NYRR Blames Media for Fueling Sandy Struggle. A Lesson in Bad PR.

There IS such a thing as bad press. The New York Road Runners gave us this lesson when they made themselves a lightening rod during the debate of whether or not to hold the New York City Marathon in the wake of Superstorm Sandy.  Mayor Bloomberg did not help the situation in the lead up to the final decision by continuing to pursue holding the race. In his defense, commonsense finally prevailed and the event was cancelled.  However, NYRR made its own situation worse by blaming everyone but the storm.

About 14 hours after the decision to cancel the marathon was announced, NYRR sent out an email to its members blaming the media for “…coverage antagonistic to the marathon and its participants, created conditions that raised concern for the safety of both those working to produce the event and its participants. While holding the race would not have required diverting resources from the recovery effort…”

They had 14 hours, if not longer, to think about the content of their email and the message that they wanted to deliver to NYC and the runners.  In the context of their email, this finger-pointing message is the third sentence, and in the paragraph that comes BEFORE mentioning where donations can be made and what NYRR will do with the resources that they have to help those in need. 

The New York Post did a great job pointing out the marathon’s generators, heated tents, food, bottled water and labor of the men and women putting up bleachers and signs. This is what journalists do. The reporters did not make this up. They did not leave their homes in the morning looking to pick a fight with NYRR. They reported the facts and made a reasonable and humane assessment that all of the stuff being used for the race could be used for people who are actually suffering and are unable to get basic human services like heat, food, drinking water and shelter. 

In crisis PR, a half-day to prepare a written statement is a luxury.  There was absolutely no reason for NYRR to write about the negative press they were currently receiving by redirecting the blame to those who were simply highlighting their selfishness.

The appropriate statement could have been “There was a big storm. Sadly, many people lost their lives. You may have seen media reports that we have the very resources that our neighbors desperately need. Although you may be disappointed that the marathon was cancelled, we are sure that you understand that it would not be appropriate to hold this race. Instead, we will redeploy these much needed resources to the areas where they are most needed.”

End of discussion. 

Melissa Daly has worked in media relations and financial communications for nearly 20 years. Melissa formed MFD Communications, a strategic consulting firm, after spending three years at Goldman Sachs as Vice President, Corporate Communications. Prior to that, Melissa was a Director at Brunswick Group, a London-based financial and business communications firm. There, she spearheaded its financial services business in the US, managing communications for hedge fund, private equity, insurance and traditional asset management firms. Melissa also worked at Fred Alger Management, The Hartford and Lipper in communications and media relations roles and has frequently appeared on CNBC and CNN as an industry commentator.   Her experience spans across business sectors and continents. 

Paul Ryan Can’t Answer a Strange Question

Let me start by saying that this is a non-partisan commentary.  On Monday, Paul Ryan was interviewed by a reporter with ABC12 in Flint, Michigan. Like all good broadcast interviews, the topic quickly changed.  Vice Presidential candidate Paul Ryan and his public relations handler didn’t like the direction and instantly ended the interview.  See it here on BuzzFeed. I have written about this topic before and am always drawn to the abruptly ended interview. Mostly because it makes the person who walked off look ill prepared and silly.

Mr. Ryan was engaged in an interview discussing gun laws.  He successfully talked about the need to enforce the current laws. He called it a crime problem, not a gun problem. He then went on to explain the need for improved services in inner cities and that more should be done to address what is at the heart of the crime problem. All good.

The reporter then asked how that would be possible while cutting taxes. Cue the flak who then interrupted and said that the interview was over.  Ryan appeared appalled and accused the reporter of putting those words in his mouth and said that was a “strange question.”  Not really.  A strange question would be something like “boxers or briefs?”

Ok, you are running for a high profile political office.  You will likely have hundreds of press interviews.  The topics you need to be prepared to respond to are always going to be, well, everything.  If you are the Republican vice presidential candidate, you can safely assume that hot topics will include taxes, guns, abortion and your marathon time.  It appears that in this recent interview, Ryan’s prep for a tax-related question was to be pulled off stage.

To be fair, Paul Ryan’s campaign responded to follow-up media queries with the following clarification “Eventually you’re going to see a local reporter embarrass himself.” Well played. Always blame the reporter.  I recall that this worked well when Sarah Palin blamed Katie Couric for her tough line of questioning, which included asking what Ms. Palin read on a regular basis.

