it’s impossible to say who drove the PR strategy of silence, though a dignified lack of comment has long been a hallmark of the royal family. But it’s possible that Catherine herself, striving to keep some autonomy over herself and her family, insisted on waiting to reveal the news until it became clear that the scandal would not subside without a clear, direct explanation of what had been going on with one of the most visible women in the world.

It’s a horrible, heartbreaking situation. There’s no real way to win here. The conspiracy theories won’t end, especially not with cancer cropping up twice in the same family at the same time. Catherine will continue to have to fight for any shred of privacy, as even her medical records were breached.

It’s all a sad, weary echo of the life (and death) of Princess Diana, Catherine’s late mother-in-law whom paparazzi hounded until the very moment she was killed by their voracious appetite for another photo of her.

It also calls to mind another recent scandal over the non-disclosure of a medical condition. Lloyd Austin, the U.S. defense secretary, came under fire for failing to disclose to the White House or his temporary replacement that he had been hospitalized for cancer surgery.

All of this demonstrates how messy and complicated communications can be when it comes to a personal health issue.

There are no easy answers here. No finger-wagging maxims about what you should always do in these situations or what you should never do. Only that if you find yourself in a situation where you are helping a principal, client or even a friend deal with whether or how to disclose a medical issue that is impacting their official duties, lead with empathy. With listening. By releasing what information you can while fighting like hell to preserve as much privacy as the client wants.

There will be times when this balance is difficult — even impossible — to maintain. When stakeholders’ right to know will outweigh an individual’s own personal tragedy.

If that day comes, be as kind, as sensitive and as understanding as you can be.

Best wishes for a speedy recovery for Princess Catherine and all those battling cancer.

Allison Carter is editor-in-chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post Princess Catherine reveals cancer treatment after weeks of PR unrest appeared first on PR Daily.

This story has been updated to clarify that Griner has not conducted one-on-one interviews since her return. 

Securing the release of WNBA star Brittney Griner from wrongful detention in Russia was a monumental feat of politics and negotiations.

But PR also played a critical role.

“It was about screaming from the mountaintop and trying to have the public and ultimately the government and White House pay attention to us, because we knew that without the government support and the support of the White House, she probably wasn’t going to come home,” Calder Hynes told PR Daily. Hynes is senior vice president of global communications at Wasserman, the sports and entertainment talent agency that has represented Griner for years.

Wasserman coordinated efforts to release Griner from her nearly 10-month imprisonment in Russia, a massive undertaking that required working with not only the government, international attorneys and hostage experts, but also the WNBA, USA Basketball and the court of public opinion.

In an interview with PR Daily, Hynes and Griner’s longtime agent Lindsay Kagawa Colas revealed how they worked to first keep the incident quiet – and then how to ensure every American viewed Griner as their sister, daughter or neighbor.

This story was in part developed based on reporting from “Inside Brittney Griner’s Russia arrest, detainment and release,” written by ESPN’s T.J. Quinn, for details around Griner’s arrest and detention. All quotes with Kagawa Colas and Hynes are from interviews with PR Daily.

An early morning call and an international incident

Kagawa Colas was awakened early one morning by a call from a colleague. There was a problem. The information they had was slim, just a text from Griner’s wife, Cherelle, that the basketball star had been arrested as she returned to Russia to kick off her play with UMMC Ekaterinburg due to her possession of two marijuana vape cartridges.

Brittney Griner and Lindsay Kagawa Colas after Griner’s release from Russian detention. Photo provided by Wasserman.

At first, this was just another problem to solve. A day in the life of a sports agent.

“We were still hoping that this was going to be a sports diplomacy issue that could be solved,” Kagawa Colas told PR Daily. “Some misunderstanding. She has a prescription for this medically prescribed cannabis oil. I’m sure we can figure this out.”

“The initial (PR) approach was, let’s try to keep this out of public knowledge. Move past it,” Hynes recalled.

But the timing meant that this would be more than a minor drug bust. Griner was detained on Feb. 17, 2022.

One week later, Russia invaded Ukraine.

From quiet to loud

For more than two weeks, few people outside Griner’s immediate circle knew of her detention. But on March 5, Russia itself broke the news of her detention, forcing her team’s hand.

“That was one of those early signals that she was a political pawn,” Kagawa Colas said. “And they were going to start using this as a negotiation.”

That began a new, cautious phase of efforts. The team wanted to correct misinformation and advocate for Griner, but they didn’t want to exacerbate the situation unnecessarily.

“It was more about being factual, trying to provide the public and the press with what they needed, keep them close, while at the same time not trying to go out there with an agenda or pushback about why she’s there, or why she isn’t, or what the treatment is in regards to her safety,” Hynes said. “We couldn’t really start a back and forth with the Russian government.”

But the months of Griner’s confinement dragged on. By August, she had been sentenced to a staggering nine years’ incarceration. By November, she was transferred to a Russian labor camp, where she was tasked with carrying bolts of cloth — she was too tall to perform the sewing other women did — and breaking ice. The cold weather required her to cut her trademark locs after they kept freezing.

At home, the campaign to bring her home began to ramp up.

“Early, it was ‘be quiet,’” Kagawa Colas remembered. “‘Let’s not raise her value. Let’s see if we can resolve this quietly.’ Then it was, ‘if we want to keep her visible and make sure she’s a priority at the White House, how do we do that without compromising the White House and compromising the negotiation?’”

One issue — and opportunity — was Griner’s identity. She is Black. She is a lesbian. She presents in ways that are gender-nonconforming. That allowed Biden’s political opponents to turn her into a wedge issue to strike at the president, with the fires further stoked by Russian-backed bots on social media. The more controversy around her, the more she could be used as a pawn by Vladimir Putin and his regime. But the team had to speak up. The time for silence had passed.

“How do we simultaneously decrease her value in a trade to make a trade easier, while also ensuring she’s a priority? That is a needle to thread,” Kagawa Colas said.

The answer was a campaign that emphasized unity.

‘BG is for everybody’

The Wasserman team decided that Griner’s multi-layered identity was an asset, not a liability.

“Maybe you can’t see yourself in Brittney Griner, but we’re going to tell you why you actually can,” Kagawa Colas said. In the PR campaign, they emphasized that Griner is the daughter of a veteran and a former law enforcement officer. Her favorite holiday is the Fourth of July. She’s an American hero, having won two Olympic gold medals for her country.

But her Blackness and her sexuality were not avoided either. The Wasserman team said these were obvious reasons that she was detained. As a result, Black women in media became some of the most valuable and powerful voices in the campaign.

“They intimately understood the story,” Hynes said. “And they understood the challenges more easily. They were much more understanding and open to covering the story with a little bit more of a personal connection. But more than anything, we didn’t need to go through all the explanation to them about the lesson. The whys of all this.”

And some did use Griner’s identity to tear her down or even say she should remain in Russia. But the Wasserman team tried to stay above the fray, pointing out that Griner has rights as an American and if you believe in those rights, you should be advocating for her.

The other challenge was that Griner, locked up in Russia, could not speak for herself. She needed advocates. One of those was Kagawa Colas. The other key player was Cherelle Griner, Brittney’s wife.

“Cherelle was just an average American person, had not been a public figure, had not been in the limelight, had not done any media and not really engaged,” Hynes said. “And we were all of a sudden asking her to do an interview on ‘Good Morning America’ with Robin Roberts.”

The Wasserman team helped with media training, giving Cherelle the tools she needed as quickly as possible to succeed in a difficult role. From looking the part to telling her emotional story clearly, she got a crash course — and succeeded.

“Talk about a person who has the utmost strength in all this,” Hynes said. “Cherelle just really delivered.”

Beyond the media relations, there were rallies and events in Arizona, where Griner still plays with the Phoenix Mercury WNBA team, and partnerships with the NBA. Every measure was meant to ensure that attention stayed on Griner and the public remained invested in the effort to bring her home. #WeAreBG was used as a rallying hashtag to encourage others to advocate for and see themselves in Griner, used by both regular people and celebrities like NBA star Carmelo Anthony to keep her name in the news.

 

View this post on Instagram

 

A post shared by Carmelo Anthony (@carmeloanthony)

And then in December, nearly 10 months after Griner was stopped at customs in Moscow, officials reached a deal. Her freedom was secured in exchange for Viktor Bout, a Russian arms dealer serving a federal prison sentence.

Freedom

When Griner was returned to the United States and reunited with her wife, the team took a moment to celebrate.

“It was overwhelming. It was confusion. It was excitement. It was just pure joy,” Hynes said. “I got very emotional, and I cried because I don’t think I understood how much pent-up emotion I had over this.”

But the moment of celebration was brief. There was still a great deal of work to do.

Even choosing which photo of Brittney and Cherelle reuniting would be released to the media had to be carefully orchestrated.

“We wanted to balance both the historic significance of the moment, the personal, emotional side that grounds the story, and I think they’re the most compelling,” Hynes said.

Brittney Griner reunites with her wife Cherelle after spending nearly 10 months in detention in Russia. Photo provided by Wasserman.

The military and the government were involved, necessitating time and sensitivity as Griner readjusted. But there were also hundreds of interview requests pouring in. So far, Griner has stuck to press conferences and has not yet sat for one-on-one interviews.

“We all realized very quickly that obviously getting her home was the goal, but in her larger story and for our dealing with her, if you want to put it in the context of a PR campaign, it was actually only the first phase. It’s on to this whole next chapter of Brittney’s life,” Hynes told PR Daily.

But overall, Hynes said the campaign reaffirmed his belief in the power of PR to accomplish important things.

“It was gratifying that it seemed like a true-blue PR campaign, even today, can have a really tangible impact on this really positive outcome.”

The return

Griner returned to the court for the 2023 WNBA season, where she shot a career-high 61.8% and was again named an All-Star. Her memoir, “Coming Home,” will be released later this year.

“Coming Home begins in a land where my roots developed and is the diary of my heartaches and regrets,” Griner said in a statement about the book. “But, ultimately, the book is also a story of how my family, my faith, and the support of millions who rallied for my rescue helped me endure a nightmare.”

A documentary with Disney and ESPN on her experiences is also forthcoming. And so, Kagawa Colas says, is a new emphasis on activism and helping other people who are wrongfully detained, including Paul Whelan and Evan Gershkovich.

“We’d like to think that awareness around wrongful detention has been raised,” Kagawa Colas said. “And we helped people gain a better understanding of how important it was to do whatever is necessary to get Americans home. I hope that’ll be a part of her legacy, how many people have come home in the wake of her detention and our campaign bringing her home.”

Because as Hynes pointed out, basketball is only one part of the greater arc of Griner’s life.

“(The detention) is a core part of her identity. Her whole image and persona is just shifted now and long term for her. A lot of this is about setting her up for what she wants to do when she’s ultimately done playing. Who is she gonna be?”

Allison Carter is editor-in-chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post The PR team who helped bring Brittney Griner home on how they kept her in the headlines appeared first on PR Daily.

Gabriel De La Rosa Cols is a principal at Intelligent Relations.

The recent release of a doctored photo of Princess Catherine, formerly known as Kate Middleton, and her family sparked widespread concern about the use of digital editing tools. But it also showed the ease with which conspiracy firestorms can arise from seemingly innocuous actions. 

If you haven’t heard the story, several news agencies, including the Associated Press and Reuters, recently shared a family photograph of Catherine, Princess of Wales. The photo seemed to have been intended to prevent any more speculation over her health after she went virtually missing from the public eye since her abdominal surgery two months ago. However, those news agencies later retracted the photo and reported that there was evidence of photo manipulation. 

