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: , , , , , , , , , , , , , ,

PR Jury Still Out on Foxy Knoxy

April 23, 2013 by 1 Comment
PR Jury Still Out on Foxy Knoxy

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for Amanda Knox, who hasn’t quite moved the PR dial of public opinion.

Has America made up its mind yet about Amanda Knox? The college student from Seattle, who was convicted in Italy of murdering her housemate Meredith Kercher during a sex escapade gone awry, has just published her memoir. Random House paid upwards of $4 million for Waiting To Be Heard, and advance reviews indicate that despite some gruesome tales about Italian prison life, America remains undecided about the young woman whom the European tabloids named “Foxy Knoxy.”

There’s enough new material to make sure this case stays in the headlines: prison officers were hitting on her while prosecutors bullied and threatened her, telling her she was HIV positive to destabilize her mood. She depicts a world of torment, being utterly unable to process and deal with the shock of events as they unfolded.

Knox describes how she coped with her original conviction and those harrowing four years in an Italian prison until her conviction was overturned. She also gives her version of some of the more notable stories that circulated after she was charged, including the famous one about doing handstands while in custody and being charged. The next step is in an exclusive interview with ABC news and Diane Sawyer. Might this be the deciding moment for the American public?

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK) for Amanda Knox, who hasn’t quite moved the PR dial of public opinion.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Being talked about is not the same as being liked. The public continues to be confused by this case, even more so now that the Italian courts are retrying it. Amanda Knox still captures headlines, but given her tale of undeserving punishment, there remains an inexplicable lack of sympathy for the young photogenic and educated woman. Part of the PR debate remains stalled in confusion about what really happened that night. In her forthcoming interviews to promote the book, Knox will need to break new ground on this decisive point. That’s where her PR pardon lies.

 

Filed Under: Lowest Graded, 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: , , , , , , ,

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: , , , , , , , ,

Vogue Fashions a (Too) Perfect First Family

March 25, 2013 by Leave a Comment
Vogue Fashions a (Too) Perfect First Family

The PR Verdict: “C” (Distinctly OK) for Vogue’s cover feature on the First Family. (Pictured: First Lady Michelle and President Barack Obama.)

Can planned PR be too effective? That might be the inevitable question when reading the latest edition of American Vogue, featuring First Lady Michelle Obama on the cover.  Photographed elegantly by Annie Liebowitz, the magazine offers an interview with the Obamas at home in the White House, with a particular focus on the First Lady’s views on raising a family. To the Obamas’ supporters, it’s inspiring; to the cynical, it makes for decidedly unedifying reading.

In the article, America’s First Couple talk about “their life as parents, their marriage, and their vision for America’s families.” This is an article that details the rigors of running a household just like any other and the stresses a demanding job can have on any parent. While most working couples find it hard to have an evening meal with their children, Mrs. Obama tells Vogue that the President is home by 6:30 pm to have dinner with her and their two daughters.

The article goes on to emphasize the importance of family, grandparents, and discipline, and the Obamas talk in a good-natured way about coming to terms with technology that teenagers understand as second nature. The PR sound-bite that sums up the article?  This is not the First Family, but rather the “Family First Family.”

THE PR VERDICT: “C” (Distinctly OK ) for the Obamas and their Vogue profile. The ring of authenticity may have sounded a bit tinny coming from this very Obama-friendly publication.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Authenticity gives credibility. This article has all the hallmarks of being quote checked, pre-approved, and negotiated every step of the way. (Important to mention: Vogue editor Anna Wintour raised funds for the Obama campaign and was rumored to be in the running for an ambassadorship.) The result? Some of it just doesn’t ring comfortably true. Though the Obamas may be, in some respects, like ordinary Americans, the magazine’s description of the family sitting down to dinner together seems almost perfectly scripted. The end result is that the reader feels vaguely manipulated. Next time, opt for telling a less 1950’s version of suburban family bliss and opt for something more modern. Sometimes it’s better if PR gets out of its own way.

To read the article, click here.

Filed Under: Lowest Graded, Marketing and PR, Media, Politics, Uncategorized 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: , , , , , , , ,

Changing Hathaway’s Haters

March 6, 2013 by 1 Comment
Changing Hathaways Haters

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Anne Hathaway.

