Yoga Apparel Company’s PR in Downward (Dog) Spiral

June 12, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Yoga Apparel Companys PR in Downward (Dog) Spiral

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Lululemon. (Pictured: Former CEO Christine Day)

Off with their heads! That may have been the cry from yoga apparel maker Lululemon‘s board of directors, which was likely behind the resignation of two key executives after an embarrassing and costly incident. The company had to recall their signature Luon yoga pants after customers complained that they revealed more than just good form in yoga classes. The switch from opaque fabric set Lululemon back to the tune of $140 million, with a drop in stock prices. As the sheer pants exposed more tails, heads were sure to roll.

First to go was Chief Product Officer Sheree Waterson, who left the company in April. And yesterday, Christine Day announced she would be stepping down from her position as Lululemon’s CEO after nearly six years. PR was spun far thicker than the fabric that caused the problems in the first place. Day calmly called the move a “personal decision,” adding that she would stay on until a successor was named. This was, of course, meant to sound like all were in agreement and yogically serene.

The stock market was not quite so zen. Lululemon’s shares fell 12 percent in the wake of the news, which brings up the question of not only when to fire, but if. Yes, this was a costly mistake, and certainly an embarrassment for one of the most successful athletic apparel chains around. But the beheading, following the mistake, may have taken things from bad to worse.

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Lululemon. Too much unrest in this high-end clothing company is making them look bad.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Sometimes, it’s better to let sleeping (downward) dogs lie, at least for a while. A given in any business is that mistakes will be made, and a large part of any good PR department’s work is cleaning up after the initial mess. But once that’s done, why create another mess, just as the public is forgetting about it all? It’s the job of any good PR to advise execs about potential fallout resulting from drastic moves. They won’t want to hear it, but they’re sure to look for someone to blame when they find themselves in an even more painful position.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Companies & Markets, Marketing and PR Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

PRISM, Through the PR Looking Glass

June 11, 2013 by 2 Comments
PRISM, Through the PR Looking Glass

THE PR VERDICT: “A” (PR Perfect) for Silicon Valley’s tech giants, for keeping it short but not mincing words in response to PRISM allegations.

PRISM, news outlets reported last week, is a clandestine program under which the US National Security Agency obtained “direct” access to the servers of Microsoft, Apple, Google, AOL, and Facebook, all of whom signed on to the program. The disclosure came on the heels of similar revelations about the government obtaining call logs of Verizon customers and spying on journalists. As described by the media, PRISM, an acronym for “Planning Tool for Resource Integration, Synchronization, and Management,” appears to be far more obtrusive and Orwellian than previously thought. One anonymous source said it enabled the NSA to “literally watch you as you type.”

Or does it? Faster than a trending tweet, the companies mentioned as being complicit in the citizen spying issued unambiguous denials. “Outrageous,” said Facebook’s Mark Zuckerberg. “Never heard of PRISM,” said Apple. Those denials, plus the government’s declassification and disclosure of some PRISM details, cast doubt on the story, which drew surprisingly muted public outrage anyway. Verizon’s response, in contrast, seemed contrived and concerned more with containing PR damage. The Washington Post, one of the outlets that broke the story, appeared later to walk back its initial reporting as other media outlets found experts to assert that the leaked PRISM documents had been misread.

THE PR VERDICT: “A” (PR Perfect) for Silicon Valley’s tech giants, for keeping it short.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Keep it simple. When the story is misleading or just plain wrong, don’t waste a second in responding. Don’t get bogged down in ambiguous language that produces the infamous non-denial denial. Sometimes PR is not just about PR; it’s about setting the record straight, and doing so before a story long on accusations but short on facts spins wildly out of control. Journalists can make mistakes and some – gasp! – have agendas. When the press bites, reach out to your journalism friends (you have made some friends, haven’t you?) to set the story straight. And remember; bonus points for acting aggrieved, not angry.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Crisis Communictions, Media, Tech Sector Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Cook Keeps Apple’s PR Polished

June 4, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Cook Keeps Apples PR Polished

The PR Verdict: “B” (Good Show) for Tim Cook and Apple.

Though its market value has declined by a gasp-inducing one-third since September, Apple remains the most valuable public company in the world. Nearly everyone expects each new Apple product launch or refresh to be a game-changer, so when the company falls short of these outsized expectations, it tends to be publicly punished more harshly than others. As Apple moves inevitably through a period of slower growth and longer product cycles, its need to manage expectations and tend to its well-burnished image takes on greater prominence. PR to the rescue!