Since then, a number of conspiracy theories have emerged about the state of the British Royal Family, Catherine’s health and pretty much anything else trolls can think of. And an apology from Princess Catherine insisting that the edits were merely the result of her own amateur efforts did nothing to stop the conspiracy storm. 

So what happened here? And what should public relations professionals do to prevent similar incidents for their clients in a time when photo manipulation and AI-generated images are making it harder to know what is real or fake? 

Loss of credibility

Clearly, media entities that are rightly focused on maintaining their credibility won’t stand for doctored images or anything else that might indicate a lack of honesty. The moment various publications realized the photo was doctored, not only did they retract it, but the photo immediately became a fantastic example of what not to do if you want a good relationship with the media. 

Even after the retractions, the image did plenty of damage: the same media entities that published the image were beset by conspiracy theorists. As a result, some media companies have watched their credibility lose ground to unscrupulous actors who just want to foment rumors. 

This should matter to us because part of our job as public relations professionals is maintaining good relationships with media entities and journalists. We’re here not only to help our clients, but also to make sure the stories we ask media personnel to promote are credible and won’t hurt their reputations. Needless to say, if we fail in that mission and it results in a similar PR fiasco because of an edited or AI-generated image or a false story, we’re going to have a very hard time convincing the same reporter or publication to view our client as a source in the future. 

Basically, we need to avoid anything that looks like a lack of transparency on our part. The problem with Princess Catherine’s picture wasn’t that an amateur photographer decided to touch up a photo. The problem was the appearance of dishonesty, and that’s something that will really hurt the public image of any brand or famous spokesperson involved. Unfortunately, these types of incidents will continue to happen as more public figures and brands place a greater emphasis on digital technologies and/or AI-generated images. 

Avoiding the firestorm

PR professionals are responsible for ensuring the authenticity of the content they send to the media on behalf of clients. Of course, you might not even be aware that your clients are using AI or editing to change images until some news station takes an issue with a photo you’ve sent over. But I think it’s fair to say that the Princess Catherine story at least gives you some leverage to open a discussion with your clients about the need to be cautious. 

For the most part, edited images or images made with AI can suggest that your client has something to hide. So even if your pictures are a bit grainy or outdated, that’s preferable to something that clearly reveals that it has been edited. 

You can also look for signs of an edited image yourself. In the case of the Princess Catherine image, there were clearly misaligned and missing objects. An AI-generated image often has smooth or blurry textures, colors, or unnatural lighting. If you discover an image has been edited or could give the impression of being edited or AI-generated, you might need to ask for a new image you can share. 

Remember, if this is a mistake a high-powered PR team meant to protect royalty from criticism can make, then it’s also a mistake any of us could fall into. If you suspect your client may have doctored a photo, make sure not to send it out to the media. And maybe sit down and discuss how recent events have shown it’s just better to be transparent from the start. Your clients will thank you in the end.

The post After the Princess Catherine photo disaster, have this conversation with your clients appeared first on PR Daily.

Two chief executives at food and beverage industry giants have recently landed themselves in the public opinion doghouse for their comments on the price of food.

WK Kellogg CEO Gary Pilnick said in a CNBC interview that his company has found success suggesting cereal as an affordable dinner. “If you think about the cost of cereal for a family versus what they otherwise might do, it’s going to be much more affordable,” Pilnick said. He pointed out that a bowl of cereal with fruit can cost less than $1 a bowl.

“Squawk on the Street” host Carl Quintanilla noted that that messaging might “land the wrong way,” though Pilnick quickly waved that away. “It’s actually landing really well right now,” he said.

That quickly changed.

Many news headlines compared Pilnick’s statements to “let them eat cake,” a flippant phrase wrongly attributed to Marie Antoinette. Users on forums like Reddit pointed out that cereal is no longer affordable, often clocking in at $6 a box for name-brand varieties like Kellogg’s. Additionally, cereal is not a nutritional substitute for a dinner with a protein, starch and vegetable, even if it is more affordable.

Pilnick’s ill-considered remark also smacks of former Nestlé CEO Peter Brabeck-Letmathe’s statement in the 2005 documentary “We Feed the World” that the notion of water a human right is an “extreme solution.”

Fast food chain Wendy’s also ran into internet ire when CEO Kirk Tanner said during an earnings call that the restaurants would roll out new menu boards that feature “dynamic pricing.”

It was a passing comment during a longer earnings call, but media outlets seized on the phrase and interpreted it to mean “surge pricing” — a supply-and-demand model that explains why you pay more for an Uber when it’s raining after an NFL game ends.

Customers were indignant at the idea of a Baconator jumping in price at lunch time. Wendy’s quickly walked back the remarks with a statement that read, in part: “This was misconstrued in some media reports as an intent to raise prices when demand is highest at our restaurants. We have no plans to do that and would not raise prices when our customers are visiting us most. Any features we may test in the future would be designed to benefit our customers and restaurant crew members.” The statement went on to stress that the dynamic pricing would offer discounts, not price bumps.

Let’s take a deeper look at why these CEO remarks, perhaps harmless on their face, landed so badly.

1. The moment matters.

Consumers are tired. They’ve endured years of inflation and price increases blamed on supply issues and the cost of labor. The Wall Street Journal reported that food is taking up more of the average person’s budget now than it has in 30 years, with eating taking up 11.3% of disposable income. Couple this with record-breaking rents and mortgage rates, and people’s wallets are feeling stressed.

Additionally, food costs are something we all must grapple with every day. From grocery store shelves to the drive-through, we all know what food used to cost and what it costs now. Meanwhile, food companies are reaping record profits margins as those prices grow higher and higher.

In other words, this is a uniquely terrible point in history to get cute with the price of food. People want the stability of knowing how much a Dave’s Single with Cheese costs. They don’t want to be told that a box of sugary cereal is an economically wise choice for dinner over meat and veg. Americans are already selecting less nutritious options out of concern for the cost of healthy meals.

It’s a pervasive enough problem that President Joe Biden has even slammed grocery stores for food costs.

Yes, CEOs have an obligation to make money for their companies. That’s their job. But making these comments so plainly, even in seemingly friendly arenas like CNBC, can rub salt in wounds for average consumers when they don’t also acknowledge the very real pain behind the economic choices being made today.

2. The messenger matters.

Neither Tanner nor Pilnick are average consumers.

The Guardian reported that Pilnick’s base salary is $1 million, with another $4 million in incentives. Tanner also has a base salary of $1 million, likely with additional incentives on top of that.

In other words, neither is going to be significantly impacted by changes in prices for a hamburger, nor have to eat a bowl of cereal out of financial necessity.

Messages coming from high-paid CEOs about price and thrift can come off as tone deaf. Plenty of people reading this story now have, at some point, had cereal for dinner, either because of its cost or because of its ease of preparation or both. It’s hardly a radical idea. Indeed, “Squawk Box” host Becky Quick admits in the same segment that as a busy mom, she eats cereal for dinner regularly. But it’s the tone and lifestyle of the messenger that makes the comments land so clunkily.

Kellogg’s marketing and social media posts could have made the breakfast-for-dinner point better than Pilnick could have.

3. Nuance matters in media.

The media may be greatly reduced in power from its glory days, but it can still take a PR message and turn it out of control in a matter of moments.

Simply by using the synonym “surge pricing” instead of the term “dynamic pricing” Wendy’s Tanner used, the story took on a different slant. But in the absence of more information from Wendy’s about how the program would work, it wasn’t an absurd leap for the media to make. The two terms are often used synonymously.

But because Wendy’s didn’t have more data ready to provide right away, the story spun out of its control. The narrative of paying more for a burger in peak times was cemented. The clarifying statement came late to the game, after the negative press was done, and it ended up sounding like backpedaling, even if it was their intent all along.

And the “let them eat flakes” framing that many media chose for Pilnick amplified his messaging in the most damaging light possible.

The media still has tremendous power. And in the absence of information — or in the presence of one damning quote — stories can take on lives of their own.

Be sensitive to the moment. Choose your spokespeople wisely. And be ready to respond to the media quickly and decisively.

Allison Carter is editor-in-chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post Kellogg’s, Wendy’s CEO blunders show perils of this economic moment appeared first on PR Daily.

The worst has happened: a major crisis is underway affecting your organization. This could be anything from an embarrassing social media gaffe to a physical emergency and everything in between. But now reporters are blowing up your phone, your email is even more unmanageable than usual and you’re trying to handle it all while getting smart, timely messages out to the public.

Take a deep breath. It’s going to be OK.

Nick Lanyi, a consultant with RCG and former journalist, lays out five steps to help work with the media instead of against them during your most chaotic moments.

1. You won’t have all the answers in the first hours of a crisis, or even in the first days. But you need to say that. Don’t leave reporters hanging, even if you can’t actually answer their questions. “I’m looking into that. I’ll get back to you.” “I can’t talk now, but we’ll have a statement in an hour.” These perfectly acceptable responses allow the media to know you’re on top of things, even if the situation is still unclear. “Your success in shaping the story will depend in part on keeping that conversation going, even when you need to push back or say no,” Lanyi writes.
2. Your usual media relations team probably isn’t enough to handle this storm. You may need to quickly tap agencies, consultants or commandeer other internal comms resources to stay on top of it all. Lanyi specifically recommends assigning a “traffic cop” to monitor incoming media and social media inquiries and ensure they’re handled in a timely fashion.
3. Don’t freeze anyone out. It’s an inevitability of the profession: some journalists and outlets are friendlier to your organization, and some might be a bit tougher. During a crisis, it’s tempting to only respond to the outlets that tend to be nicer to you. Lanyi recommends against only engaging with friends. “In fact, (more negative) outlets are arguably the top priority during the crisis because they can cause the most damage to your reputation,” Lanyi writes. “The resources in time and effort that you devote toward shaping negative coverage is often worth more in a crisis than generating relatively positive coverage.”
4. Schedule briefings. While responding to every request, as discussed in No. 1, is a noble goal, it’s sometimes physically impossible in a national or international crisis. That’s where mass briefings or press conferences can come to the rescue. Not only does it help get information to the broadest swath of reporters, but it also can buy you time when you get questions you don’t have answers to yet: “We’ll answer that during our briefing tomorrow.”
5. Why is planning the last step and not the first? Because the acute phase of a crisis is only the beginning. The media will likely cover your recovery or redemption arc, and shaping that narrative is just as — perhaps even more — important than what’s come before. Lay the groundwork now when you still have the media’s attention. Ask them what their next coverage steps are and how you can facilitate them.

Remember, the media isn’t out to get you. It’s out to share quality information with its audience. Help them do that, and you’ll likely find your organization’s reputation comes out looking better and better.

Read Lanyi’s full advice here.

The post 5 tips for handling media relations during a crisis appeared first on PR Daily.

Home goods retailer Wayfair laid off 1,650 employees last week, amounting to 13% of the organization’s workforce. CEO Niraj Shah said the cuts were needed given the post-pandemic economic reality the retail company faces, and that “having too many great people is worse than having too few,” reports RetailDive.

But these job cuts and even the comments from Shah merit a closer interpretation when considering his note to employees last month, telling them they needed to work harder and put in longer hours.

“Working long hours, being responsive, blending work and life, is not anything to shy away from,” he said, according to CNN. “There is not a lot of history of laziness being rewarded with success.”

Beyond the inconsistent reasoning and duplicity between Shah’s comments, the messages also highlight the importance of harmonious alignment and collaboration between different comms teams.

Let’s take a look at how comms pros can align internal best practices to avoid something like this in the future.

Executive message coaching for internal audiences

Delivering consistent executive change comms requires having your executives not only media trained for talking to external audiences, but coached by the comms team on how to properly engage internal audiences, too.