Without a doubt, this year’s Academy Awards gave the media lots to talk about. There’s the debate over Oscar presenter Seth McFarlane’s envelope-pushing monologues, and Jennifer Lawrence’s stumble. But of all the gossip-worthy notes, one point was made so often in the Twitterverse that it began a media storm: Apparently, people hate Anne Hathaway.

Not everyone, of course. After all, Hathaway won a Golden Globe and an Oscar for Les Miserables, and she has appeared on numerous magazine covers. But public opinion has been poisoned: the words “Hathaway,” “annoying” and “hate” garner multimillions of Google results. Even Anderson Cooper recently felt the need to defend Hathaway on his show.

The reasons are vague but came to a tipping point with Hathaway’s Academy Awards acceptance speech. The accusation? Rehearsed and not terribly genuine. Even before that, though, Tweeters were bashing her Awards dress for showing her nipples, a wardrobe malfunction that seemed less accidental after paparazzo photographed her going commando at the New York Les Mis premiere.

Who cares if a few (million) people hate her? Well, Hollywood, for one. Hathaway’s detractors are predominantly women. If Hathaway scores low on female popularity ratings, then certain roles won’t be made available. She needs some turnaround PR to make sure her place at the Vanity Fair Oscar party is secured.

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Anne Hathaway. A legion of female haters may ultimately change her career in Hollywood.

THE PR TAKEAWAY:  Want to be more liked? Find new friends and revisit old ones. When half the movie buying population doesn’t care for you, a PR rethink is needed. Hathaway’s problem is that she tests in market research as aloof and unapproachable. For the moment, cease photo shoots with Vogue and Bazaar, quietly put Valentino back on the rack, and instead publicly pal around with some old school buddies while booking slots on the chat shows hosted by other women: Ellen, Wendy Williams, Oprah, and Chelsea Handler. Being aloof and talented may be chic, but being in the company of other likeable women will turn this PR issue around. Just ask Hilary Clinton and Meryl Streep.

Filed Under: Celebrity, Lowest Graded, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , , ,

On the Red Carpet (Yawn) at the Oscars

February 26, 2013 by Leave a Comment
On the Red Carpet (Yawn) at the Oscars

The PR Verdict: “D” (PR Problematic) for PRs on the red carpet.

Was there anything of note to come out of the almost 90 minutes of interviews on the red carpet before Sunday’s Oscar ceremony? All interviews were tightly managed and controlled, with PRs flanking relentlessly both sides of the stars in question. The problem? Heavy PR supervision led to indistinguishable interviews and some mighty dull TV.

The format of the red-carpet interview is set in stone: Say you are having a wonderful time (“This SOOOO amazing!”). Name the designer of the gown you have been sewn into. Thank everyone who contributed to your look, including your best friend and brilliant stylist (usually the same). Say you chose the outfit because it is simultaneously comfortable, beautiful, and, above all, a reflection of who you really are. With a wave of the hand, show the jewelry. Finally, air-kiss the interviewer farewell while talking in a voice normally reserved for teens at a birthday party. Move onto your next interview, guided by your clipboard-carrying PR heavies, and repeat. No wonder host Seth McFarlane’s patter seemed so shocking by comparison.

PRs are notorious for picking and choosing which journalists will be granted interviews – those who are friendly to their star client, stay on script, and will allow the roll call of designer names to be dropped in lieu of a decent quote. But is this good PR? Why oh why can’t someone be allowed to occasionally go off script?

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for PRs, who just might be doing their jobs too effectively, making glittering celebrities seem positively dull.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: Leave some wiggle room for spontaneity. The most surprising thing about the Oscars was how utterly unsurprising the almost 90 minutes of interviews were before the show started. Nothing wrong with an upbeat tone, but why not have the client differentiate herself from the pack? This might mean the occasional tough interview, or even snarky comment. Sometimes the best PR is packaging the product so that all bases are covered. In other cases, when blessed with a witty, intelligent client, let the cards fall where they may. News is news when something surprises. PRs should consider giving the Twitterverse something to really tweet about.

Filed Under: Celebrity, Lowest Graded, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , ,

When Coke isn’t the Real Thing

February 14, 2013 by Leave a Comment
COKENZ2 150x150 When Coke isnt the Real Thing

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Coca-Cola.