CEO Tim Cook, who has performed superbly in the all-but-impossible role as successor to the iconic Apple leader Steve Jobs, is well aware of these imperatives, as is Apple’s best-in-class PR and marketing team. Apple’s annual developers conference, where it typically unveils its latest and greatest, starts next Monday. Cook has been out polishing his Apple in preceding weeks, successfully defending the company in a May 21 appearance before a Senate committee bent on making Apple the poster child for corporate tax avoidance. Last week, at a prominent tech conference, he laid out a less aggressive but still ambitious agenda of product development, strategy, and enhancement for 2013, affirming that Apple has “several more game changers in us” but refraining from promising the iMoon. What the secretive, surprise-loving Apple will unveil next week remains anyone’s best guess. Fortunately, people are still guessing.

THE PR VERDICT: “B” (Good Show) for Apple and Tim Cook, for taking care of business when business doesn’t take care of itself. Probably only Steve Jobs himself could earn an “A.”

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Reputation management never ends, but occasionally it takes on heightened importance. Apple responded proactively and aggressively to accusations of tax avoidance and put the blame where it belongs – on the tax code. It did so at a time when its product cycle has slipped ever so slightly back to earth, addressing that with statements tempering specific (and more measurable) short-term expectations while promising bigger, better, shinier things to come. The trick is finding the PR wording that allows everyone to hear what they wanted or expected to hear – not easy, but as Apple’s combined management and PR teams have shown, it can be done.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Companies & Markets, Marketing and PR, Media, Silicon Valley, Tech Sector Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Nike Drops Charity, Yet Their PR Image Lives Strong

May 29, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Nike Drops Charity, Yet Their PR Image Lives Strong

THE PR VERDICT: “B” (Good Show) for Nike, which very quietly severed a costly tie with Livestrong.

Yesterday, Nike announced they would cease production of products associated with the Livestrong brand. Livestrong, the charitable organization founded by cyclist Lance Armstrong, had a nine-year relationship with the world-famous sportswear brand that raised over $100 million through the sales of products. “We expected changes like this,” said a Livestrong spokesperson. As did the PR world.

After Armstrong admitted to doping his way through all seven of his Tour de France wins, his sponsors jumped ship faster than any of Armstrong’s cycling records, Nike included. But how would it look if they abandoned a charitable foundation? Livestrong was blameless, their only crime guilt by association.

Nike’s PR team knew that withdrawing money from a charity, even in the wake of a disgraceful scandal could backfire on them. The more sensible and low risk option? Pull the plug on the products and continue to fund the charity directly.

THE PR VERDICT: “B” (Good Show) for Nike for beginning to sever ties with a high-profile charity with minimum fuss.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: When ties must be cut, don’t hack; slice gently. The harsh fact is that Nike had to distance itself from Armstrong and all to do with him. However, this is a charity; how to distance without looking like villains? Stop production of products –  a practical measure anyone could agree with – while confirming to the media that the company will keep making donations to the charity. Without patting themselves on the back, Nike still comes out looking like a decent company, despite dealing what may well be a fatal blow to Livestrong. (Actually, their founder did that.) What happens to Livestrong remains to be seen, but Nike has already come out ahead.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Highest Graded, Marketing and PR, Media, Not for Profit /Charitable Giving Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

The PRV Report Card: This Week’s Winners and Losers

May 10, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR WINNER OF THE WEEK: “A” (PR Perfect) to Charles Ramsey, the Cleveland man who helped free three girls held captive in his neighbor’s house for more than a decade. Ramsey’s Internet stardom was launched with a local TV interview that included colorful one-liners like “I knew something was wrong when a little pretty white girl ran into a black man’s arms.” One of the only people available to the media in the early hours of the story, Ramsey was roundly lauded for both his actions and his handling of the unexpected attention. Not everyone was positive: Slate gnashed its teeth over “a troubling trend of the ‘the hilarious black neighbor’.” Overall, though, the Cleveland dishwasher came off as heroic, lively, and genuine.

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR LOSER OF THE WEEK: “F” (FULL FIASCO) to rappers and their agents who lured the allegedly unsuspecting entertainers into lucrative endorsement contracts, only to have them rescinded shortly thereafter. Three rappers were dropped this week: Reebok let go of Rick Ross, while Pepsico released Li’l Wayne and Tyler the Creator. Suddenly their lyrics were deemed to be offensive and racist and not in keeping with corporate values. The rappers issued lukewarm apologies, but what was clear was that nobody had done their homework before signing on the dotted line. Finally, Reverend Al Sharpton weighed in and said everybody was at fault. We agree. Everyone gets an “F” -  no debate.