Beyond the baseline lack of empathy that employees expect from leaders in today’s workplace, this also shows a high likelihood of insufficient practice on Shah’s part. That’s not just his responsibility — it’s on the executive communications team, the employee communications and the PR team to align and ensure that the organization’s leaders have the guardrails they need to communicate effectively. Working on tone and message alignment with an internal coach would highlight leadership communications best practices such as aligning tone with the audience, demonstrating empathy with the employee experience, and general consistency of narrative.

In the weeks following these less-than-stellar comments, it’s unclear whether anyone worked with Shah to sit down and go over tips for consistent engagement and alignment of message As of this writing, Wayfair has not responded to Ragan’s request for comment.

Comms pros need to make sure they work with their leaders on delivering consistent language across multiple stakeholder sets—minimizing the likelihood of tonal shifts that require damage control after the fact. When your corporate comms and employee comms aren’t playing the same tune, the scene is set for complications and it’s time to find out why.

Combatting tone deafness

There’s a right and wrong way to handle layoffs, and while on the surface, the news that Wayfair’s affected employees will be offered severance packages combined with Shah’s newly compassionate tone toward his employees could offer a correction in tone and message.

Consider the people left behind at Wayfair after this news. Are they going to want to rally their efforts for leadership that calls them lazy in a story that’s been leaked to the media? There’s a good chance they won’t. What might have seemed like an offhand comment in an internal meeting can have lasting impacts. It’s possible that prospective employees won’t consider Wayfair as a top choice for their careers. A line that was likely intended as a motivator could become a culture-killer, all because of a lack of proper comms protocol and preparation.

This is why a vetting process for messages (or any time of pronouncement from leadership) is so necessary — keeping things consistent. Employee comms should ensure that clear, empathetic messaging reaches employees during job cuts, and corporate comms should ensure stakeholders that operations are still stable, while leadership unites these efforts. But all three of these functions need to work hand-in-hand for maximum effectiveness. If one goes off the script (which leadership seemingly did in Wayfair’s case with the CEO comments), reputation and business prospects are at risk.

Where to start when so many executives seem to go rogue and not even work with comms teams? Working proactively with your executives to develop a sound tone and cadence for posting on social media is one way, as it can train them to develop their independent voice in a way that aligns with the mission, vision and values of your brand. Big things that this can help them refine include:

• Articulating the company’s mission, vision and values in social posts featuring leadership.
• Humanizing the brand behind the organization.
• Showcasing company culture.
• Recognizing company successes.
• Responding to crises with a people-first approach.

When working with executives on aligning messages, communicators should consider who they want the executive to reach and what they want the executive to talk about first and foremost. But it’s nearly as important to humanize the executive that’s communicating.

This is achieved by molding the communication style to the personality of the leader so it seems natural, and rounding out aspects of the leader’s personality to make them more relatable to the audience. This can include sharing anecdotes about their family or personal lives that might resonate with audiences. The more leaders can relate to who their communicating with, the more likely the message is to resonate.

Addressing leaks

By taking proactive measures to engage employees and gauge sentiment early on, you can also prevent leaks from happening in the first place. Former Fleishman Hilliard vice president of CX Elizabeth Solomon shared some great tactics on how to prevent and address leaks in an organization.

At their core, leaks happen when an employee is discontented. This is especially true when employees feel like they don’t have a voice to speak up about their concerns. Instead of going to an internal source, they bypass them for the media because they feel they aren’t listened to. HR and comms pros should seek to empower employees to speak their minds and ask questions, as this can help root out one of the main causes behind leaks in the first place.

Organizations should also put infrastructure in place to prevent leaks. This can include putting a monitoring strategy in place for potential leaks and getting ahead of planned events (like layoffs) in which leaks might occur. Doing so can allow teams to determine where they’re agile enough to detect leaks and where they might need some help.

The process around preventing and defining leak parameters can’t just fall on legal. It should instead be a collaborative effort with proactive parameters and established consequences that are clear to all.

Proper comms is an intricate balancing act — particularly during trying times like a layoff. Comms pros need to be sure that all teams are aligned properly, and that employee sentiment is gauged, to ensure everything goes as well as possible during a tough situation.

Sean Devlin is an editor at Ragan Communications. In his spare time he enjoys Philly sports, a good pint and ’90s trivia night.

The post What you can learn from Wayfair’s layoff communications appeared first on PR Daily.

We’ve all seen the picture by now, the gaping hole in the side of an Alaska Airlines plane, passengers seated nearby, their oxygen masks dangling. Anyone who’s flown before can imagine what it must have felt like if we were sitting there, the terror, the screaming wind tearing clothes away, a frantic mother struggling to hold her child in place.  

Boeing President and CEO Dave Calhoun has seen that picture too. The first time he viewed it, he said he didn’t know what had happened to the person who had been in that seat. “I got kids, I got grandkids and so do you,” Calhoun said through tears in an all-hands meeting. “This stuff matters.”  

Thankfully, the plane stayed in the sky and no one was killed. But the incident is bringing intense scrutiny to Boeing, the manufacturer of the 737 Max 9 jet. Inspections of all Max 9s have subsequently revealed bolts in the door plug in need of tightening. There will doubtless be many engineering and manufacturing challenges in the days ahead. Legal and legislative consequences loom too.  

But how has Boeing communicated about this disaster, coming just years after crashes on other 737 Max plane models left more than 300 dead? There are lessons here for all communicators facing their own crises. 

A strong website 

Visitors to Boeing.com are immediately greeted with the information they came to see: “Updates on Alaska Airlines Flight 1282 and the 737-9,” the banner in the hero spot on the homepage reads. The company understands that right now, people probably aren’t looking for its sustainability pledge. Rather than pretend one can hide from this massive news event, the information people truly want is instantly accessible. 

Upon clicking on that page, users are first shown a 4-minute clip of Calhoun’s address to Boeing employees. We’ll address Calhoun’s role in crisis response below, but leading with a strong, empathetic message that takes responsibility for the disaster and puts a human face on the incident certainly helps matters. 

From there, the page offers a reverse-chronological listing of all statements from Boeing since the day it began. This layout makes life easier for their surely overwhelmed comms department: all the statements are published there, with clear attribution, ready for journalists to pull for themselves and incorporate into their reporting. 

Seeing the evolution of statements in real-time is an incredibly helpful tool for communicators. It begins with barebones, terse statements in which no real information was available: “We are aware of the incident involving Alaska Airlines Flight 1282. We are working to gather more information and are in contact with our airline customer. A Boeing technical team stands ready to support the investigation.” 

As time progressed and the situation became clear, the statements showed more details. Their statement dated Jan. 15 outlines five specific actions the group is taking throughout the company to “strengthen quality” after the inspections. The points are easy to understand, even though they’re discussing an intensely technical topic. 

One other strength of this website strategy is in making internal conversations external. Many of the statements on the website specify that they began as emails sent to Boeing employees, or like Calhoun’s address at the top of the page, took place during meetings. This approach to mixternal communications both saves time and shows that Boeing is telling one story to everyone: what happened isn’t OK. They must do better. And they can only do that together. 

CEO out front 

Beyond unattributed statements, Calhoun has acted as the primary face and voice of Boeing through this crisis. While some statements in the newsroom are attributed to Boeing Commercial Airplanes President and CEO Stan Deal, Calhoun appears at the top of the newsroom. He also appeared in an in-person interview with CNBC – almost certainly a move to calm a skittish stock market and buyers.  

In his CNBC interview, Calhoun repeats the same story about his reaction to seeing the photo of the hole in the Alaska Airlines craft, with the same upwelling of emotion, which may be out of place on a business-focused program. But he quickly got down to brass tacks. 

When asked what happened, Calhoun responded bluntly, with short, simple sentences that took clear ownership: “Well, what happened is exactly what you saw, a fuselage plug blew out. That’s the mistake. It can never happen. We’re not allowed that to happen.” 

He tried to spin the inspection as a positive, noting that the data they gain will help determine Boeing’s next actions. Throughout, he repeated that this can “never happen again,” and emphasized that Boeing will take all the time it needs to fix this problem. 

Calhoun comes across as credible, taking responsibility for the problem and working to fix it. Boeing’s newsroom and statements show seriousness and transparency. But will any of that be enough in the face of yet another life-threatening crisis?  

Learn more about navigating complex challenges like these at Ragan’s Public Affairs & Speechwriting Virtual Conference  on Wednesday, February 21, 2024 11 a.m.-3:30 p.m. ET.

Allison Carter is editor-in-chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post How Boeing has communicated about 737 Max 9 disaster appeared first on PR Daily.

This story was originally published on Oct. 10, 2023. We’re republishing it as part of our countdown of top stories of the year. 

This past weekend the Palestinian militant group Hamas attacked Israel, the latest escalation in a conflict that’s led to the deaths of more than 1,500 Israelis and Palestinians in just a few short days.  Organizations around the world have been grappling with how to issue statements addressing the war—and whether to say anything at all. 

Many have taken a quiet, wait-and-see approach. Others have addressed only logistical challenges in the regions or statements of support for their employees in the region. And a small number have voiced vocal support for Israel and condemnation of the attacks. 

Here are some of the responses. 

Logistics and employees 

Some organizations with operations in the Middle East have issued statements that say little about the conflict itself, focusing instead on how their business is impacted. 

For instance, many major airlines have suspended flights in and out of Tel Aviv. Their statements are simple, fact-based  updates on the situation for passengers, as the AP reported. UPS issued a similarly operations-focused statement on parcel delivery.  

Delta CEO Ed Bastian went farther,  using LinkedIn to share updates on the airlines’ decision to cancel flights in and out of Tel Aviv through the end of October while reiterating its efforts to repatriate Americans stranded in Israel. Then the post turns more personal, recalling an anti-hate Town Hall held earlier this year.  

“Rabbi (Larry) Sernovitz reminded us of a beautiful saying, ‘Because I see you, I have an obligation to you.’ We all have an obligation to one another during this difficult time and it’s crucial that we come together to deepen our understanding and care for each other. Our hearts are with everyone impacted by these tragic events.” 

Other statements also straddled the line between expressing either sympathy or support for affected stakeholders while also giving updates on events in the region, such as Nvidia’s cancellation of its upcoming AI Summit in Tel Aviv.  

“Our hearts go out to all those affected by the situation,” the statement reads, in part, while skimming over what “the situation” is. “The safety and wellbeing of our participants are our top priority, and we believe this is the best course of action to ensure everyone’s safety.” 

CEOs tie responses back to corporate values 

Some companies relied on more personal statements from CEOs in the form of memos or posts on LinkedIn over broad corporate releases.

CNN obtained several memos from the leaders of international companies with employees in the area that leaned more into the human angle. 

“This past weekend’s attack on Israel and its people and the resulting war and bloodshed are a terrible tragedy,” JPMorgan Chase CEO Jamie Dimon wrote in a memo. “We stand with our employees, their families and the people of Israel during this time of great suffering and loss.” 

 Dimon’s memo also went farther, extending prayers and offering an explicit call for peace. “The human cost of wars and terrorism are enormous, with too many lives lost and changed forever,” he continued. “We join together in our hope to one day see the end of violence and for there to be peace throughout the Middle East.” 

Goldman Sachs CEO David Solomon sent a similar memo, also obtained by CNN. ““All of us at Goldman Sachs are thinking of you and your families in the face of this shocking aggression directed at the people of Israel,” he wrote “The dynamics in the Middle East have always been difficult and complex. But, these attacks are terrorism and violate our most fundamental of values.” 

Both CEOs emphasized that all employees in the area were safe and that the offices would operate as work-from-home for the foreseeable future. 

Pfizer CEO and Chairman Albert Bourla shared his own memo to Israeli colleagues on Linkedin. 

