Just what is Chick-fil-A's position on same-sex marriage these days? This summer, the company's CEO said his firm believed in, "the biblical definition" of a family and was giving funds to those opposed to gay marriage.  There were protests for and against this stand. Loyal customers apparently continued to buy the Chick's signature chicken sandwiches and biscuits.  But this week it appears less clear where Chick-fil-A stands on the issue.  First, a Chicago Alderman announced that the restaurant franchise had changed its position, and therefore he would no longer oppose a new Chick-fil-A location in his district.  But, then came two statements from the company that don't exactly clear things up.  One reads in part, "Our intent is not to support political and social agendas."  What?  

No matter where you stand on the issue of same sex marriage, I think it's too late for the company to try to skirt controversial issues.  It's confusing to its customers and the brand.  Since neither of these latest company statements confirm or deny the Alderman's claim, I would look for this to story stick around for a while.  The ball may be back in the Alderman's court.

Talk about bad press.  A senior travel reporter for the Wall Street Journal this week advised readers not to fly on American Airlines--because it is "too unreliable."  He's talking about the major delays and cancellations that has been plaguing the airline amid a labor dispute with its pilots.  Obviously the WSJ is a trusted source for business men and women--the very ones who would be impacted the most by major delays and flight cancellations.  If this report by the NBC affiliate in Dallas is any indication, the airline needs to come up with much better answers for the flying public.  And, a written response isn't good enough. A key executive with strong communication skills should be doing interviews or at least put up a verbal statement on the website.

http://www.nbcdfw.com/news/business/Cancellations-Surge-at-American-Airlines-170126706.html 

I see nothing in AA's statement or on its website that would assure me enough to book a flight.  They need to get creative fast.  

The world is watching as the U.S. reacts to the attack on its Consulate in Benghazi, Libya that killed 4 Americans including U.S. Ambassador Chris Stevens.  We've heard condemnations from President Obama and Secretary of State Clinton.  But it's Mitt Romney's condemnation of President Obama at this time that has puzzled many---including some in his own party. To be sure the GOP Presidential hopeful needs to speak out on this horrific attack, and the protest and attack at our Embassy in Cairo. The trouble is he appears to have been responding to a statement issued by embassy officials in Cairo, and not the President.  Embassy officials criticized, not the attackers, but the anti-Muslim film that may have sparked the Cairo attack. Romney called the President's response, "disgraceful."  As NBC's Andrea Mitchell pointed out in her reporting, the Cairo embassy statement was issued hours before the deadly attack in Libya.  When the President spoke later, he made it clear there is no justification for this violence.  

I believe a better response for Governor Romney would have been to strongly condemn the anti-American attacks on both Benghazi and Cairo, and not criticize the President at this stage.  The Chairman of the House Intelligence Committee, Rep. Mike Rogers (R), got it right when he told Andrea Mitchell there would be time for a policy debate later.

President Obama has fired back saying Romney tends to "shoot first and aim later."   This is simply not a day for either President Obama or Governor Romney to play politics as usual.  What message is this sending around the world?

 

President Obama said it best: "Rape is rape".  Inaccurate and ill-conceived remarks regarding rape made by Rep. Todd Akin (R-Missouri) this weekend, have taken hold of the Presidential campaign.  Akin is running for Senate and not suprisedly, he's taking a lot of hits today for talking about "legitimate rape".  He went on the air today to clarify, saying what he meant was "forcible rape".  Not much of a retraction.  And did a doctor really tell him rape rarely results in pregnancy? When you say inflammatory things in the media, don't expect the story to just fade away.

The President is using this controversy to appeal to women voters.  And the Romney/Ryan camp has chastised Akin.  Other Republicans are calling for him to drop out of the race.  Akin was more than "off message", he was a disaster in the "Jaco Report" TV interview.  I can't imagine Paul Ryan is thrilled about being dragged into this mess.  He and Akin have co-sponsored abortion legislation.  Look for this to be front and center in the Vice Presidential debates, as the media presses the VP candidate to clarify his position.  At the very least, this isn't the message the GOP hopefuls wanted to be delivering today.  