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersTHE PRV “THERE’S NO ‘THERE’ THERE” AWARD TO Georgia Holt, aka Cher’s mother. Perennially youthful celebrity Cher is a legend when it comes to reinvention of media relevancy, and her documentary Dear Mom, Love Cher - which recently aired on the Lifetime network – is one for the PR books. However, press for the tribute to Mom sounded slightly less than scintillating. When told of granddaughter Chastity’s upcoming sex change to grandson Chaz, the quote from mere Cher was, ”That’s interesting, sweetheart.” Hm. Okay. Well, good for her, but was it good for PR?

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Celebrity, Featured News Stories, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , ,

Martha Stewart and Match.Com: Is It Love?

May 8, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Martha Stewart and Match.Com: Is It Love?

THE PR VERDICT: “A” (PR Perfect) for Match.com.

You must have heard about it by now – after all, Saturday Night Live has already done a skit on it – but in case you haven’t, Martha Stewart, domestic diva-turned-entrepreneur, is turning to the Internet in the hopes of finding true love. Ms. Stewart has joined millions of other singles by posting a profile on dating website Match.com. She shared this tidbit last week in a candid conversation about her love life with NBC Today show host and longtime friend Matt Lauer.

What you may not have heard in the rush-to-coverage that followed, however, was much of a response from Match.com. At first blush, this seems a bit odd. After all, having one of the world’s most successful and recognizable businesswomen touting your product on national television is a dream come true. Indeed, the PR team over at Match must still be reeling from such unexpected good fortune.

Or are they? Matchmaking is a tricky business – even more so when your new unofficial spokeswoman is a global celebrity whose happiness depends on your company coming up with the goods. Sam Yagan, the CEO at Match.com, agreeably appeared on an episode of Today to help Ms. Stewart write and post her profile, but other that the Match.com response has been very low-key: no press releases, interviews, or big social media blitz. This is the right approach: Save the champagne for the engagement party.

THE PR VERDICT:  “A” (PR Perfect) for Match.com. By staying out of the media limelight now, Match leaves itself room to take credit if Martha does find Mr. Right, as well as to graciously split with her if she doesn’t, without taking an unnecessary PR hit.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: When it comes to PR, it’s the marriage that should be celebrated, not the courtship. Dating is an uncertain phase;  success is far from certain, whether in love or in business. The big PR push should come when quantifiable results are produced and stand the test of time. Until then, it’s just another concept that, like new love, could go south in a heartbeat.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Celebrity, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

JC Penney’s “Secret” Apology

May 7, 2013 by 2 Comments
JC Penneys Secret Apology

The PR Verdict: “B” (Good Show) for JC Penney’s embarrassingly sentimental but effective ad.

How to make up after a row? That’s the question the management of JC Penney had to ask itself following its repositioning of the venerable retail chain. The storied brand was put through some radical changes under new management, and the changes, designed to attract a younger clientele, proved disastrous. Holiday sales in 2012 dropped over 30 percent, and the retail brand lost a third of its customers and over $4 billion in revenue.

JC Penney’s first step to recovery is to apologize. The retailer is kicking off with a commercial called “It’s no secret,” backed with an extensive social media and broadcast program that lets customers past and present know that they got things wrong. “What matters with mistakes is what we learn,” says the commercial’s voice over. “We learned a very simple thing: to listen to you. To hear what you need to make your life more beautiful.” The spot ends asking consumers to “come back.”

The commercial has provoked varied reactions, including some who said they were reduced to tears (really), while naysayers counter that the ad promises nothing and sounds like empty air. But just like part of a couple making up after a row, JC Penney understands that for an apology to count, it needs to be devoid of justifications and imprudent promises. First base is to let the mea culpa stand and be heard so that a new page can be turned. Then, and only then, proceed.

THE PR VERDICT: “B” (Good Show) for JC Penney and its embarrassingly sentimental but effective ad campaign.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Apologies don’t count when padded with reasons and justifications. This ad hits the right chord and targets the family consumer who was most alienated by highhanded, wanna-be hipster management overhauls. This is a clever first step, modest and deferential while simply asking for a second chance. Hollywood couldn’t have written it better. Now let’s see if this relationship can move on.

To see the JC Penney ad, click here.

 

 

 

 

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Highest Graded, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

Is Apple’s PR Bruised?

April 25, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Is Apples PR Bruised?What to think of Apple? To hear stock analysts and business anchors talk, one would think Goliath had just taken a severe hit to the head. Apple has been the undisputed giant of tech for so long that the slightest waver on its feet has everyone talking about how the mighty may soon be falling.

True, profits are down – about 18 percent this quarter, and the first decline for Apple in a decade. Speculation that the company might slope downward following the demise of leader Steve Jobs didn’t come to pass immediately, but the birth of competitive, and cheaper, products are starting to pose a threat. And there are no new products coming from Apple, which is bad news for a company that caters to consumers mad for the latest in tech devices.