“At Pfizer, we are committed to protecting and saving lives, and dedicated to the health and well-being of people around the world,” his LinkedIn post read, with the ideas echoed in the memo. “Actions that are geared towards inflicting bloodshed, harm and death are antithetical to our work and to our values. “ 

Jonas Prising, chairman and CEO of Fortune 500 staffing company ManpowerGroup, was unequivocal in his public LinkedIn statement.  

“We stand firmly behind Israel, where we have operated for more than 60 years, and its people. We are learning of the direct and tragic impact on our colleagues, and our leaders and teams on the ground are working tirelessly to provide support. The safety and well-being of our team and their families are our top concern, and we know the uncertainty of the coming days will be very challenging for all. 

Corporate shows of support 

Other organizations showed support for Israel and condemnation of the terrorist attacks through a variety of mediums—from social media to light shows. 

In New York City, the Empire State Building lit up in in blue and white to show solidarity, while American Eagle turned its billboard into the Israeli flag. 

Tonight from 10-11PM the Empire State Building will shine in the colors of the Israeli flag pic.twitter.com/1yU4HDbSVA

— Empire State Building (@EmpireStateBldg) October 7, 2023

Some companies offered brief, simple messages.  

But others were more impassioned. 

The major U.S. sports leagues shared similar statements, down to their black backgrounds. 

pic.twitter.com/N3acvFr2A2

— NFL (@NFL) October 9, 2023

pic.twitter.com/caMWxl0R0E

— MLB (@MLB) October 9, 2023

pic.twitter.com/mNByBXlf0E

— Major League Soccer (@MLS) October 9, 2023

The U.S. Chamber of Commerce not only condemned the violence, but also outlined its concrete actions for helping – a rare move so far.  

And many more organizations chose to remain silent, either because they are not directly involved in the region, have no official stance or simply do not see a need. 

We’ll continue to cover the response to this ongoing tragedy.  

Allison Carter is executive editor of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post Top stories of 2023: Statements and social media posts from global companies on Israel appeared first on PR Daily.

This story was originally published on Oct. 16, 2023. We’re republishing it as part of our countdown of top stories of the year. 

Nearly a week later, organizations of all descriptions are still struggling to find words to respond to the unfolding tragedy in Israel and Palestine.

Universities find themselves in a unique position. As academic and community centers, many have an obligation to offer empathy and clarity in an uncertain time. As leaders of diverse groups of students and faculty, they must balance safety, free speech and support. 

And sometimes all those competing interests can fall apart and create a communications crisis. 

The current poster child for these difficulties is Harvard University. The prestigious school is facing criticism on two fronts: its delay in issuing a statement condemning Hamas’ attacks on Israeli civilians and their slowness in responding to a controversial letter from student groups that blamed Israel for the attacks.  

PR Daily sat down with Sandy Lish, principal and co-founder of The Castle Group and an expert in higher education crisis response. She shared her thoughts on Harvard’s delayed response, potential paths to recovery and which universities handled the situation with more grace. 

‘A communications failure’ 

Lish minced no words when it comes to how Harvard handled — or failed to handle — its response to the attacks. 

“It’s fascinating to watch an institution like Harvard that has all the resources in the world have the biggest blunder,” she said.  “It’s astonishing, really, because there’s no reason for it.” 

Its biggest mistake, in her opinion, was not keeping it simple in the initial response. 

“This was, first and foremost, a terrorist attack that needed to be called what it is, decried for what it is,” Lish said. “Every institution of higher learning every corporation, every company, has diverging opinions on the geopolitical issues. That’s just a fact. But conflating all of that into one message is where the problem was.” 

A statement issued on Monday, Oct. 9 and signed by Harvard President Claudine Gay and other school leaders reads, in part: “We write to you today heartbroken by the death and destruction unleashed by the attack by Hamas that targeted citizens in Israel this weekend, and by the war in Israel and Gaza now under way.”

For Lish, this message reads as a failure of “groupthink” watering down and complicating what should be simple messages. The best way to mitigate, she said, it is through a strong crisis comms playbook that is put into place well before it’s needed. It keeps heads cooler and helps to reduce the urge to please everyone in a single statement. 

Lish doesn’t fault Harvard for the timing of its initial statement, which came two days after the attack on Israeli civilians. If waiting another day would have yielded a better statement, she would have urged that. But a crisis playbook likely would have sped up response time, she said. 

But timing became a factor because there was another curveball at play: a letter signed by student groups blaming Israel, not Hamas, for the terrorist attacks. 

The letter 

The open letter was published over the weekend by a coalition of student groups and faced intense blowback from politicians, the business community and even a former president of Harvard. 

But Harvard did not respond to the letter until Tuesday, the day after its initial response to the attacks in general. 

A statement signed only by President Gay read: 

“As the events of recent days continue to reverberate, let there be no doubt that I condemn the terrorist atrocities perpetrated by Hamas. Such inhumanity is abhorrent, whatever one’s individual views of the origins of longstanding conflicts in the region. 

Let me also state, on this matter as on others, that while our students have the right to speak for themselves, no student group — not even 30 student groups — speaks for Harvard University or its leadership.” 

That response left Lish baffled. 

“Why not say that right out of the gate? Why not?” she questioned. In her view, these simple, clear statements would have been better placed in the first response. 

But some universities did get it right — in very similar circumstances to Harvard’s. 

‘The moral high ground’ 

While Lish made it clear she hasn’t read every statement out there, she did point to positive examples, too. 

In a statement Wednesday, University of Arizona President Robert C. Robbins issued a statement that addressed both the attacks and a planned campus protest by a group that endorsed Hamas’ actions: 

“As a public university, we have both the obligation and the opportunity to support and defend free speech and open dialogue. We recognize that the First Amendment protects speech and demonstrations, even for ideas and opinions that most find objectionable or hateful. 

I want to be clear that SJP is not speaking on behalf of our university. But they have the constitutional right to hold their views and to express them in a safe environment.” 

Lish praised Robbins’ restatement of university values, as well as his ability to balance students’ right to free speech at a public college with clarity about the institution’s stance. 

“It just felt like he really took the moral high ground, but he did not try to equivocate,” Lish said. 

Where Harvard goes next 

Harvard is now in full-fledged crisis mode — and as Lish points out, there’s no “quick fix” for this. 

This is a moment for Gay, who stepped into her position as president earlier this year, to step up. 

“She has an opportunity to lead and say, ‘this is what we stand for as an institution,’” Lish said. “’Our people need to feel safe. We decry terrorism. We support free speech. How do we heal as a community?’ Listen to people. Take feedback.” 

Allison Carter is executive editor of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post Top stories of 2023: Crisis communications lessons from Harvard’s response to attack in Israel appeared first on PR Daily.

America is at a political and cultural crossroads. 

While this statement has technically been true since at least 2016, many of the threads that have divided the nation seem set to come to a head in 2024.  

The U.S. presidential election will be a major flashpoint at which voters will need to consider where they stand on issues ranging from wars in the Middle East and Ukraine to an uncertain relationship with China, the rising volatility of a changing climate and a variety of culture wars centered around identity. 

Gravity Research surveyed top communications executives from Fortune 1,000 companies to better understand which of these issues most concern them in the year ahead. All together, the data paints a picture of a fractured nation — and a worried corporate sector. 

The DE&I concern

The biggest foreseeable event of the next year is certain to be the U.S. presidential election, the first since insurrectionists stormed the capital to protest the certification of current President Joe Biden.  

But the campaign process itself is likely to bring some level of risk to companies and their initiatives. 

The biggest election-related concern by far relates to its potential impact on affirmative action, DE&I and equity initiatives, with a full 88% at least moderately concerned about this impact. Of course, this plays out against the backdrop of the Supreme Court case that all but ended race-conscious admissions at universities and saber rattling from GOP attorneys general toward companies engaged in the practice. 

But this should not be interpreted as companies panicking or abandoning DE&I efforts. In a subsequent question, Gravity asked what specific actions companies had taken in the wake of the decision. Majorities of both B2B and B2C companies responded that at the moment, they’re in a wait-and-see holding pattern, likely until trial cases like that against the Fearless Fund, which gives grants to Black female entrepreneurs, are decided.  

Some companies are taking steps, such as building hiring pipelines with HBCUs in order to improve diverse hiring without running afoul of courts and legislators. Others are “de-risking,” as Gravity President Luke Hartig puts it, or revising existing programs and materials to achieve the same end goals with different language.  

Finally, in the wake of the Israel-Hamas conflict, the definition of DE&I is expanding and refocusing on other areas, including religious inclusion.  

Foreign issues resonate at home 

World events have taken center stage in the United States. According to Hartig, Israel-Hamas remains a white-hot issue with Ukraine simmering amid concerns about whether the United States will continue funding the nation in its war against Russia. But in the background are concerns over China, especially around human rights issues and potential economic decoupling from the nation. However, Hartig stressed that the China concerns are in the background — but still present. 

“(Companies) figured out a mode or a process for China issues,” Hartig said. “And they haven’t necessarily figured that out yet on these other geopolitical issues.” 

One other wild card lies ahead for 2024: the Summer Olympics, which will be held in Paris. We can expect some level of athlete protests on any number of issues — something that may complicate the plans of the corporations that sponsor both the games and specific athletes.  

Climate change: Caught between a rock and a hard place 

One of the most challenging issues for companies to navigate is climate change. On the one hand, progressive politicians and activists are pushing for accountability on climate pledges. On the other, conservative politicians and activists are fighting against the very concept of ESG. 

The data shows an interesting split between concerns for B2B and B2C companies. B2B companies are especially worried about outside critiques by activists over a lack of progress toward goals, while B2C companies, which are more likely to be household names, are worried about being hit by the GOP or shareholders.  

Undoubtedly, 2024 will hold challenges and curveballs for communicators — and for the nation as a whole. Rest up; we’re in for quite a year. 

Allison Carter is editor-in-chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post By the numbers: What worries PR leaders most about the year ahead appeared first on PR Daily.

Chris Harihar is executive vice president at Crenshaw Communications, a Mod Op company.

On Friday, OpenAI announced it had fired well-liked CEO Sam Altman, upending the AI industry. This decision, driven by some still-vague AI governance concerns from the nonprofit board, alongside Altman’s for-profit commercialization push, led to a weekend-long saga. Microsoft and other OpenAI investors even tried to influence the board to reconsider and reinstate Altman. Somehow, though, it’s now Monday and Emmett Shear, ex-Twitch CEO, is now CEO of OpenAI.

From a PR perspective, this is a textbook example of how not to do a Friday news dump. In fact, given how it unfolded and how it continues to play out, it could be considered the worst Friday news dump in tech history.

For the uninitiated, a Friday news dump is a PR tactic that tries to blunt the impact of a negative story by releasing it when people are less focused on news and when reporters are less likely to cover it – i.e., late Friday, ahead of a weekend. This past weekend was especially ripe for a news dump with Thanksgiving around the corner and many journalists already out of the office.

But what did OpenAI do wrong, exactly? Friday news dumps can honestly be pretty effective, though this wasn’t.

Here are some of the basic things they botched, along with key lessons for companies considering dropping their own Friday news dump announcements in the future.

No transparency, few details

The Altman announcement was a shocker. Outside of TikTok, OpenAI is the fastest-growing company in tech, and is at the forefront of the generative AI movement through ChatGPT and DALL-E. It has a major partnership in place with Microsoft. To many, OpenAI is synonymous with the AI category. Altman’s well-regarded leadership has also made him the face of the AI movement. Beyond that, in less than a year, Altman and OpenAI have fundamentally changed how we work, at least as PR people. All of this heightened the shock of the news and the abrupt announcement raised inevitable and obvious questions. Unfortunately, OpenAI’s vague statement about Altman being fired for not being “consistently candid in his communications with the board” only added to the mystery. The lack of information, alongside the backdrop of OpenAI’s achievements over the last year, fueled speculation and uncertainty.

