How to Take On A Media Giant

May 14, 2013 by Leave a Comment

How to Take On A Media Giant A golden rule of corporate PR? Threatening to sue a newspaper or media outlet is a waste of time. Even trying to intimidate through an endless volley of legal letters usually backfires. Unless you can call out a media outlet on its polices and procedures, complaining about perceived unfairness usually falls on deaf and everlastingly hostile ears. Which is why Bloomberg’s recent misstep with Goldman Sachs makes interesting reading.

Bloomberg, a robust news organization, prides itself on high standards and journalist integrity, but is now wiping egg from its face following the admission and subsequent apology that its journalists had access to certain client information from its terminals ubiquitous on every trading floor. This included user’s login information and other general details including help desk inquiries. Bloomberg issued a quick apology and swiftly announced changes in procedure. It has since stressed that at no time did reporters have access to trading and monitoring systems or to clients’ messages to one another (the stuff that really matters).

When Goldman Sachs, routinely held accountable in the public eye, discovered that its employees were being monitored by Bloomberg journalists with access to private data, a formal complaint was made. This must have the been the gotcha moment. No news organization likes to be accused of an ethical breach and this was one case where Goldman could flex its own muscle and claim the moral high ground.

The PR Verdict:  “A” for Goldman Sachs for scoring a public and ethical win.

The PR Takeaway:  Integrity is the Achilles’ heel. No doubt Goldman Sachs has previously had its fair share of battles with Bloomberg but complaining to news organizations about bias and unfairness rarely works. This time it was different. A bruised eye for a leading news organization and a PR point for Goldman Sachs for starting a news cycle debate about journalist integrity.  When there is a breach of procedure any PR is on firm ground to go ahead and complain. Choose your battles wisely.

 

Filed Under: Companies & Markets, Finance, Legal, Media Tagged With: , , , , , ,

Austere Today, Gone Tomorrow?

April 30, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Austere Today, Gone Tomorrow?

THE PR VERDICT: “F” (Full Fiasco) for the proponents of austerity, who continue to lose a losing battle.

What now for the proponents of austerity? Up until last month it seemed they had won the policy and PR debate. With disciples across Europe and the US, and with Angela Merkel as its high priestess, fiscal restraint was positioned as a dose of much needed tough medicine. The mantra was clear; no pain, no gain. Politically unassailable, this was one helluva PR launch with some influential backers. Over the last month, however, things have become a little more complicated: austerity may have lost its PR claim as a cure all.

Last week, economists at the University of Massachusetts reviewed calculations cited in Growth In a Time of Austerity, the bible for those justifying tightened fiscal policy, as flawed. The claim? The research published in January 2010 by Harvard University included “selective exclusion of available data and unconventional weighting of summary statistics.” The case for austerity is now not so clear.

Since then, austerity seems to be losing more and more PR steam. EU nations are sliding deeper into recession, with unemployment in Spain and Greece topping 30 percent. In Britain, austerity is responsible for a limp 0.3 percent growth, while Germany, the champion of austerity, is teetering on the edge of recession. Has austerity fallen out of fashion? The headlines would seem to suggest that less has not added up to more.

THE PR VERDICT: “F” (Full Fiasco) for the proponents of austerity, who continue to lose  a losing battle.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Product launches can teach us something about ideological launches. If austerity was a consumer product, it would now be sitting on the supermarket shelves unloved and unwanted. Why? Because not one of its proponents have been able to demonstrate tangible benefits. Despite a big and loud launch, its advocates seem to be retreating into the shadows. Where are the business leaders confirming they are hiring in the face of cutbacks? Without some simple proof points and enthusiastic advocates, this is one launch that might have seen its brief vogue run right out of steam and into the dustbins of economic history.