Akin is an embarrassment to his party and his state.  To women he is much worse.  Once again, we are reminded that words matter.  



 

Tweeting is a great way for a broadcast journalist to connect with the TV audience. But are there rules, or is the journalist free to write anything that comes to his mind? Media outlets across the country are grappling with this. Management encourages employees to use this tool to help drive traffic to its news programming. But, too often, tweets are becoming an embarrassment.

I just read that CNN's Anderson Cooper responded to a critical tweet by calling the writer, an "idiot". The dispute is over the speed at which CNN sent troops to Milwaukee to cover the temple shooting. Apparently, not fast enough for the "idiot".
Journalists are suppose to be wordsmiths who communicate without resorting to name-calling. Anderson can and should do better. Breaking news is the network's bread and butter, and I'm sure it wasted no time reacting to this horrific event. Not everyone will agree, and that's OK. No amount of name calling will change opinions. Anderson fans may eat it up when he doesn't hold back. I, for one, just don't think it serves the network or the audience, well.

This modern age quandary isn't unique to journalism.  Every business needs to figure out how use Twitter and other social networking sites effectively.  It shouldn't be just a venue to blow off steam.  Set a policy for employees and make sure they know what is expected of them. I often work with clients who don't know what their firm's policy is or the company doesn't even have one. 

Is NBC in a no-win situation when it comes to "when" to broadcast events?  Do it in real time and the network alienates some prime time viewers who are trying to avoid results all day.  But in this day of instant news via social media, it seems wrong to save the "news" for prime time.  If you have a Facebook or Twitter account, it is next to impossible not to find out who took Gold, Silver and Bronze well before the competition is aired on television.  And aren't many of us streaming the video online anyway?  At LA City Hall,  the tech guys had to tell employees to stop streaming the games, because all the traffic was slowing down the works--for the real work being performed by our local government employees.  For me, there is something to be said for watching some events on a large television monitor.  So does size matter to you, or it is just speed when it comes to Olympic results?  Clearly the game has changed and so too must the network's thinking on delivery.   I'd like to see the events televised in real time and then replayed in prime time, although who knows if that is economically sound for any network.  

Perhaps NBC could save some big bucks, but keeping some of their big name talent in New York.  Did we really need Ryan Secrest's taped interviews during the opening ceremonies? It really ruined the flow and I blame the network, not Secrest for that.  NBC's Today Show seems to be overflowing with anchors in London.  It's a perk to be selected to go, but is it really adding much value for viewers?  I, for one, don't think it works.  

It's prime time and I am off to watch NBC's coverage on my TV, even though I know exactly what to expect.

 

Why is Crisis Communication so important for every business?  It's all about protecting the brand.  Warner Bros. and Christian Dior took bold steps in firing two big money-makers, but they really didn't have a choice.  In the case of Dior, there can be no excuse for the anti-Semitic remarks made by famed designer John Galliano.  True, a few of his fellow designers say they abhor the words, but sympathize with the man.  The public, I believe, has a different take and could easily boycott Dior. Oscar-winner Natalie Portman, the new face of a Dior perfume, certainly didn't mince words in her condemnation of Galliano.  Fresh on the heels of her win, Portman has a big platform.  

And could anyone blame Warner Bros. for saying enough is enough from Charlie Sheen?  Who knows what is going on in his mind, but the minds at Warner Bros. have to think about the bigger picture.  While Sheen keeps talking to any reporter who will listen, and tweeting to his heart's content; I believe the public will grow weary of his behavior.  His TV character had charm; real life is another matter.  

When companies face this kind of scrutiny in the public eye, every statement executives issue has the potential to make matters worse.  Behind the scenes many scenarios are being run and risks accessed.  How will the brand be affected if we do "A" instead of "B", or opt to wait it out and hope a bigger story comes along and knocks our troubles off the radar???  