Let’s apply Ryan’s performance to the business world. When senior executives are going to be interviewed by the media, they need to be prepared for everything that has to do with their company and industry.  But they also need to be prepared for anything that is in the public domain, or would eventually become public.

The right preparation for any interview should include the basics of the subject you are scheduled to discuss. But as a business leader or other spokesperson, you need to assess what could be asked.  How do we figure that out?  First, look at the paper and see what’s being said about you or the firm and your competitors. Next, think about any industry or regulatory issues.  You also need to consider what you have talked about in the past. Topics that you have been on the record

about are also fair game. Have an answer.

Paul Ryan blew an opportunity to discuss his platform.  The word “taxes” was uttered and mics were ripped off. So instead of everyone discussing Romney/Ryan’s proposed budget plan, the story is now Paul Ryan lost his cool, blamed the reporter and now looks like the kid who walked off the playground and took his ball home.

Melissa Daly has worked in media relations and financial communications for nearly 20 years. Melissa formed MFD Communications, a strategic consulting firm, after spending three years at Goldman Sachs as Vice President, Corporate Communications. Prior to that, Melissa was a Director at Brunswick Group, a London-based financial and business communications firm. There, she spearheaded its financial services business in the US, managing communications for hedge fund, private equity, insurance and traditional asset management firms. Melissa also worked at Fred Alger Management, The Hartford and Lipper in communications and media relations roles and has frequently appeared on CNBC and CNN as an industry commentator.   Her experience spans across business sectors and continents. 

Approving No Quote Approvals

Last week, The New York Times drew “a clear line” against the practice of allowing sources to approve quotes after an interview takes place and before the story goes to print.

During my many years as a public relations professional, I have worked with corporate clients who have made the review process a key part of their media policy before allowing an executive to be interviewed by a journalist. This is a huge ask of any reporter.  It can also be insulting to the interviewer as this request implies that you don’t trust the reporter’s ability to get it right.

Proactively pitching an executive to the press is not an easy job.  Then adding the caveat of requiring a quote check is simply disingenuous.  When you are on the defense, asking for a quote approval seems like your executive or firm may be hiding something.  Mostly, it can give the appearance that the executive cannot be trusted with speaking on the record about a business line or particular issue. None of these perceptions is ideal.

Of course there are rare times when asking for quote approvals may be necessary.  For example, if a topic is particularly complicated and a quote check can ensure accuracy on verbiage.  The New York Times will allow quote checks with the proper editorial approvals.  Likely they won’t grant permission if it’s simply because the executive is inexperienced or unprepared.

Over the years, the practice of quote approvals has become more common. I have asked some reporters why they so easily give in to agreeing to do quote checks. Mostly it boils down to access and in some cases, it’s a corporate-wide policy.  Reporters can’t thoroughly report if no one will talk to them.

How can pr professionals deal with the practice of no longer being allowed to review quotes? Prepare. Before the interview, prepare the reporter with the appropriate background information, which includes facts and figures on the business, and relevant information on the person being interviewed. Then make sure that whomever is being interviewed is well versed on the subject matter and has prepared appropriate answers to anticipated easy and difficult questions. And then do a run-through or mock interview.

Press interviews are like a chess game with a bit of a dance jammed between the moves. One must anticipate the next play but the participants need to work together a little bit for both sides to engage with each other on a long-term basis. The right preparation and practice will make executives and their bosses more comfortable with being interviewed on the record.

Melissa Daly has worked in media relations and financial communications for nearly 20 years. Melissa formed MFD Communications, a strategic consulting firm, after spending three years at Goldman Sachs as Vice President, Corporate Communications. Prior to that, Melissa was a Director at Brunswick Group, a London-based financial and business communications firm. There, she spearheaded its financial services business in the US, managing communications for hedge fund, private equity, insurance and traditional asset management firms. Melissa also worked at Fred Alger Management, The Hartford and Lipper in communications and media relations roles and has frequently appeared on CNBC and CNN as an industry commentator.   Her experience spans across business sectors and continents. 