Death by Coca-Cola? The Coca-Cola Company is waging a PR battle in New Zealand after a coroner found that its signature Coke product likely contributed to the heart attack and subsequent death of a young woman, Natasha Harris. The coroner said this week  that the amount of Coke drunk by Harris likely created a metabolic imbalance resulting in an irregular heartbeat. He called for Coca-Cola to put warning labels on its products that make clear the dangers of excessive consumption and to consider lowering the caffeine content.

By all accounts, Harris’s Coke addiction was uncommon. She is estimated to have drunk between 6-10 litres (2-2.5 gallons) per day, the equivalent of more than 2 pounds of sugar and nearly 1000 milligrams of caffeine.  Routinely vomiting and having no remaining teeth of her own, one or more of her eight children was reportedly born with no tooth enamel. Even the coroner conceded that Coca-Cola could not be held responsible for Harris’ irresponsible use of its beverage.

When Harris died three years ago, Coca-Cola resisted the implication that its soda could be linked to her demise. This time around, Coca-Cola is saying it is “disappointed” in the coroner’s findings because there is no conclusive proof that Coke was a substantial factor in Harris’ death. Media outlets around the world are unmoved and sceptical.

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Coca-Cola. When the coroner says your product contributed to someone’s death – and common sense supports that view – saying “Did not!” is guaranteed to create new problems and additional coverage.

THE PR TAKEAWAY:  Aim at the perception not the reality. While the coroner’s report may well have legal holes to be later fought in a court, the real battle here is the reputational risk of Coke being seen as inherently dangerous. Coke is not a nutritionist’s best friend but then again, neither does it kill people on a regular basis. A more persuasive statement would have been to point to the coroner’s own acknowledgement and stress that anything, including water, can be damaging when it’s taken in such dramatic excess. With a response like that, Cocoa Cola may only have had to deal with one day of troubling press coverage and not the multiple it is now facing.

Filed Under: Advertising and PR, Branding, Companies & Markets, Crisis Communictions, Lowest Graded Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , ,

Same Old Snoop Dogg Song and Dance

January 22, 2013 by Leave a Comment

Snoppdogg 150x150 Same Old Snoop Dogg Song and DanceSnoop Dogg, the infamous hip hop singer, has been rehabilitated and now re-launched with a new name, new film, and new album. It’s a full agenda; the “Snoop Dogg” name has been discarded. His new one? Snoop Lion. The spiritually re-birthed Snoop Lion is no longer “singing about smoking weed and killing people.”  Instead, his new message is about smoking weed and then “smoking some more.”

Snoop Lion, whose real name is Calvin Broadus, is a 41-year-old rapper who was acquitted, along with his bodyguard, of the murder of a gang member. He is now launching a new album called Reincarnated, as well as a feature length documentary with the same name. The central theme? His love of weed, the power of weed, and the history of weed.

His re-launch seems puzzlingly similar to his previous persona, which centered around weed. Not known for puritan living, he tells GQ that he would like to spread the word about his favorite pastime. “It’s actually grown from the ground straight to you, so its like eating a vegetable,” he explains. Snoop Lion then takes the interviewer to his favorite physician, Dr. Dina, who provides “medicinal weed” in a place where a “baby faced blonde” employee named Rachel does a handstand. Is this really a reincarnation?

THE PR VERDICT: “D” (PR Problematic) for Snoop Lion, né Dogg. His metamorphosis into Snoop Lion needs a more radical script.

THE PR TAKEAWAY: A different script for a different image.  Snoop Dog was the shorthand for all things “weed related,” says the singer, claiming, “I partake in all things Snoop Dogg” (ie, weed). His re-launch is meant to be coincide with his spiritual reincarnation, as explained in the album and the film documentary. But his GQ interview only reinforces everything we previously knew. From a PR point of view, and without anything new to say, this was a 360 degree reincarnation. Reinvention, or reincarnation, is ineffective if the allegedly new person just keeps saying the same old thing. From Snoop Dogg to Snoop Lion and back to Dogg again…

To read the interview, click here.

Filed Under: Branding, Celebrity, Lowest Graded, Media Tagged With: , , , , , , , , , , , ,
«Older Posts