 

Filed Under: Finance, Foreign Policy/ Affairs, Lowest Graded, Politics/Government, Regulatory Matters Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

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

April 26, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR WINNER OF THE WEEK: “A” (PR Perfect) to French authorities for pursuing criminal charges against those responsible for last year’s topless photos of Kate Middleton. The photos, which not only infuriated the Royals but also privacy advocates, were taken from afar, then published in French magazine Closer, owned by Mondadori, and eventually in several other European publications. If convicted, Mondadori CEO Ernesto Mauri and the as-yet-unnamed photographer could spend up to a year in jail, be forced to cease business for five years, and/or face a fine of 45,000 euros. Yes, this may be a little over the top, but given the long term abuses of the tabloids (as seen in the hacking scandals in the UK), the charges send an unmistakable message: Invasions of privacy will not be tolerated ici.

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR LOSER OF THE WEEK: “F” (FULL FIASCO) to KPMG Chairman Michael Andrew, who told the Financial Times that a recent insider-trading scandal involving a former partner was a ”one-day wonder” that generated coverage only because it was a “slow news week.” We love keeping calm and carrying on, but in cases like this, too much sang-froid just looks downright careless. If JP Morgan regrets CEO Jamie Dimon’s comments about a “tempest in a teacup” regarding the $6 billion London Whale trading loss, then Andrew’s equally cavalier comments may end up haunting him. In the new age of corporate contrition, this was a misstep. Both clients and staff must have been wondering: What was he thinking?

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersTHE PRV “THERE’S NO ‘THERE’ THERE” AWARD TO the George W. Bush Library dedication ceremony. Timing is everything, and whether this was a good week or a bad one to dedicate the George W. Bush Presidential Library and Museum was debatable. The event was a patriotic photo op for sure, with all five living presidents – Bush father and son, Carter, Clinton, and Obama – there to open the center. But the same event was candy for detractors, who pondered whether the Bush legacy of war and financial foundation for the recession was grounds for commemoration, and if a library was really the most apt choice for Dubya. Considering the past two weeks of North Korean missiles at the ready, ricin-laced letters to politicians, and a terrorist attack in Boston, this celebratory move seemed somewhat oddly timed.

 

 

Filed Under: Finance, Foreign Policy/ Affairs, International News, Legal, Marketing and PR, Media, Politics Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , ,

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

April 19, 2013 by Leave a Comment

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR WINNER OF THE WEEK: A (PR PERFECT) to Adele for reportedly declining a seven-figure offer from publisher HarperCollins to write a memoir. The 24-year old superstar allegedly described herself as wanting to live a bit more before chronicling her life – imagine that! In turning down the deal, Adele is taking a different tack than many of her peers, including Miley Cyrus, who penned a tell-all at 16; Justin Bieber, who at 19 has two memoirs under his belt; and, at 28, ancient Katy Perry, whose autobiography is due out this year. Kudos to Adele for wisely realizing that she’ll likely have a more interesting story to tell – and sell – in a few years’ time.

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR LOSER OF THE WEEK: “F” (FULL FIASCO) to the PR team for Christine Lagarde of the IMF. Red faces at the PR office of Lagarde, who failed to make the recent list of Time Magazine’s top 100 people. The usual suspects were there, including Kim Jong Un of North Korea, Aung San Suu Kyi of Burma, and even Chrstina Aguilera of talent reality show The Voice. But the rariefied list strangely didn’t include the widely travelled head of the IMF, who has been busy trying to save the euro and halt the ongoing European banking crisis. We doubt it bothered Lagarde herself, but it was a curious omission that someone in the IMF PR department might want to take a look at before the next staff meeting.

BRADLEYCOPPER 150x150 The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersTHE PRV “THERE’S NO ‘THERE’ THERE” AWARD TO Bradley Cooper.  The actor voted “Sexiest Man Alive” by People  in 2011 has just given an interview to Details that was immediately picked up by surprised media everywhere. The news hook? Bradley lives with his mom. Apparently he moved in with his mother Gloria following the death of his father two years ago and since then, they live in rooms next door to one another. Admirable though that may be, it does work against some of the PR positioning as one of Hollywood’s leading men. Explaining to Details, Cooper said, “She’s in the next room. But here’s the thing: She’s a cool chick. We can hang, and she can roll with the punches.” Bradley’s PR presumably winced when reading…

 

 

Filed Under: Branding, Celebrity, Crisis Communictions, Featured News Stories, Finance, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

JP Morgan: It May Take Two

April 8, 2013 by 1 Comment
JP Morgan: It May Take Two

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for JP Morgan. (Pictured: JP Morgan CEO Jamie Dimon.)