A Lesson From #MittRomney and #ParisHilton

Last week Mitt Romney and Paris Hilton were each defending private exchanges that were made public by others.  Let’s review. While at a fundraiser earlier this year, Mr. Romney made comments about the segment of the population that he will never convince to vote for him. Thus, he doesn’t care as much about this group for campaigning purposes.  A video recording of this  was recently brought to light.  And last week, while Ms. Hilton was in a NYC taxi, the driver caught her on tape making an inflammatory statement about gay men and AIDS.  Both of these comments “were taken out of context,” according to the individuals.  I don’t know either of them well enough to guess what they actually meant. 

Here’s the lesson:  If you are the president, presidential candidate, average politician, CEO, CFO, business leader, or just famous for being wealthy, your comments are never private if there are people around who are not legally or morally obligated to keep your words a secret. No matter your professional title, if the public is generally interested in you as a person, anything that you say in front of others can make headlines.   

Whether you are in the broad public eye, or famous within your industry, you are living in a fishbowl.  So no matter the size of that fishbowl, when you are speaking to a colleague at a conference, someone may be listening. If you are at a restaurant, someone is taking note (and you should always tip well).  Any presentation you give, whether to a small or very large audience, may be caught on tape. Once you put your words out there, anyone can capture them and make them public.

But also consider with the permanent archive that is the World Wide Web, even if you are not a business leader, political candidate, well-known actor, or whatever, now, someday you may be. What you post, record, or say publicly today may someday come back to haunt you with a simple Google or Bing search.

Over the last several days, a lot of blame has been put on the person who recorded Romney and the cab driver who taped Hilton. But really, if Mitt and Paris gave some thought before they spoke, these comments wouldn’t be out in the public domain.  The blame lies solely on the people who made these remarks.   We’ve all said silly things in the past, but we don’t blame others for remembering them.

Simply, if you don’t want to see it in print, don’t say it.

Melissa Daly has worked in media relations and financial communications for nearly 20 years. Melissa formed MFD Communications, a strategic consulting firm, after spending three years at Goldman Sachs as Vice President, Corporate Communications. Prior to that, Melissa was a Director at Brunswick Group, a London-based financial and business communications firm. There, she spearheaded its financial services business in the US, managing communications for hedge fund, private equity, insurance and traditional asset management firms. Melissa also worked at Fred Alger Management, The Hartford and Lipper in communications and media relations roles and has frequently appeared on CNBC and CNN as an industry commentator.   Her experience spans across business sectors and continents. 

#RepClarke, No One got the Joke, Not Even #Colbert

As the funniest, and most sarcastic person I know, even I have the good sense to understand when to keep my humor at bay.   

While appearing on “The Colbert Report”, which aired earlier this week, Brooklyn Rep. Yvette Clarke offered a surprising glimpse into both her lack of historical knowledge of the borough she represents, as well as a current understanding of her own sense of humor.  In this interview, Clarke told Stephen Colbert that slavery persisted in Brooklyn until as late as 1898. However, slavery was legally abolished in New York in 1827. You can see the clip HERE. 

To be fair, this is not an easy show for a guest. Mr. Colbert is a genius with a staff of brilliant writers. It’s tough to compete with that. Clarke should not have tried.  But since she did, she had plenty of opportunity to lighten the moment by simply saying, “I was kidding.” Better yet, don’t joke about a topic that simply isn’t funny (i.e. slavery). Instead, she made Colbert, and the rest of the country, uncomfortable with her comments and poor delivery. 

I have never met Representative Clarke, nor do I pay much attention to her as I live on the Upper West Side and no one in public office tries to be funny up here.  Perhaps she has a great sense of humor and is always the funniest person in the room. Or her jokes are always met with uncomfortable laughter. One thing is certain; she was not funny in this spot.

Here’s my advice. Humor does not always work. Don’t try to be funny in situations when you are not 100% positive that your jokes won’t die on the vine.   In print interviews, sarcasm never works, as a journalist cannot put an emoticon after your quote. On television, it’s a bit easier, but jokes have to be clear. Not everyone gets sarcasm and if you are in a serious profession or senior role, the expectation is that everything you say should be taken seriously.