Your company may not be a heavy weight, but you'll feel like the weight of the world is on your shoulders when a crisis hits and the media latches on to the story and won't let go.  The first statement, media interview or news conference is key to maintaining or restoring your firm's reputation.  It really does pay to have your executives trained in Crisis Communication long before a crisis hits.  

www.WomenMediaPros.com



 

Taco Bell is no shrinking violet.  It was faced with a communication crisis this week amid allegations that its beef tacos are not that beefy.  Instead of panicking, they strategized and took their message directly to news and taco consumers.

In a brilliant move, they disclosed their secret recipe on the Taco Bell web site.  They did not apologize for mixing spices, fillers and water with 88% beef.  The president conveyed the company message in a YouTube video.  

Traditional media was used as well.  Network television interviews were done and full page ads were placed in newspapers. The lawsuit hasn't gone away, but from a PR standpoint, the company has leveled the playing field.  

Every corporate communication crisis is unique. But, industries would do well to take a look at Taco Bell's approach.  While it is too early to tell if sales will fall; I predict this will fade quickly.  It definitely is not as creepy as Wendy's predicament when a woman made false allegations of finding a finger in her chili. It takes time to erase that image from one's mind.
The Taco Bell team used a smart analogy in its messaging; the way Taco Bell prepares its beef is no different than what most of us do at home when we make chili.  That is a simple message consumers should relate to.

Protecting your brand is vital no matter how large or small you company is.  If the first time you think about Crisis Communication is when you are facing a real crisis, you are in trouble.  

Need a crisis communication plan, on-site drill, or executive training?

It's been an ugly election season.  In California we have been bombarded with one negative campaign ad after another. From Meg Whitman's "housekeeper gate" to Jerry Brown's "she's a whore" controversy, voters are left wondering if anyone is telling the truth.  To be sure every major candidate has had some media training.  Those who are more skilled at media interviews and in debate settings, have a definite advantage.  And then there's Christine O'Donnell, the Republican Senate hopeful in Delaware.  It's hard to respond to allegations you are a witch, while being the brunt of jokes offered up nightly by Leno, Letterman and Stewart.  But it wasn't witchcraft that tripped up O'Donnell in her debate against Chris Coons.  She was asked a "gotcha question" about Supreme Court decisions and she had no idea how to respond.  It was a deer in headlights moment.  She should have been prepped for these types of questions.  

In the Arizona and New York gubernatorial races, homosexuality has become an issue. Responding to media request for health records on Arizona Governor Jan Brewer, an aide suggested they look into old reports that her challenger is gay.  In New York, candidate Carl Paladino has demonized homosexuals.  Is this really what voters want to hear about just weeks before the election? Paladino went face to face with Matt Lauer over the issue on NBC's Today Show.  Guess the candidate didn't hear what happened to Tom Cruise when he lectured Lauer.  

Media training is only successful when those being trained are willing to take the expert advice that is offered.   

I just watched a report on WSB-TV (Atlanta) that has me fired up.  An overweight woman was charged $5.00 extra at a nail salon in Lithonia, Georgia, because she is "fat".  Clear cut case of discrimination in my book.  What is amazing is the salon owner did a TV interview and admits what her salon did.  Her excuse?  The special chairs have a weight limit of 200 pounds and cost $2500 to repair.  Kim Tan doesn't think that's fair.  She went on to say, if she had seen the large woman before the manicure began, she would have turned her away.  The humiliated customer plans a protest outside the salon.

If I were giving Ms. Tan public relations advice, I would tell her to apologize publically and announce a change of salon policy immediately. Some free manicures are also a good idea.  I  have been to many nail salons and have seen large women and some men having treatments. Never seen one break a chair yet.  The salon owner may think this story will just go away.  It won't.  Her TV interview only made things worse.  It would have been a golden opportunity to right a wrong.  She blew it. 

Providing services in: Los Angeles, San Francisco, San Diego, Phoenix, Las Vegas, Denver, Dallas, Salt Lake City, Chicago, Milwaukee