Another first for Apple is having to borrow money. The explanation? Rather than face taxes on bringing in offshore assets, Apple will take a loan to pay $100 billion to shareholders by 2015, which pleases some, but perplexes others. Bottom line: should Apple be in crisis mode or business as usual?

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for Apple. The news isn’t good, but then again it isn’t all rotten.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: A company’s reputation can precede, and quiet, speculation. Apple may be wavering in its long-held number one slot, but one of the company’s priorities has been building a brand. People don’t speak of phones; they talk about iPhones and lead iLives. Consumers still see Apple products as cool and a cut above the rest despite their ubiquity.  While cheaper products may come around, it will take far more than that to put a dent in Apple’s brand loyalty. Apple’s PR should continue to polish its image and brand and let the stock price see-saw of its own accord. Apple’s upward unrelating share price climb had to come to an end at some point. Best thing is to pause and catch a PR breath.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Companies & Markets, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

The Great PR Behind Gatsby

April 22, 2013 by Leave a Comment
The Great PR Behind Gatsby

THE PR VERDICT: “A” (PR Perfect) for Gatsby’s PR campaign.

Ask any author, artist, or musician about the PR surrounding their latest offering and the persistent complaint is almost always the same: The Marketing and PR departments had no idea what they were doing. The PR was weak, uncoordinated, and didn’t happen. The PR punched below its weight. No one, it seems, is ever satisfied.

One example that seems, so far, to have broken that convention is the advance PR for The Great Gatsby. The latest film adaptation of F. Scott Fitzgerald’s 1925 novel of the same name, the movie was directed and co-written by Baz Luhrmann and stars Leonardo di Caprio, Tobey Maguire, and Carey Mulligan. Opening in the summer, its launch has been preceded by a slick PR campaign that has covered all the bases.

From Mulligan’s cover on the May issue of Vogue to a lengthy feature in Architectural Digest about the sets used in the film, magazines have been waxing lyrical about the movie. Venerable retailer Brooks Bros. has just launched a fashion line in honor of the film, launched with an exhibition of the film’s costumes in London. Stage two involves a blizzard of interviews with the director and cast about Gatsby and its hold on America. This PR is firing on all cylinders.

THE PR VERDICT: “A” (PR Perfect) for Gatsby’s PR campaign.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Start with a myth and work from there. What’s impressive about the PR building up to the film’s opening is how pervasive the coverage has been. From an elaborate social media program that has strategically placed the movie trailer on multiple sites to articles and interviews highlighting the fashion and interiors of America’s favorite age, this is one launch that has taken full advantage of the public’s ongoing fascination with the Gatsby myth. It goes to prove that with good material and strategic thinking, PR can launch a punch way above its weight.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Celebrity, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

Candy’s Bad PR Aftertaste

April 16, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Nick Candy 150x150 Candys Bad PR Aftertaste

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Nick Candy and his PR image.

Nick Candy, described by the Financial Times as London’s “property tycoon,” agreed to be the subject for this weekend’s column Lunch with the FT. The article is ideally an opportunity for the subject to show a less rehearsed, more informal side. So what did Candy talk about? “Fast cars, famous friends, and the super-wealthy,” said the article’s intro. Too bad Candy forgot that no one likes a side of showoff with lunch.

As one half of the property developing team of Candy and Candy, Nick, with brother Christian, is changing the face of London real estate. Their latest project, One Hyde Park, is host to Russian oligarchs and the most expensive real estate in the world. Critics abound when it comes to the brothers. The chief accusation? Parvenu namedroppers who have struck lucky and whose love of publicity borders on the maniacal.

Candy responds in the interview that while he and his brother care about the brand of Candy and Candy, they surprisingly pay little attention to the PR strategy. The brand, he claims, is about luxury, and as if to prove it, Candy relentlessly drops names during the interview. Among them is FT’s own editor Lionel Barber, who he describes as a “friend.” He mentions attendance at Davos and outlines his coming week of global travel. The article ends with an embarrassing aftertaste: after the lunch, Barber informs the journalist that he barely knows Nick Candy.

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Nick Candy and his firm’s PR image. A tough PR lesson learned the hard way.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Gravitas beats brashness. For a major international property developer, this was an embarrassing article, and being caught out by the editor of the Financial Times was the final coup de grace. In tone and content, this entire interview misfired. For two brothers who started as brash developers, they now need to craft a PR image that is more trustworthy. The absence of any clear messaging in the interview was clear. Candy’s admission that they pay no attention to press and PR strategy might just be the unexaggerated admission in an interview sure to prompt more criticism – and indigestion.

To read the interview, click here.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Lowest Graded, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , ,
«Older Posts