Sarcasm can be quite dangerous. Consider that your comments will be repeated verbatim without the wink and nod that you delivered with your statement.  Think about how those comments will resonate among a broader audience. Often, you will see that not everyone will get it and some might be offended. Worst case is that you may appear ignorant (see above).

As a result of this interview, Clarke's spokesperson’s response has been that the representative was simply joking with Colbert. "It's a comedy show -- it's meant to be light and meant to be funny. Unfortunately, it was a joke that some people understood and some people didn't understand," he said.  For the record, I did not understand it.

I’ve been a spokesperson for many people over many years, on a wide range of topics.  I’ve never had to publicly explain that my boss just simply isn’t funny.  That wouldn’t be uncomfortable at all.

Melissa Daly has worked in financial communications for nearly 20 years, with a special focus on media relations and key message development around critical issues. Melissa formed MFD Communications after spending three years at Goldman Sachs as Vice President, Corporate Communications. Prior to that, Melissa was a Director at Brunswick Group, a London-based financial and business communications firm. There, she spearheaded its financial services business in the US, managing communications for hedge fund, private equity, insurance and traditional asset management firms. Melissa also worked at Fred Alger Management, The Hartford and Lipper in communications and media relations roles and has frequently appeared on CNBC and CNN as an industry commentator.   Her experience spans across business sectors and continents. 

#HOTmic Will Burn You

Here’s my free advice of the day: If you are near a microphone, it may be on.  And if you are WEARING a microphone, it IS on. You can safely assume that someone will hear your comments, and may record them. And if noteworthy, those comments will be replayed and picked up broadly by other media outlets.

On Wednesday, Yahoo! News Washington Bureau Chief David Chalian was fired because of remarkably inappropriate comments he made about Mitt Romney and his wife ahead of a live webcast covering the Republican National Convention.   Chalian naively thought his remarks were private. But he was wearing a microphone and, GASP, this obnoxious statement was picked up and now the world gets hear what he said.  Yahoo! acted quickly, issued a statement, terminated Mr. Chalian and apologized to the RNC.

You will recall that President Obama did something similar in March when he uttered to then-Russian President Medvedev, that “after my election I have more flexibility,” in relation to the contentious issue of missile defense. The world heard this embarrassing “private” moment.

POTUS and a seasoned journalist are far from being amateurs, but these are very foolish mistakes that everyone should learn from.

I tell my clients to never to let their guard down when they are in the presence of reporters and especially when doing an interview.  Most importantly, the interview, or broadcast, begins when the mic is near, the phone call starts or the reporter is in earshot. The interview ends when the mic is nowhere in sight, the phone is hung up and you and the reporter have parted ways.

I can point to countless headlines and incidents of comments that were made before or after a media interview when an executive, celebrity or politician believed that because the light wasn’t on, or the reporter’s notebook was put away, that their comments would be off-the-record. In the case of a live microphone, nothing is off the record. And with any journalist, nothing is off the record unless both sides agree BEFOREHAND that any following statements will be off the record.

So that means when you are on a conference call assume that someone else is on the line. When walking with a reporter to or from an elevator, assume that your comments can be jotted down later. And when the microphone is on you, it’s on, even if the camera is not.

Never take a relationship with a journalist for granted and never assume that because you don’t want the world to hear your comments, they won’t.

Melissa F Daly has worked in financial communications for more than 15 years, with a special focus on media relations and key message development around critical issues. Melissa formed MFD Communications, a communications strategy firm, after spending three years at Goldman Sachs as Vice President, Corporate Communications. Prior to that, Melissa was a Director at Brunswick Group, a London-based financial and business communications firm. There, she spearheaded its financial services business in the US, managing communications for hedge fund, private equity, insurance and traditional asset management firms. Melissa also worked at Fred Alger Management, The Hartford and Lipper in communications and media relations roles and has frequently appeared on CNBC and CNN as an industry commentator.   Her experience spans business sectors and continents. 

The First Rule: Prepare.

Wednesday’s Wall Street Journal featured an interesting story on Facebook’s advertising strategy and its new VP of Marketing, Carolyn Everson.  The reporter highlighted Everson’s first big meeting with advertising heavyweights including executives from Unilever, Wal-Mart and Coca-Cola. Facebook’s CEO, Mark Zuckerberg, was linked in via videoconference.

