Speaking "off the record" is unacceptable

Once I was speaking with a reporter I had worked with in my newspaper days. We were chummy. He interviewed me about one of my clients. The interview was "over," and some normal human chit-chat between longtime colleagues ensued. About 10 minutes into our banter, I made a lighthearted remark. This is what he quoted in his article.

There was "no harm, no foul," but I leaned a lesson: There is no such thing as a friendly chat with a reporter. Even your good friends. You are never off the record; if you are talking with a reporter, blogger, etc., every word you say is fair game, regardless of any meaningless promises made, i.e. "This is just for background," or "Can we talk off the record?"

Your answer: "No."

You can never, ever, ever say anything to a reporter under any conditions unless you are willing to see it in the story.

Ever.

(Ever)


Steve Cebalt, Problem Solver
Highview Public Relations
www.highviewhelp.com
"Reputation and Crisis Management"
(260) 471-5870 e-mail: info@highviewhelp.com

Where are you vulnerable to "bad news"?

It's hard to predict a true crisis -- by definition a crises happens on its own timetable.

Most PR problems are not true crises; they are issues or sensitive situations that could harm your reputation; they tend to evolve into a crisis of a magnitute over which you have SOME control. Often, these vulnerabilities can be identified. Each organization has different vulnerabilities.

Some are sensitive issues that COULD happen, and your job is to prepare for contingencies. Others are things that WILL happen and are likely to be criticized.

Effective reputation management requires, at a minimum, a meeting to identify your likely problems -- the ones you can reasonably anticipate. Not everything you can possibly imagine; rather the issues you have some knowledge about and which you can realistically anticipate occurring.

Just identifying potential bad news can help you begin managing it before it ever happens.




Steve Cebalt, Problem Solver,
Highview Public Relations
www.highviewhelp.com
"Reputation and Crisis Management"
(260) 471-5870 e-mail: info@highviewhelp.com

"Spin" is unacceptable; facts are your friends

PR practitioners were once called "spin doctors." You don't hear that term so much any more, because it's obsolete and unacceptable and ineffective.

In corporate or nonprofit communications, facts and integrity are your friends. You cannot wordsmith your way out of a situation. You never could, really -- "spin" never worked well. But PR firms sold themselves as word wizards who could spin a pile of dung into gold.

Dung is dung. Just call it that. Your reputation and integrity are "gold."

So don't try to bury the lead, use euphemisms, obfuscate, dodge, or spin the issues. It will harm your reputation permanently. Your brand is at stake, and it must be protected with integrity in all communications. In the digital age, there are a million "watchdogs" who will shred you if you do not convey factual information at all times.

There are a few tactical things you can do to convey the truth but mitigate the spread of the information. The White House often releases unfavorable news around 6:30 p.m. on a Friday, when many journalists have left for the weekend, the nightly news is already on the air, and the Sunday talk shows have already been booked.

On a local level this works, too. If your information is not time-sensitive, you can hold it until a major local or national story breaks and release it then, when reporters are focused on the big breaking story.

I see nothing disingenuous in time your announcements tactically. That is not spin. That simply puts the task on the media to be able to focus on more than one thing at a time; they should be equipped to handle that -- it's their job.

Spin is dead.


Steve Cebalt, Problem Solver,
Highview Public Relations
www.highviewhelp.com
"Reputation and Crisis Management"
(260) 471-5870 e-mail: info@highviewhelp.com

"No Comment"

" 'No comment' is a splendid expression. I am using it again and again."

-- Winston Churchill


If it's good enough for Churchill, it's good enough for me.

I was trained that "no comment" makes a company look somehow guilty, as if the statement affirms the truth of the question. "Has your factories industrial waste been diverted into the groundwater?"

If you don't want to debate the issue in the media, don't. It may be a very complex answer for which you are still gathering relevant facts.

Often "no comment" is the only honest answer. So use it!






Steve Cebalt, Problem Solver,
Highview Public Relations, Fort Wayne,  Indiana
www.highviewhelp.com
"Reputation and Crisis Management"
(260) 471-5870 e-mail: info@highviewhelp.com

The Crisis PR Balancing Act

It's better to be right than to be fast.

In a crisis, the media have an interest in speed and in exclusive information.

The job of the Crisis PR Manager is to reconcile those needs with the company's primary objectives: truth and accuracy.

It helps to separate facts into categories:

1. The public has a right to know. Recently Indiana's statewide school testing system crashed on the most important testing day of the year. Billions of dollars are at stake with the results of these tests; people get fired, schools get closed. The local school system responded promptly by holding a news conference announced this way: "ISTEP+ testing has been disrupted this week across the state due to computer complications. FWCS officials will give a report on what happened, how it affected schools and what is the current status of testing." Perfect. This issue affects every student, parent and taxpayer, so this issue is "bigger than you," and the public's right to know is paramount

2. Stakeholders have a need to know.  Sometimes your crisis affects only your customers, employees, or some other group with a vested interest. The media perhaps would LIKE to know, but your customers NEED to know. Understanding the difference is helpful in dealing with the trade or consumer media. Is the issue of public interest? Or of narrow interest to people directly affected.

3. The media would LIKE to know. Your CEO leaves abruptly. It could be a health issue, a family issue, a termination. Publicly traded companies may be bound to release material information; but the media may LIKE to know more than they NEED to know.

So ask yourself when under fire:

Is this a "right to know" issue, a "need to know," or "like to know."

This can help you triage your crisis communications, meeting the media need for speed and facts, while giving you the latitude to put truth and accuracy first, ahead of all other issues.

Facts are your friend. Make a list of all the things you DO know. Separate them into these three categories.

Make a list of the things you are DOING to resolve the issue and to prevent it from recurring. Separate these into their proper categories (public interest, need to know, like to know). These will be your most important messages in the early phase of a crisis.

Make a list of the things you DON'T know. If they are of public interest, you must find out the answers, and in the interim, state what you are doing to find the answers. Similarly for the "Need to Know" category.

Being prepared to state the things you don't know with confidence is crucial. Crises don't reveal themselves all at once. New facts emerge to complete the puzzle. "We don't know" is a great answer, if you can then say, "Our vice presidents are working 24/7 to research the answers and we expect to have more information as soon as possible."

Steve Cebalt, Problem Solver
Highview Public Relations
www.highviewhelp.com
"Reputation and Crisis Management" (260) 471-5870
e-mail: info@highviewhelp.com

Should you "correct" the media? It's usually unacceptable

A newspaper writes a story on your company and spells the CEO's name wrong. Do you call in and ask for a correction?

No. In fact you almost never should ask for a correction. Often I see a correction on a negative news article, and I'd never seen the original article. If the company had not asked for a correction, that negative publicity would not have been noticed by me at all. You are giving the story another day in the news cycle -- shooting yourself in the foot.

So if they said you have 800 employees and you have 1,000, leave it go. If they misquote you a little bit, leave it go.

Here is the rule: Only ask for a correction if there is a MATERIAL cost to the company resulting from the error. Example: Let's say a nonprofit is having a fundraiser May 15, but they get the date wrong. That will cost the organization both money and reputation equity if people miss the event and show up on the wrong date. So if there is a dollar cost that you can pinpoint, and it is significant, THEN ask for a correction.


Steve Cebalt, Problem Solver, Highview Public Relations www.highviewhelp.com
"Reputation and Crisis Management" (260) 471-5870 e-mail: info@highviewhelp.com