Megabank JP Morgan hit the headlines over the weekend with news that it was mobilizing its senior management to defeat a shareholder vote on corporate governance. In advance of a vote at next month’s annual meeting, board members are planning to sit down with some of the bank’s biggest shareholders, encouraging them to block a motion to separate the role of CEO and Chairman.

Momentum for the proposal has gathered steam following the losses from the London Whale trading episode and JPM’s nearly $6 billion in losses. Fairly or unfairly, questions about the CEO have been raised, and whether or not it is possible to manage a firm of JP Morgan’s size. Following some recent ugly congressional hearings, the new catch cry is not only too big to fail abut also too big to manage. This recent suggestion, to split the current Chairman/CEO role into two is an attempt, so say its proponents, to get another set of eyes overseeing day-to-day management.

The Board of JP Morgan isn’t in favor of the change, while press reports have CEO Jamie Dimon being alternatively sanguine about the proposal or threatening to leave, if the motion is approved. To avoid ongoing external scrutiny and to appease fierce critics in Washington and elsewhere, this may be one battle not worth fighting.

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for JP Morgan and its decision to oppose suggested governance reforms.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Give an inch to keep a mile. It’s not really clear what JP Morgan’s objections are to splitting the role of CEO and Chairman. It is, after all, a structure that is already in place in many companies around the world, and splitting the roles is generally perceived as a desirable safeguard. For a firm that has been dragged through acres of tough media coverage about its internal management controls, this might have been one relatively painless and not unreasonable concession to make. Another financial loss or management failure around the corner, and JP Morgan may rue the day it so vociferously opposed such a modest reform.

Filed Under: Companies & Markets, Finance, Lowest Graded, Regulatory Matters Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

SAC May Be Too Calm As It Carries On

April 2, 2013 by Leave a Comment
SAC May Be Too Calm As It Carries On

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for SAC capital and its business as usual PR tactic.

Keep calm and carry on. In the world of crisis PR, that British wartime slogan is the standard mantra, but Steve Cohen, founder of beleaguered hedge fund SAC Capital, seems to be taking it to heart. The hedge fund, center of a long-running investigation into insider-trading, was in the headlines again last week when one of Cohen’s key lieutenants was arrested. The news capped a week of astonishing headlines.

As arrests mount and a $600 million penalty to settle some civil claims is in the works, founder Cohen’s PR response has been to carry on as normal. But what is normal for one of the world’s largest and most successful hedge funds? A spending spree to change the mood.

Three items made the news: the purchases of a Picasso painting for a cool $155 million, and of oceanfront property in East Hampton for $60 Million. Then throw in the sale of a Manhattan condo for $115 million and it’s clear that at SAC, the recent headlines are not putting the firm into crisis. They’re distracting, yes, but apparently, the show must go on.

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for SAC capital and its business-as-usual PR tactic.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Chutzpah has its merits – until it strays into willful arrogance. There is some wisdom in brazenly continuing with a business-as-usual approach while others might describe the sky as falling. Keeping calm and carrying on reassures investors, clients, and above all employees that this too will pass. In this case, however, SAC’s actions seem akin to thumbing their proverbial nose at authority. In a fight over potentially criminal allegations, SAC has less leverage than it thinks. This might be the moment to lay a little lower and not inflame prosecutors wanting their day in the sun.