Poor planning

Altman’s dismissal appeared to be a very last-minute call. The sequence of events, especially with Altman actively representing OpenAI at public events earlier in the week, suggested the decision was made late in the same week. Additionally, a timeline emerged where Greg Brockman, an Altman supporter and OpenAI’s president and board chairman, reportedly learned about the decision just minutes before it was made and abruptly resigned. Even key partners like Microsoft were informed almost simultaneously with the public announcement. The poor PR management cast doubt on the entire OpenAI board and their ability to manage the business. If you can’t get a press announcement’s basics right, will you be a good steward of the company?

Bad consistency

Adding to the confusion, OpenAI’s COO Brad Lightcap made a statement on Saturday that did not align with the board’s earlier message. He mentioned, “the board’s decision was not made in response to malfeasance or anything related to our financial, business, safety, or security/privacy practices.” This seemed at odds with the reasons implied in the initial announcement, leading to more questions and clouding the situation further. If you’re going to dump news on a Friday, the subsequent communications have to be consistent with your initial statement to the market. Anything that deviates or seems misaligned will only create more questions and headaches for all those involved.

No allies or advocates

A crucial aspect of handling a Friday news dump successfully is having a network of allies prepared to support your POV if things linger or go sideways on social media and in off-the-record reporter interactions. Altman, with little notice, did this extremely well. Tech execs like Aaron Levie of Box, Marissa Mayer, formerly of Yahoo, and Brian Cheskey of Airbnb, publicly expressed support for him (and likely lobbied behind the scenes). This advocates network played a key role in shaping the public and media’s perception of the situation. In contrast, OpenAI’s lack of a similar strategy left a gap in the story. Without influential voices to offer balancing perspectives or support, the company missed an opportunity to manage the story’s direction and impact.

Ultimately, a Friday news dump can be an effective PR tactic. But, you have to do it the right way. In this instance, OpenAI missed key steps and paid the price. A statement by OpenAI’s new CEO Emmett Shear, I think, says it best: “It’s clear that the process and communications around Sam’s removal has been handled very badly, which has seriously damaged our trust.” Clearly, he understands that the process made the actual decision seem much worse.

The post Lessons from OpenAI’s botched Friday news dump appeared first on PR Daily.

In today’s world, communicators must be prepared for all sorts of crises, whether they’re directly related to company operations or part of our larger society.

With the news of the ICBC cybersecurity attack that disrupted treasury trading last week, it’s a prime time for communicators to consider the plans they have in place to prepare for cybersecurity issues.

To gain a clearer perspective, we spoke with several seasoned communications professionals about how to prepare the right type of communication ahead of an attack, what to do after one, and the advice they’d give communicators who are navigating through cybersecurity crises.

Adjusting the general crisis plan

Comms leads should have a crisis communication plan in place that they’ve either drafted, modified or otherwise adjusted to the current risk landscape. That’s pretty 101. But in the modern world, that crisis plan needs to account for crises that can arise from all directions, especially from cybersecurity concerns. According to a study released earlier this year by NordVPN, general awareness of cyberattacks is on the decline and only 3% of Americans are knowledgeable about digital privacy protection, and that’s something that comms pros need to contend with.

If you’re not already incorporating cybersecurity crisis comms into your general crisis plan, the time to start is now.

“Any good plan is comprehensive and well drilled,” said Catherine Hernandez Blades, senior vice president of marketing and communications at SAIC. “Preparation for cyber-attacks should be just as robust as how you prepare for what to do in the event of a physical workforce violence event, a natural disaster, or any other crisis.”

Whether the crisis is in the physical or virtual world, you need to be prepared. That’s why things like tabletop exercises are so important. These exercises should plan for many contingencies, as you can never be quite sure of what form an attack might take.

Hernandez-Blades said that everything should be considered, including the little things.

“For example, what if you’re the victim of a ransomware attack by a bad state actor? Does your usual war room team include access to translation services in case the ransom note is written in a foreign language? Plan for every contingency down to the smallest detail while never losing sight of the bigger picture.”

Leadership and partner buy-in

If proper crisis planning is the first step towards preparation for a potential cybersecurity attack, getting leadership on board with the plan comes next.

You can plan by partnering with the right leaders from the outset.

“Engage leadership and create a plan – it’s not a matter of ’if’ but ’when’ in today’s digital economy,” said Kevin Dinino, founder and president of KCD PR. “Communicators need to pair themselves closely with CISO/CSOs to be aligned on how to address technical concerns and the communications process to follow.”

An often-underestimated part of the crisis plan involves going outside the walls of the organization. Be aware of anyone with access to the organization’s IT systems and ensure that the message gets to them as well.

“It’s imperative that all third-party vendors and anyone with access to company systems and networks undergo an extensive review of systems and protocols to test and identify any vulnerabilities,” Dinino continued.

“Not enough companies go through this testing and recent cyberattacks illustrate how third-party vendors often are overlooked but have access to company data and networks.”

Keeping things moving in the wake of an attack 

Preparation is key, but sometimes cyberattacks happen. It’s critical that communicators know what to do to keep comms on message if an attack does occur.

This means amplifying the responsibilities of both internal and external communicators to right the ship and maintain order.

“Internal communications team plays a critical role in instilling confidence in employees that the company is well prepared and able to mitigate the impact of a breach,” said Katarina Matic, global senior director at Montieth & Company.

Internal comms doesn’t stop at relaying the news to employees, either  — it also goes a long way toward setting the mixternal strategy on the right path.

“(Internal comms) plays a pivotal role in informing the external communications strategy and shaping the communication with and the perception of external stakeholders, clients, partners, government, and investors,” Matic added.

Though it might take a little while to get things back on track, communicators can keep stakeholders calm in the interim.

“The reality is that it won’t be business as usual for a period of time,” Dinino said.

“Our job as communicators is to address this with key audiences to focus on how the breach was addressed and what functions need to be serviced to ensure stakeholder retention and that reputational damages are minimized.”

Maintaining a voice at the table

Communicators often pine for a steady seat at the executive decision-making table. Cyberattacks offer an important inflection point for attaining and maintaining that seat,  as you can demonstrate the reputational value of the function by providing a holistic perspective on the path forward after an attack.

“We in communications are in the unique position of having access to a tremendous amount of external and internal information, which we need to do our jobs,” Hernandez-Blades said.

“We peek around corners for visibility into emerging issues. We are the function that exists to truly collaborate across the matrix for the purpose of synthesizing and disseminating information.”

Even with this important role, not all organizations prioritize crisis comms. It’s your job to work toward changing that by providing tangible scenarios to leadership.

“Communicators, both internal and external, need to present concerns in the context of potential repercussions and the real impact those repercussions can have,” Matic said.

Sean Devlin is an editor at Ragan Communications. In his spare time he enjoys Philly sports, a good pint and ’90s trivia night.

The post How communicators can navigate through cybersecurity crises appeared first on PR Daily.

More than 260 major companies have addressed the ongoing war between Israel and Hamas in some way as of Oct. 30, according to Gravity Research.  

But the research shows that how and when these organizations have “engaged” (in Gravity’s words) with the ongoing conflict has varied widely. 

When Gravity says a company has “engaged” on the Israel-Hamas issue, this can mean a broad range of either internal or external communications, including public statements including social media, internal memos or initiatives and so on.  

The vast majority of the statements were issued in the first week after the initial Oct. 7 attack by Hamas on Israel. The speediest and most voluminous responses came from organizations with significant operations or employees in the region — 52% of all the communications studied came from organizations with employees in Israel. 

Especially in that first week, statements leaned heavily toward expressing support for the Israeli people and standing against antisemitism, Gravity found. But Luke Hartig, president of Gravity, said that when it came to those early statements, specificity won out over generic messaging. 

“That general expression of concerns about the conflict without getting specific generally was not a winning message,” he told PR Daily. “And I think people were looking for them to at least condemn a terrorist attack and at least say something about the victims.” 

However, as the situation has continued to evolve, that language is beginning to shift. After a blast devastated a hospital in Gaza and Israel began to take more military action, companies put out statements that referenced the humanitarian crisis and called for peace in the region. Still, as of Oct. 27, only about 20% of all statements referenced the humanitarian crisis in Gaza.  

Hartig points to Google as an example of how statements have evolved over the course of the conflict. Alphabet CEO Sundar Pichai sent an email to Googlers the day of the initial terrorist attack, focused mostly on the company’s employees in the region and the search engine and YouTube response to misinformation. Ten days later, Pichai issued a public statement that explicitly addressed both antisemitism and Islamophobia and outlined donation plans to groups connected to both Israel and Palestine.  

This also made Google one of just 10% of companies who have responded more than once to the conflict.  

Messengers and donations 

Gravity found that discussing the war was also addressed by several CEOs on recent Q3 earnings calls, with 28 chief executives from Fortune 500 companies mentioning the conflict, though only three directly addressed the business impacts. 

And indeed, CEOs were the most common messenger for communicating about the conflict. Gravity’s research found that 55% of all internal and external statements were delivered under the name of the CEO rather than other officers or more generic statements, adding a human touch to the tragedy. 

Some organizations are also making donations to organizations in the region. Seventy-eight of the organizations Gravity looked at offered financial aid — most popularly to American Friends of Magen David Adom, which is Israel’s organization linked to the International Red Cross. Interestingly, some organizations declined to identify which group would receive their funds. 

Gravity also found that a disproportionate quantity of donations (40%) came from financial and professional services firms. While it’s hard to say why exactly this is, Hartig believes it’s connected to the high number of financial firms with operations in Israel, as well as their prevalence in New York, home to a large Jewish population.  

Hartig noted another geographic trend, though this is based more on anecdotes than data: American employees and audiences often view the conflict quite differently than those in other countries. Specifically, he said there is more concern in areas of Europe and the Middle East for Palestinians than in the United States. 

“I think what that actually means for a company is just that, if you’re making a statement, there’s probably a need to say a little bit more about Palestinian suffering and the humanitarian situation there,” Hartig said.  

The shadow of Ukraine 

A plethora of religious and geopolitical complications make this conflict more fraught than others in recent memory. But many are drawing direct comparisons to how companies responded to Russia’s attack on Ukraine and crying hypocrisy, though there are significant difference between the conflicts. 

“I don’t know how you fully get around that,” Hartig said. “It seems like that’s going to be a case, regardless of what position you take, because you’re always going to have to find some incident that you didn’t engage on. I do know, when I talk to my clients, it’s a big concern for them. And it’s something that they consistently hear from employees, and it’s something that employees are raising to CEOs and such.” 

The bottom line is that people are closely watching this conflict and how organizations respond. As the situation seems primed to drag on indefinitely, keep listening. Be ready to respond when needed.  

Allison Carter is editor-in-chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post This is how many major companies have commented on Israel-Hamas war appeared first on PR Daily.

Sometimes as communicators, you may put out a statement that misses the mark. Or maybe your executives never asked communications for help and they got it wrong. Now it’s your mess to clean up.  

This challenge has been a recurring one for many communicators in recent weeks as organizations scrambled to respond to the war between Israel and Hamas.  

For instance, PRSA-NY issued an initial statement on the violence, followed by an apology, then a clarification. Now-former Web Conference CEO Paddy Cosgrave apologized after his controversial comments on the war — but later resigned anyway as major sponsors pulled out of the conference over his initial remarks.  

Apologies are a delicate art. Admitting when you’re wrong might help fix strained relationships — but can also extend the life cycle of a story and keep reminding people of your first misstep. And if not handled with care, they can end up making things much, much worse. 