Facebook has been struggling with its advertising strategy. It’s known to many outsiders that it needs to justify its value to its sponsors.  According to the Journal’s piece, when Mr. Zuckerberg was asked if the advertisers were committed to spending big bucks with Facebook, how could they be assured a return on their investment?

Mr. Zuckerberg's response, according to one of the attendees: "That's a great question and we should probably have an answer to that, shouldn't we?"

WHAT????

I have three rules that I share with my clients. The first rule is to thoroughly prepare for every presentation and press interview. One must prepare key messages and content and then practice those talking points.  This preparation and practice should be the same whether it is for a small audience, keynote speech or interview with a major publication.

Part of this preparation goes beyond the few points you want to deliver to your audience. You must also prepare for the tough questions.  A lot of focus is often spent on high profile press interviews and noteworthy speeches. But sales and investor meetings should be no different, especially if you are a C-suite executive or business leader. Your words will resonate, potentially travelling quickly through the investment community, among competitors and likely the media, as we saw with this example.

When speaking with your stakeholders, whether in person or using the press as a conduit for your message, know what the tough questions will be and have an answer for them.  The topic may be sensitive, but avoiding it or giving a flippant response will only make matters worse.  The audience will think you are either hiding something or simply don’t care.  Neither is beneficial for you or your firm.

See my related previous post: http://mfdcommunications.blogspot.com/2011/10/was-that-question-really-such-surprise.html

Dimon vs. Diamond

Obviously Jamie Dimon won this head-to-head PR battle, as he’s still standing and still has a job. But let's review what happened.

In May, JPMorgan was reeling when it wound up with a colossal trading loss, not the tempest in a teapot that its CEO Jamie Dimon originally described. It turned out to be a hurricane, and we’re still not sure of its size. The loss could be anywhere from $3 billion to $9 billion. Perhaps, larger. No one knows for sure, as it depends on the exit and the day you ask. Nonetheless, Dimon stepped up and admitted mistakes. Heads rolled. Dimon's head bowed.

Recently, Barclay's acknowledged that its traders manipulated Libor in order to benefit the firm.  Its CEO Bob Diamond's stance was to say that the firms’ traders involved were wrong and that he wasn't going to leave the Barclays. The next day, he left the firm saying, "The focus of intensity was my leadership. It was better for me to step down."  Note, he did not say that he took any responsibility for the actions of those under his watch.  

Dimon owned up to the mistakes of individuals and his team, as well as his own shortcomings. While Diamond deflected, saying that it was the traders’ fault. You know what? CEOs are responsible for what happens under their leadership. Not dissimilar to a middle manager being responsible for their individual team members.  The standard is higher for the CEO because the pay is a bit more and the responsibility much greater, thus there is more accountability.  You can't take all of the credit and none of the blame, especially in such a public display.

Here’s what Dimon said in front of the US Senate: “We made a mistake. I am absolutely responsible. The buck stops with me.” Simple, clean and honest. People liked and respected him for it.

In contrast, Diamond pointed fingers at everyone else while answering to the British Parliament. He shifted some blame onto the Bank of England’s Paul Tucker. He denied having knowledge of the traders’ actions. He pointed to the faults of Libor itself. He also voiced his frustration that other banks were not suffering from the same negative spotlight.  Not a single one of his many fingers was pointed at himself. The reviews of this performance were not positive.

The difference here is in understanding the gravity of a situation and anticipating stakeholder reaction to both the issue and the response. JPM expected their story to have legs and consistently appeared to be well prepared. In contrast, Diamond added fuel to his own firing (I mean, resignation) by being cocky and assuming that the story would just go away.  According to a WSJ story last week, he believed this story would last one news cycle.

Having read a newspaper or two, I have never seen a $400 million+ settlement just vanish after one news cycle.  I have often been criticized for being too cynical. However, being a cynic opens the mind to potential risks of a bad story, expectations of the worst possible scenario, followed by the preparation for said scenario. It certainly is not a pretty or easy road to travel, but in the long run, it is the safest route. 

Yes, I Am Giving It Away.

Having a successful press interview goes well beyond gesture, posture and costume.  The reality is that in order to have an effective conversation with a journalist, preparation must begin well before the interview is scheduled.