Filed Under: Companies & Markets, Finance, Legal, Regulatory Matters Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

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

March 22, 2013 by 1 Comment

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and Losers

PR WINNER OF THE WEEK: “A” (PR PERFECT) to the latest online petition. We love the latest petition circulating on the White House’s own website, “We the People” which calls on Congressional lawmakers to prominently display their financial backers and monetary support from various lobbies. Yes, it will make Congressional members look like Nascar participants, but it just might focus their minds when it comes to voting on financial or healthcare reform. Members of Congress would be required to wear the names of their “sponsors” during all official duties, including voting. The size of a logo or name would vary with the amount of a donation. A brilliant idea, giving vested interests no place to hide.

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersPR LOSER OF THE WEEK: “F” (FULL FIASCO) to the European Central Bank (ECB) and its ham-fisted attempt to impose an unprecedented tax on the deposits of ordinary Cypriots without vetting the levy with lawmakers first. The tax, part of a proposal to bail out the small Mediterranean country of Cyprus, sparked demonstrations and forced the Cypriot Parliament to reject the bailout’s terms, causing angst in European, and ultimately world, financial markets. Nobody likes a tax, but the terms may have been easier to accept had the ECB secured the backing of key leaders first. Instead, Cyprus now teeters on the brink of economic collapse. The world watches – and waits to be affected by the consequences.

The PRV Report Card: This Weeks Winners and LosersTHE PRV “THERE’S NO ‘THERE’ THERE” AWARD to Michele Bachmann. The Republican Representative for Minnesota is back, and she’s making less sense than ever. In this video, she says Obamacare will “literally kill” women and children. We understand what she meant, but a bill cannot literally kill anyone, unless it is used to inflict a fatal paper cut. Still, it would not be the health care bill itself, but the paper the bill was printed on. That’s more detail on that than Rep. Bachmann gave in her charge against Obamacare. And in her address at the Conservative Political Action Conference, she stated that the First Family lives ” a lifestyle that is one of excess.” Bill O’Reilly pointed out that President George W. Bush had a bigger White House budget. Let no mere fact stop the poor man’s Sarah Palin from making her point – whatever that might be.

Filed Under: Companies & Markets, Featured News Stories, Finance, Media, Politics/Government Tagged With: , , , , , , ,

JP Morgan’s Whale of a Hangover

March 19, 2013 by 2 Comments
JP Morgans Whale of a Hangover

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for JP Morgan. (Pictured: JPM chief Jamie Dimon.)

Stiff drinks for the staff at JP Morgan? A martini or two might have helped ease the pain from Friday’s Congressional hearing in Washington, which examined the firm’s now infamous $6 billion loss known as the “London Whale.” The trade generated not only steep losses but a level of scrutiny from regulators and the media that has had JP Morgan’s management on the hoof for months.

Friday’s hearing was brutal for JPM’s top brass. The list of accusations by the Senate’s Permanent Sub Committee on Investigations was simple enough: a risky proprietary trading strategy, concealing losses, manipulating pricing models, and lying to investors and regulators. Anything else? Actually, yes; the fallout continues as Senate aides are now pondering referrals to regulators and the Justice Department. This was a bad day for JP Morgan, and a very good day for the Senate’s PR machine.

Despite a parade of embarrassing and contradictory testimony, the thrust of JP Morgan’s response remains unchanged: “Management always said what they believed to be true at the time, period. In hindsight we discovered some of the information they had was wrong.” Fair enough, but unlikely to break the momentum on a train wreck of an issue that continues to gain momentum.

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for JP Morgan. A straightforward and expected defense, though it’s unlikely to make much of a difference.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Life is not always fair. Despite its clout, JP Morgan was always going to be outgunned in a public hearing concerning its embarrassing  losses. The bad news for the firm is that there is little that can be said to disrupt the forward movement on this issue, apart from what they’ve already said. Admitting you got it wrong may not be enough in an environment that continues to be out of love with banks. It will take more critical and remedial changes in management and strategy before the heat is turned down. Until then, another round, please…

Filed Under: Companies & Markets, Finance, Regulatory Matters Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

Prince Causes King-Sized PR Problem

March 11, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Prince Causes King Sized PR Problem

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Prince Alwaleed.