We spoke to Eliot Hoff, global crisis practice lead for APCO Worldwide, about when and how to say you’re sorry. 

The risks of apologizing 

As to the apologies surrounding initial statements about the Israel-Hamas was, Hoff doesn’t think most of these have been successful in repairing the narrative. For one thing, your first statement is likely to be your stickiest. Any attempt at apology after may only remind audiences of their anger, and even the apology may strike the wrong chord.  

Hoff pointed to the conversations happening on college campuses, where some institutions either delayed making initial statements or made statements some constituents didn’t feel were strong enough or specific enough to satisfy.  

“What was said first has created the entire tone of the response and while anything said after could make a positive difference in certain instances, but it brings up what was said first,” Hoff said.  

This doubling effect underscores the importance of getting statements right the first time. Whether the statement is from the company as a whole or a leader specifically, communications must have a seat at the table. Communicators can see the blind spots, identify the areas most likely to cause backlash or even advise against a statement altogether. 

But none of that can happen if the communicator isn’t in the room when the statement is being drafted. 

Additionally, the timing for apologies is critical. Some are simply too little, too late. People are likely to evaluate an apology in the context of a situation’s present moment, not the moment when the initial statement was made. 

For instance, some organizations found themselves apologizing for statements they made in the immediate aftermath of the Hamas terrorist attack on Israel that instigated the conflict. But by the time the apology was made, the situation had significantly evolved and escalated into full-blown war. So those audiences are reliving the initial statement through the lens of the present moment rather than in the time it was made.  

“They’re thinking in the context of the situation now, and they’re creating their own understanding of what that apology really means and what you really stand for,” Hoff said. 

Silence is a statement 

Despite these risks, there are times when apologizing is appropriate. Hoff cited examples such as a faulty product or a factually incorrect statement.  

“That shows they care about their stakeholders,” Hoff said. “They are taking responsibility. They know what’s important, they’re going to fix it. That’s an apology that could be very effective.”. 

But in the context of geopolitical commentary, things get much murkier. Some organizations may think that not making a statement at all will save them from backlash — but that’s just no longer true. 

“Silence is a statement,” Hoff said simply. “(Organizations) have to be very careful about deciding to make a statement now, even if they feel it’s a balanced statement because the emotions and opinions here are raw.”  

Allison Carter is editor in chief of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post Saying sorry: The risks of apologizing after a statement goes wrong appeared first on PR Daily.

You don’t have time to create a crisis comms plan, but you also can’t afford not to.

So it’s time to sprint.

Gerard Braud, president of Braud Communications and a crisis comms expert, laid out five simple steps to getting ready for a crisis in your organization.

Here’s how to do it.

1. Vulnerability assessment

• A crisis, according to Braud, is “a situation that could damage the revenue reputation and brand of your organization.”
• Look at possible crises that could arise, from fast-moving events like active shoots or natural disasters to slower-burn events like a product recall or a negative social media post.
• Bring in stakeholders from different departments to ensure you’re covering the full scope of potential problems — not just the ones you can see from your office.

2. Create the plan

Braud says that one properly written plan can serve nearly any type of crisis. It’s vital that it clearly outlines key responsibilities so there’s no ambiguity in the moment. This plan should include:

• What to do
• Who does it
• How they do it
• How they gather, confirm and disseminate information
• How fast they must do it — this is certainly faster than you think it is. Assume you need to have an initial statement within 15 minutes of a crisis arising.

Keep your plan clear and specific to your organization — a free template off the internet won’t help you here.

3. Pre-write news statements

• Go back to step 1.
• Look at all those different scenarios you outlined and write draft press releases on each of them. Get legal and C-suite sign off of them all.
• When disaster does strike, all you have to do is change details and press “send.” This will allow you all to focus more on the unexpected parts of your disaster than handling the basics.

4. Choose your spokespeople

Braud says you need three kinds of spokespeople in a crisis.

• A PR person will typically deliver the first, basic statement that delivers the who, what, when, where, why and how. Avoid speculation at any cost, especially when it comes to the why and the how. Own what you don’t know — and don’t take questions for now.
• Second comes a subject matter expert who can speak to the particular nature of the crisis. This could be an IT person for a data breach or a production manager in the case of an industrial accident. They can give context and depth.
• Only bring out your CEO or other top executives for the largest scale events — usually those involving death or mass casualty. Bould says they are able to “convey the ultimate empathy.” Getting them involved too soon can escalate situations prematurely.

Use those pre-written statements from step 3. They can be a great jumping off point for talking points.

5. Drill

• Every plan needs a strong stress test. You need to practice applying your plan.
• Make it feel real. Braud says to write the test like a murder mystery, with twists and turns. It should feel stressful!
• Once you’ve found the weak points, refine your plan. Make it better. And be ready.

See the full video on Ragan Training..

The post How to create a crisis comms plan — fast appeared first on PR Daily.

Steve Smith is associate partner at Voxus PR. 

As my team will tell you, don’t get me started talking about baseball if you’re in a hurry. However, one story that recently dominated headlines holds several important lessons for PR professionals: The suspension of broadcaster Kevin Brown by the Baltimore Orioles owner John Angelos.

The Orioles have been one of the most remarkable stories of the baseball season thus far. That’s especially painful for me to write after the team took two of three from my Seattle Mariners this past weekend. The team’s young core of emerging stars currently holds the best record in the American League (as of Aug. 14) following six consecutive seasons missing the playoffs. But the team now finds itself in the news for all the wrong reasons.

Brown, the Orioles’ TV and radio play-by-play announcer since 2019, had not called a game since July 30, and on Aug. 7 it was reported that he was “suspended indefinitely” over a comment during a pre-game show. Long story short (hey, I’m trying!), Brown discussed how the Orioles had played poorly in the past against the Tampa Bay Rays on the road at Tropicana Park, but that they’d already won as many games there this season as the previous three combined.

Matt Jergensen, a Baltimore sports blogger and podcaster, was the first to report what had allegedly happened, prompting the sports media world to try and get to the bottom of Brown’s absence. Before the day was over, the Orioles had a full-blown PR crisis on their hands. Here’s how the day played out and three lessons in reputation and brand management that PR pros can learn from it.

1. Timely and transparent communication is key: When news of Brown’s suspension broke last Monday morning, the Orioles organization failed to respond in a timely manner. Hours passed without any comment on why Brown had been missing from the broadcast booth, leaving audiences to speculate while the story continued to gain traction. When the Orioles finally provided a prepared statement to a few select news outlets, their remarks failed to fully explain what occurred. In fact, the statement specifically noted that there was no suspension, which contradicted what had already been verified by a number of news outlets, including The Athletic.The way a company handles controversy can have a lasting impact on its brand reputation, and this situation is a perfect example of why timely and transparent communication is critical when handling a PR crisis. By responding quickly and providing a clear statement explaining Brown’s absence, the Orioles could have addressed these questions and concerns while demonstrating accountability for what happened. Unfortunately, that shortcoming resulted in….
2. Social media adds fuel to the fire: In the hours following news of Brown’s apparent suspension, it quickly grew from a local sports story to a national sports story to an item of national news interest – all while spreading like wildfire on social media. This was soon compounded by the fact that broadcasters for other MLB teams started chiming in during games and on social media. Announcers from the New York Yankees, Boston Red Sox, Chicago White Sox, New York Mets, Philadelphia Phillies and others came to Brown’s defense, calling the suspension “unconscionable” and an “utter humiliation” for the Orioles, or even going so far as to make a joke about their team’s poor play and say they hope they won’t “get suspended by the Orioles for saying that.”So, what’s the lesson here for PR pros? As with Brown’s suspension, companies often make high-profile personnel decisions without timely and transparent communication or considering how social media can view this as an attempt to bury the news. While companies may be reluctant to discuss personnel matters, in today’s 24/7 digital world assume the news will get out and spread quickly. The Orioles failed to engage with the media to provide information or clarification, leaving the story to spiral out of control. PR teams have increasingly gained access to the C-suite in recent years. Leverage that access to remind business leaders how these events rarely occur in a vacuum and seek to become engaged in these conversations before decisions become public.
3. Consider potential impacts and prepare for the fallout. As any Orioles fan will likely tell you, the Angelos family have long been magnets for controversy, so – in that sense – this latest incident should come as little surprise. With only five winning seasons since 1997, perhaps a story like this would fly under the radar and not draw as much attention. But with the team playing so well and the darlings of baseball this year, Brown’s controversial absence leaves a cloud of negative attention hanging over its shining performance on the diamond.As my partner Paul Forecki wrote about the art of brand management earlier this year, it’s often said that there’s no such thing as bad press. However, companies and PR pros “need to consider how that controversy relates to and impacts the underlying brand” and “be aware of the potential for collateral damage.” The Orioles’ situation is the perfect example of the need to have a crisis communications plan in place. PR pros should be prepared to proactively anticipate and successfully manage controversial situations that may arise from the personal actions or decisions of key figures associated with a brand.

As Warren Buffett said, “It takes 20 years to build a reputation and five minutes to ruin it.” Perhaps that doesn’t apply to the Angelos family, as some might argue that bird has long since flown the nest. Still, the recent suspension of Orioles broadcaster Kevin Brown highlights a number of important lessons for PR professionals in brand management and crisis communication. By planning ahead, developing a crisis communications plan and proactively engaging in conversations with key stakeholders, PR pros can help control the fallout and mitigate the potential amplification of negative sentiments on social media.

The post 3 PR lessons in reputation and brand management from the suspension of Orioles broadcaster Kevin Brown appeared first on PR Daily.

In its handling of an independent investigation, the university confronted common, but crucial, crisis questions.

The post Crisis comms lessons from the Northwestern football scandal appeared first on PR Daily.

E-commerce clothing brand Shein took a group of diverse influencers to Guangzhou, China in June. What was meant to be a standard press tour went awry when people reacted negatively to the social posts about the trip, NPR reported. Shein invited the group to see its Innovation Center, where some clothes are manufactured and sent to warehouses. It didn’t go well when the influencers subsequently hyped up their adventures and experiences at the appealing Innovation Center and reported that workers told them that they worked in good conditions.

“Upon interviewing the workers, a lot of them were really confused and taken back with the child labor questions and the lead-in-the-clothing questions,” Destene Sudduth, a social media influencer posted on TikTok. “They weren’t even sweating. We were the ones sweating.”

Many of the influencers’ followers were upset because the Innovation Center does not accurately portray what really happens in factories, according to reports.

Followers called the trip propaganda due to Shein’s deep, nightmarish history of allegedly abusing workers in harmful work environments.

The company is still reeling from the backlash.

Morning Consult reported that Shein’s net favorability dropped 20 points year in year, possibly in part due to the response to the trip.

In an article from The Cut, a Shein rep attempted to smooth ruffled feathers.

The unnamed representative said that “social-media videos and commentary are authentic, and we respect each influencer’s perspective and voice on their experience. We look forward to continuing to provide more transparency around our on-demand business model and operations.”

The trip backfired on Shein because they misrepresented how the brand operates in an attempt to gloss over unsettling claims about worker mistreatment, resulting in this backlash, Jessica Doyle, founder, principal and fractional CCO at Two Creeks Strategies, told PR Daily. Doyle said that Shein’s disastrous publicity stunt was bound to get the responses that it did from the public.

“I think that this was a very likely outcome,” Doyle said. “If this is authentically the way it’s operated, it is not a bad idea. But you have to be truthful in advertising and this is advertising. Influencers are a form of advertising. Companies have great intentions, but they have to be intentional in the thought process of what it is you stand for and make the connection back to your business and build from there.”

Doyle added that controlling a brand’s narrative during a crisis means ensuring the public’s focus goes back to a company’s values and expressing how you plan to show up better than the day before.

And you’ve got to mean it.

“I think that in the rush to appear values-driven, some companies have fallen into the trap of putting forward initiatives that can appear value washing and that does more damage to your company than it does help,” Doyle said. “Because if it is inauthentic if it is not credible, you hurt your authenticity with your customers, you hurt your credibility with your customers and you put your company at risk. And in some cases, you’ve put your employees at risk.”

Doyle said that even the most public brand blunder like Shein’s doesn’t have to be a PR nightmare. As long as effective comms are in place and measures are taken to weigh out all possible scenarios of crises, including obvious ones.

“Often a crisis comms’ best work is the story no one ever sees,” Doyle said. “Every public statement has to pass the sniff test.”

The post Crisis response lessons from Shein’s failed influencer trip appeared first on PR Daily.

Bloomberg has published an extensive autopsy on Daily Harvest’s failures to protect and communicate with customers about the health hazards posed by their French Lentil + Leek Crumbles last June. At least 130 were hospitalized, and about 40 had to have their gallbladders removed.

Some customers who ate the product experienced severe gastrointestinal pain, but found themselves forced to connect the dots themselves as Daily Harvest’s social media accounts glossed over or ignored the problem. When they learned that Daily Harvest was the culprit, some eventually received canned responses and an offer of a gift card that paled in comparison to their mounting medical bills.

Usually when a company does a product recall, then that halts distribution and sales, press releases are issued and customers are informed. According to Bloomberg, Daily Harvest just sent out two separate emails to subscribers: Those who ate the crumbles and those who bought them but didn’t consume them yet. Daily Harvest alerted them of the issue, vaguely, but didn’t say there was a recall until about a week into the crisis.

Daily Harvest’s CEO Rachel Drori said that “a recall is telling somebody not to consume and dispose.”

Why it matters: Drori told Businessweek that Daily Harvest handled the crisis with “transparency, immediacy and customer empathy”, Bloomberg reported.

That’s not the case, according to scores of social media influencers who collaborated with Daily Harvest to promote the brand, and customers who got extremely ill from the product.

Confusing, lagging language didn’t help Daily Harvest at all and the lack of social media response was not empathetic –- if they responded to inuiries at all.

The company failed to create a new Instagram post about the crisis and simply edited their captions of previous posts with pictures of the crumbles, directing people to their bio for a link with more information, per Bloomberg. That meant people who had already seen the post they edited might not have seen the important information.

“Fire your comms team—this isn’t how you inform people one of your products is sending people to the hospital,” an Instagram poster noted, Bloomberg reported.

Drori said that the company was “heads down focused on getting answers” and not concentrated “on our own PR. It was the last thing on our mind.”

PR should be the first thing on a brand’s mind and how they purposefully communicate with audiences, especially in times of crisis. It’s not time to beat around the bush and be evasive with your answers. People’s health was on the line. Communicating with them should have been the first priority.

Editor’s Top Picks:

• Paul Reubens, known for his iconic character Pee-wee Herman, died at 70 from cancer. “Paul bravely and privately fought cancer for years with his trademark tenacity and wit,” a statement on his official Facebook page read, which added that “he will forever live in the comedy pantheon and in our hearts.” In a statement alongside the post, Reubens apologized for not going public with his health ailments, which he had faced for the last six years. Reubens’ personal brand will be remembered for his innate ability to be bold and unabashedly peculiar in his craft.
• Have a unique message that your brand wants to get out to your audience but are unsure which format works for you? Try using a celebrity to spread the word on the app, Cameo For Business. Through the app, celebs sell their videos and specific messages to sometimes unsuspecting fans for achievements and special occasions. Consider cool ways to use Cameo for your brand’s next announcement – as long as the celeb is fits with your brand and the message is lighthearted enough for all to enjoy.
• According to a recent Gallup poll, Americans don’t have as much confidence in the U.S. military as they used to. In 1975, amid the Vietnam War, 58% of Americans had a “great deal” or “quite a lot of confidence” in the military. Over the decades, that figure peaked to 85% in 1991 and dropped to 60% in 2023. “Now that the U.S. has completely withdrawn from both Iraq and Afghanistan, the two most significant military legacies of the 2001 terrorist attacks on the U.S., confidence in the military has continued to decline among the public,” according to Gallup. The military can’t always be transparent with the public, but when they can divulge, use that to bridge any gaps with audiences and find ways to win back up trust.

Sherri Kolade is a writer at Ragan Communications. When she is not with her family, she enjoys watching Alfred Hitchcock-style films, reading and building an authentically curated life that includes more than occasionally finding something deliciously fried. Follow her on LinkedIn. Have a great PR story idea? Email her at sherrik@ragan.com. 

The post The Daily Scoop: Looking back at Daily Harvest’s crisis fumble appeared first on PR Daily.

Aaron Gordon is a partner at Schwartz Media Strategies.

Communities along the Eastern Seaboard and Gulf of Mexico are gearing up for what could be a historic hurricane season in 2023. According to hurricane specialist John Morales, above-average sea surface temperatures in the Atlantic Ocean are fueling an unusually active storm pattern which warrants close attention over the coming months.

It’s only a matter of time before warnings and watches go up, grocery shelves are cleared out, and hurricane parties get into full swing. For PR firms and internal comms departments, now is the time to prepare for an extreme weather event, and that means revisiting – or, in some cases, creating – a storm communications plan.

In Florida, where our firm is based, hurricane planning has taken on added relevance amidst an influx of people and companies, many of whom have little or no experience coping with storm impacts. A similar dynamic is shaping up in cities across the East and South.

While conventional wisdom holds that coastal areas are at the greatest risk of feeling a storm’s full impact, a trend toward larger, stronger, wetter storms means inland communities are no longer immune.

Each year between June and November, our firm is invariably thrust into the role of guiding clients through all aspects of internal and external communications as a storm threatens.

Here are five steps that every PR pro should embrace to ensure their clients are storm ready.

• Enlist a storm task force – By centralizing the decision making within a tight-knit team, you’ll stay nimble and keep information flowing. The task force should be charged with developing and executing a storm readiness plan. This group is the first line of defense in activating preparations ahead of a storm and making judgment calls in the days that follow, so choose the team wisely. Members should have the ability to leave town if a major storm is approaching, which will help ensure communications and operations remain intact off-site.
• Create a communications game plan: The master blueprint that gets activated as a storm looms should address how leadership will stay in touch with employees; how the company will overcome technical hiccups if communications break down; and how the fast-changing needs of clients and customers will be addressed. The last point is key since circumstances can shift dramatically in a storm scenario. For example, when Hurricane Irma impacted South Florida in 2017, our hotel and resort clients suddenly found their properties serving the role of a shelter for displaced residents and first responders. Likewise, Walmart quickly transitioned from equipping customers with storm supplies to coordinating relief efforts in the Florida Keys.
• How and when to activate the plan: The first step in activating a communications plan is knowing when to “press play.” We typically recommend activating storm protocols when a tropical storm watch is issued, meaning deteriorating conditions are possible within 48 hours. At that point, the storm task force should make sure everyone within an organization understands what’s expected of them. There should be no uncertainty about where people are going to be during and after a storm, how to contact them, and how they are going to receive information. By maintaining consistent lines of communication, leadership can identify and adapt to the specific needs of employees and clients – and lend help where possible.
• Think about your pre- and post-storm message: For businesses, keeping external audiences abreast of their storm plans is vital. Clients and customers should know what preparations are in motion and how operations may be altered. Bear in mind that infrastructure may be disrupted after a storm. When the internet is down, the power is out, and your cell battery is drained, you may not have the luxury of crafting storm-related messages. Have a clear set of communications approved and ready to go, and make sure your storm task force is prepared to execute. Clients, customers, and employees should never be in doubt about how a business has fared, how to contact leadership, and what to do if they need help.
• Think digitally – and differently: It’s common for businesses to be knocked offline after a storm. Roads could be flooded or blocked by debris; the physical workplace may sustain damage; email servers may be down. Because they can be accessed remotely, social media platforms and websites should be activated as central sources of information updated by the storm task force in real time. Twitter is the ideal tool for staying up to date with useful information about a storm and its impacts, while WhatsApp is a great way to keep in contact with employees and clients when cellphone signals are disrupted. For that matter, companies that schedule social media posts ahead of time should pause their content calendars prior to a storm, ensuring they don’t appear tone deaf if their community is impacted.

The bottom line: Crises breed opportunity. Implementing a clear communications game plan can be instrumental in helping businesses sustain continuity before, during and after a storm. Communications teams that plan ahead are poised to demonstrate added value during hurricane season.

The post 5 communications tips for weathering hurricane season appeared first on PR Daily.

June 2023 has proven to be an inflection point for communicators seeking to speak to and about LGBTQ+ audiences. In the preceding years, Pride Month celebrations had become more and more mainstream. While never totally without controversy, they had flourished into  a standard part of many corporate calendars celebrated internally and externally with rainbow logos, affirmations and commitments to support the message of Pride, and participation in parade marches and events.

But amid a wave of anti-LGBTQ+ sentiment, especially aimed at transgender people, many brands have stepped back and reevaluated how they participate and talk about Pride.

Critics have become vocal and outspoken. Boycotts are growing. Axios estimated in mid-June that these controversies have cost companies more than $25 billion in market valuation. Threats have been made against the safety of employees and storefronts. Some state governments are also becoming active in punishing opponents who disagree with their stances on LGBTQ+ issues, withdrawing contracts or passing punitive measures.

Then you have LGBTQ+ communities, which has never had a simple relationship with corporate America. While they’ve been courted in recent years with splashy Pride celebrations, they’ve also offered criticism of “rainbow washing,” or brands’ performative illusion of support aimed more at boosting sales than benefiting LGBTQ+ communities.. As some brands have retreated in the face of conservative criticism, some feel those fears have been validated.

The result is an unsettled landscape that poses challenges for both internal and external communicators. It can feel like a no-win scenario, with any move certain to anger one contingent of your audience. Even silence can be risky.

There is no one right answer on how to meet this moment. It can be easy to take a zero-sum approach and say that every organization should take a stand for LGBTQ+ rights, or to say that all businesses should stay out of it and stick to selling widgets.

Both are oversimplifications.

Let’s take a look at the three main ways brands are addressing the current atmosphere in the culture wars.

Staying the course

Some organizations are making no changes to their behavior. This can cut one of two ways.

Outspoken, advocacy-focused organizations are sticking with their support of the queer community. Adidas, facing a Target-esque backlash over masculine models appearing in traditionally feminine swimsuits, stood its ground. In a statement provided to USA Today, the athletic brand said their commitment to self-expression is “reflected in a diverse line of models who bring the spirit of this collection to life.”

Similarly, The North Face did not waver in the face of anger from some over their partnership with outdoorsy drag queen Pattie Gonia. “Creating community and belonging in the outdoors is a core part of our values and is needed now more than ever. We stand with those who support our vision for a more inclusive outdoor industry,” the organization affirmed in a statement to NPR.

These brands knew their audience and held their ground. They faced backlash but made their position clear as an extension of their values.

Other brands remained consistent simply by remaining silent. They hadn’t spoken in the past, and they are not speaking up now. Organizations deeply enmeshed in government contracts or with audiences with a more conservative bent have chosen for years to sit out of Pride events. They don’t oppose them, but they don’t participate either.

This, too, is a maintenance of the status quo.

Falling silent

Others, however, moved back from more active past stances to a watchful posture. While CBS News reported that 78% of Pride organizations nationwide saw their sponsorships stay steady or increase, 22% saw decreases. Indy Pride, which organizes events in Indianapolis, saw one sponsor pull their logo (though not their funding) and another questioned a youth-focused event after social media backlash, according to CBS News.