What does Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal have in common with Paris Hilton, a Kardashian, or an insecure teenage girl? While the 58-year-old male may not need to be constantly reassured about being loved or looking pretty, he does want the world to acknowledge that he really, really is the richest of them all.

The amusing spat between Saudi Prince Alwaleed bin Talal and Forbes Magazine about his rank as 26th on their World’s Billionaires list has been a source of Schadenfreude for those who didn’t make the ranks. One day before the publication, the office of Prince Alwaleed issued a petulant statement saying he would “sever ties” with the Forbes billionaires list for a series of allegations made by the magazine. Forbes responded with a story describing in detail the process of estimating the Prince’s wealth and the efforts undertaken by himself and his entourage to influence the ranking – including the revelation that the Prince sits on a throne when travelling in his private jet.

The Prince’s efforts to secure his position in the list included making pleading calls with the editor and even offering access to his private banker in Switzerland, all to no avail. Instead, the Prince has inadvertently encouraged increased scrutiny over bigger issues, including the integrity of the Saudi financial center and allegations of stock price manipulation in the Kingdom.

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Prince Alwaleed. How do you fix a PR problem you started yourself?

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Keep business impersonal. Being the PR for Prince Alwaleed presumably involves learning to count to ten while the man on the throne shoots at the press. The terse statement concerning Forbes has ignited a series of unforeseen consequences, including press scrutiny into the transparency of his listed vehicle, Kingdom Holding, and regulation of the Saudi stock market. Rather than firing off angry press statements in response to a magazine’s fact-checking questions, stay quiet, elusive, and…well, royal. Silence is golden – even if it is on a throne in a private jet.

To read the Forbes story click here:

 

Filed Under: Finance, International News, Lowest Graded, Marketing and PR, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

GOP: OK With Sequester, or Not?

March 5, 2013 by Leave a Comment
GOP: OK With Sequester, or Not?

THE PR VERDICT: “F” for the GOP and Republicans for their post sequester messaging.

What, no triumphant headlines or gloating from the GOP? Has it suddenly discovered a new level of modesty? Days after the sequester debate has reached the end of its life cycle, the GOP and Republican politicians seem remarkably low key about their latest political triumph. Puzzling, to say the least.

From the get go, President Obama has been clear: He hated the sequester. A bad and clumsy mechanism to reduce spending that would only hurt middle and low-income earners. Bad for the economy, bad for the recovery. In PR terms, his case was an easy read.

Republicans, on the other hand, made it clear that spending needed to be reined in. This showdown was going to highlight their resolve to cut spending and bring the deficit back in line. But since then, the triumphant tone in Republican communication has been increasingly limp and muddled. House Speaker John Boehner said, “I didn’t like it anymore than anybody else liked it,” while other Congressional peers including Jim Jordan said: “The sequester should happen… That is good.” Sen. Lindsey Graham told the media, “The cumulative effect of sequestration is bad for defense.” So, is the GOP  happy with the cuts or not? What is the official party line – or is there one?

THE PR VERDICT: “F” for the GOP and Republicans for their post sequester messaging. Confusing at best.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Don’t air your doubt in public. Just weeks ago, GOP messaging was clear: Government spending was out of hand, and the American electorate had handed them a mandate to rein it in. Now that the cuts are in place, the PR messaging is confused and contradictory, playing straight into concerns that the cuts are iron-fisted and potentially damaging to the fragile recovery. What changed in the space of a couple of weeks? Now is the time for the GOP  to revisit and unify its messaging. Public displays of ambivalence in moments like this rarely offers any protection against public reactions of hostility. Without a change, the GOP and Republican Congress is unintentionally poised to take the blame for a later slow-down. Of course, if that was their intention, well, mission accomplished.

 

Filed Under: Featured News Stories, Finance, Politics, Politics/Government, Regulatory Matters Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,
«Older Posts