While most Pride organizations declined to identify which specific corporate sponsors had pulled back or chosen to remove their logos, it’s clear there have been some who have chosen to simply remove themselves from the conversation altogether, with as little fanfare as possible. Some of these organizations may still celebrate internally but have found the current landscape too risky for loud, proud external moves.

Finally, the last group is the one that has drawn the most attention and controversy.

Flipflopping

Bud Light. Target. These organizations have become shorthand for organizations who found themselves at the center of the culture wars — and blinked.

Both brands actively courted the LGBTQ+ community — Bud Light with its partnership with trans influencer Dylan Mulvaney and Target through a trans-inclusive swimsuit — and in the face of backlash, chose to abandon their stances. Bud Light disavowed members of its marketing team and Target pulled some Pride-themed items from its shelves.

These have proven to be the most damaging stances, as it draws ire from both sides of the issue. Even in victory, those in the anti-LGBTQ+ camp don’t forget what they saw as a betrayal of their values, while members of the pro-LGBTQ+ community feel abandoned.

This is the true no-win scenario, and one both brands will grapple with for the foreseeable future.

What should you do?

There is no simple playbook to follow here. Each organization must make its own decisions based on their employees, their customers, their desired customers, their ties to state and local governments, and their values.

What works for one brand may not work for another.

It’s time to help your organization do some soul-searching. What will best serve all your stakeholders — and the bottom line?

Whatever decision your organization makes, be prepared for backlash. Have your plan in place.

And good luck.

Allison Carter is executive editor of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post 3 ways brands are handling a contentious Pride Month appeared first on PR Daily.

Julie Solomon is public relations lead at Next PR.

Influencer campaigns are a great way to tell your client’s story through an authentic voice to an already-trusting target audience. When brands and influencers collaborate effectively, you’re able to foster a mutually beneficial partnership that delivers tangible results.

But when a campaign goes off track, your team can unexpectedly find itself in crisis mode. Here’s a closer look at some strategies you can use to ensure influencer campaigns run smoothly – and some tips to help you address any issues that arise when things don’t go according to plan.

Understand the contract details and align on goals

As a PR pro, writing legal contracts isn’t (usually) in your job playbook, but you need to make sure the contract aligns with your PR strategy and is executed properly. I can’t stress enough the importance of familiarizing yourself with the contract details. The PR team is often the liaison between the client and influencer as contract terms are ironed out, which presents an opportunity to develop smooth working relationships with the client’s legal team and the influencer’s representatives.

After the contract is finalized, set up a kickoff meeting with all parties to jumpstart the collaboration. Use this meeting to review deliverables and schedules, ensuring everyone is on the same page about objectives and how the teams will work together.

Keep the lines of communication open

It’s critical to build trust with the influencer and their rep by communicating regularly and being transparent about your expectations. A successful partnership benefits both parties, so open communication is a must for a smooth collaboration.

I recommend setting reminders for yourself to make sure the posting schedule outlined in the contract stays on track. Touch base with the influencer a few days before a post is meant to go live to confirm they have everything they need and are on schedule with content development.

Make a conscious effort to develop a friendly relationship with the influencer’s rep, one where you both feel comfortable texting or calling each other to get clarification or share ideas. If something goes sideways, you’ll appreciate being able to reach them quickly to resolve.

Perhaps the influencer was set to attend a live event then bailed at the last minute. You need to know as soon as possible that they won’t be in attendance, and you also need to talk to their rep about how to best answer questions that might arise from their absence. Email is too slow to handle a situation developing in real time, so a quick call is best.

Collaborate on content creation

Aligning on content that supports both parties’ goals is a key component of a successful influencer partnership.

At the same time, the content should reflect the influencer’s authentic voice – and striking the right balance can be tricky. The best approach is to establish a framework with brand guidelines and specific do’s and don’ts: words and messages to use or avoid, voice and tone guidelines, etc. From there, encourage the influencer to be themselves as they communicate within that framework, like sharing a personal story that ties into the client’s overall message.

It’s also important to review all content prior to posting. When your team is included in the final round of review and approval, you can ensure the message aligns with your strategy, the correct profiles are tagged and the influencer is using trackable UTM links to measure campaign impact.

For interviews or live events, provide questions in advance whenever possible so the influencer is not caught off guard. Make sure the influencer is well prepared prior to the event, talking them through how their story ties back to the client’s message and offering inspiration or tips on the subject, if needed.

Be ready to address issues quickly

Even the most well-planned collaborative strategy can go awry, so be prepared to address any problems immediately by reviewing content as soon as it goes live. You can set up notifications and monitor social feeds in case something goes wrong – like the influencer tagging the wrong account or adding typos to the content. You’ll be on it immediately to help resolve.

Clients may also be monitoring the influencer’s feed actively, so you’ll want to catch any misfires quickly and proactively update the client to let them know you have it handled.

Remember, influencers are humans, too, and mistakes happen. But with shared consensus on goals upfront, frequent communication, solid teamwork and a plan for addressing any issues that arise, the reward for your client’s brand outweighs the risk. With these parameters in place, you can keep your influencer partnerships on track and tap into their authentic voice to reach your client’s target audience.

What about this to focus more on collaborating to benefit both parties?

The post 4 tips to ensure influencer partnerships go according to plan appeared first on PR Daily.

What form that crisis can take is more unpredictable, though often not unknowable. It could come in the form of an accident, a natural disaster, a communications misstep or a defective product. The specific risk will depend, of course, on your business, but here are a few that could impact you, drawn from a presentation at PR Daily’s recent Media Relations Conference, presented by Ed Hoover, crisis & issues management senior manager for Mars, Incorporated and Eliot Hoff, executive director, global crisis practice lead for APCO Worldwide:

Identifying and planning for these unplanned yet foreseen crises is a critical part of any communications role. But when you’re staring at a blank page — or a badly out-of-date crisis plan — it can be overwhelming to even know where to begin.

So start simple, as Hoover and Hoff advised:

Think fast, think templated, think flexible. Your crisis plan should guide you, not bog you down with more paperwork. Think of a three-ring binder with big section markers so you can easily flip through and move documents around based on your current needs at any one time.

It sounds simple, but just putting together a list of scenarios, your templates and a list of contact for spokespeople and other key players will put you far ahead of the curve in terms of having a crisis plan.

Above all, Hoover and Hoff stressed the importance of using your organization’s purpose and values as a North Star through any crisis scenario. “A crisis is a gap between stakeholder expectations and realities – think outside in, assess what your stakeholders need, how it aligns with your principles and let this process tactically guide your response,” they advised.

If you truly understand what your organization wants to accomplish on a values-based level, how it wants to treat people, communities, the environment and other, sometimes intangible stakeholders, you’ll have a much easier pushing through any crisis scenario and coming out the other side with your reputation and revenue intact.

See the entire presentation here.

Allison Carter is executive editor of PR Daily. Follow her on Twitter or LinkedIn.

The post Anatomy of a crisis communications plan appeared first on PR Daily.

Robert Conner (he/him) is an activist and expert in LGBTQ communications and media who was named by Business Insider magazine as a top rising star in public relations in 2023. He works as the media relations manager at Scott Circle Communications, a public relations firm in Washington, D.C.

Last week’s declaration of an LGBTQ state of emergency by the Human Rights Campaign (HRC) confirmed what most LGBTQ people in the U.S. already know: we’re being attacked. While countless companies have published their “ We’re Celebrating Pride” posts, virtually none have issued a statement addressing this state of emergency. The HRC’s warning—the first of its kind in the organization’s 40-year history—comes as a record-high 75 anti-LGBTQ bills have been signed into law this year. As an LGBTQ activist, I feel unsafe. In this climate, how organizations communicate matters now more than ever.

Organizations must take a stand

A new, somber era is here, and communicators must respond accordingly. How you communicated about LGBTQ topics before the emergency declaration is outdated. This climate of oppression requires an overhauling of the communications landscape. Silence or neutrality is no longer an option.

Messages and actions must not create harm and violence

Communicating messages that don’t overtly support LGBTQ lives directly causes harm. About two in three LGBTQ youth report that hearing about anti-LGBTQ legislation “made their mental health a lot worse,” according to The Trevor Project. 70% of non-LGBTQ adults feel companies should publicly support the LGBTQ community “through hiring practices, advertising, and/or sponsorships,” reports GLAAD’s 2023 Accelerating Acceptance survey. When Target recently removed some Pride merchandise, they took down clothes that had conveyed acceptance and hope. This decision sent a message that feeds anti-LGBTQ violence.

Where to start

As a starting point, it is critical that you now publicly address the emergency: acknowledge its seriousness, address its implications for LGBTQ employees and customers, and outline your action plan. Here are the ways to get this right:

Three messages to deliver urgently, following the declaration of the LGBTQ State of Emergency

1. Issue a public statement taking a clear and inclusive stand for employees and customers.

In this initial statement, which you should issue as soon as possible, acknowledge the seriousness and unprecedented nature of the LGBTQ state of emergency. LGBTQ people are nine times more likely than non-LGBTQ people to experience violent hate. Show empathy by explaining that your organization recognizes that the declaration may be new, but the violence has been around forever and has worsened in recent months. Because the state of emergency may trigger anxiety or confusion, explain what options exist to help answer questions and list available resources prioritizing safety and well-being.

2. React to legal decisions directly affecting LGBTQ rights.

The U.S. Supreme Court will issue an opinion, likely by July 2023, on whether a business can deny services to LGBTQ customers based on the First Amendment. Communicate that regardless of the Court’s decision, your company will never deny services to LGBTQ customers. Commit to tracking this case in real-time and provide timely public updates.

Go further and state that you refuse to work with vendors that deny services to LGBTQ customers. Aside from this SCOTUS case, the ACLU updates a weekly map of anti-LGBTQ bills in state legislatures. Stay on top of bills that impact your employees and consumers, and issue updates regularly.

3. Distribute an “emergency” manifesto detailing your organization’s action plans and path forward.

Put words into action. The emergency has been declared. Now what? A manifesto should spell out concrete next steps for employees and customers to be protected and valued. This should be distributed through internal channels, social media, and any public-facing outlets.  Share new resources: due to the emergency, the HRC created a digital guidebook with health and safety tips and a summary of state-by-state laws.

Almost half of LGBTQ workers have experienced unfair treatment in their careers. Implement protocols for staff and customers to report threats to LGBTQ safety, including harmful language. This is critical for employees on job sites, customers patronizing businesses, and even in digital spaces. Organizations must double down on their non-tolerance of discrimination. Be clear that anti-LGBTQ behavior will have consequences.

In all communications in this new era, pledge to follow through. One-time statements appear shallow. Consistently monitor threats to LGBTQ safety and provide timely updates. Proactively ask LGBTQ employees and customers how they feel, seek feedback on how your organization can improve LGBTQ safety, and train supervisors to spot and prevent violence. The Society for Human Resource Management (SHRM) publishes a Workplace Inclusion for LGBTQ+ Employees toolkit, and the HRC provides a Trans Toolkit for Employers. Lastly, beyond June’s Pride month, your new manifesto should outline plans to celebrate LGBTQ people year-round with Lesbian Visibility Day (April 26), LGBTQ History Month (October), National Coming Out Day (October 11), the Transgender Day of Remembrance (November 20), and many other observances.

Be an ally and a leader

Messages can either hurt or help LGBTQ people. Stop evergreen messaging and deploy powerful, constructive statements. In the aftermath of the LGBTQ state of emergency declaration, be an ally and a leader. Use communications tools to help your organization help LGBTQ people.

The post How organizations should navigate the LGBTQ state of emergency appeared first on PR Daily.