Before taking the plunge to build your brand in the press, you must first know what you want to say and how to say it.  My experience has shown me that many people spend a lot of time on the superficial elements and not enough on their content.

So here.  Don’t waste thousands of dollars, or your valuable time, for the very basics. Here are my Top 11 pointers that you shouldn’t have to pay an expert for:

1.     Don’t wear white on television. It’s too glaring.

2.     Move your hands to gesture, but don’t fidget.

3.     Speak slowly and clearly.

4.     Smile so that you don’t look angry on TV.

5.     For television interviews, look at the person speaking to you and not the camera.

6.     Make sure the journalist has your correct title and spelling of your name.

7.     Sit on the edge of your seat and the bottom of your jacket to keep it from bunching at the shoulders.

8.     If there is a microphone around, assume it’s on.

9.     You are always on the record unless it is very clear that you are not. Even then, what you say may be used in another context.

10. Powder your nose.

11. Be prepared.

Although important, some believe that these tips are the secret to a successful interview. They are not.  Delivering your messages clearly, concisely and honestly are the real measures of success.

Spend your time cultivating relationships with journalists, developing and then simplifying your key messages and learning how to control an interview.  Only then will the superficial elements of how to look and sound fall naturally into place.  If you want to get your messages across clearly to your audience, think about what you want your audience to hear and remember. 

And when you need help understanding how to work with the media and how to develop your sound bites, call in an expert that understands your business as well as media expectations.

Of course there are risks with every press encounter. However, preparing well in advance of the interview and focusing and rehearsing your talking points will help you better navigate and control the interview and enable you to communicate effectively with your audience.  And look good doing it. 

Cramer Finally Gone Too Far?

Obviously we all watched, glanced at, reviewed, or read about JPM CEO Jamie Dimon’s appearance before the Senate Banking Committee yesterday. Many observers said that Mr. Dimon came out winning.  Essentially, he won simply because he didn’t lose, but more importantly, he appeared honest, prepared, contrite and real.  Let’s face it; this is no easy task when the entire financial community and Washington are watching.

Following the testimony, CNBC colleagues asked Jim Cramer how Mr. Dimon fared.  His response was to call him a loser 14 times, twice say he is stupid and then he professed that Mr. Dimon himself agreed with this assessment.   I am no body language expert, but the others on stage looked a bit uncomfortable.  You can watch it here via Dealbreaker’s site.  

http://dealbreaker.com/2012/06/so-this-is-jim-cramer-talking-about-jamie-dimon/

What should communications professionals do if a reporter or commentator goes off the rails against a client or executive? It’s always best to maintain a healthy relationship with the press. But, of course, it’s not always possible.   In this case, it is a careful balance of first, not adding fuel to an unpredictable fire and second, keeping the offensive behavior in check. 

This type of situation warrants a phone call, off-the-record conversation and a request for an apology. I would not expect a public apology, but the bad behavior should be flagged as unacceptable and won’t be tolerated.  Here, the leverage is the relationship. CNBC has had the privilege of many exclusive Dimon interviews,  JPM doesn’t have to continue to do that.   

CNBC viewers watch the programming for sound financial advice, market moving news, thoughtful opinions and light banter, not unwarranted character assassinations.  This rant shows a lack of respect and a lack of class. CNBC is better than that. 

Heck of a Job Brownie, I mean, #NasdaqOMX

Finally, after nearly three weeks of observing this colossal PR blunder, Robert Greifeld, CEO of Nasdaq OMX, offered an apology to the financial industry. Perhaps some investors too, but that wasn’t really clear. 

Nasdaq obviously bungled the IPO listing of Facebook on May 18^th. But two days later said, “We definitely call it a success.” Some early introspection and an acknowledgement of screwing up would have helped fill the void of Nasdaq’s voice and perhaps tempered some of the attacks by Nasdaq’s clients and thus, the media.

Nasdaq followed its apology by offering a sort of reimbursement package to clients that lost money from the mistakes made with the Facebook IPO.  The response was not kind.  Statements  by its clients, including Knight Capital calling it “unacceptable” and those made by rival NYSE saying it was “wholly inconsistent with fair practice” would indicate that the compensation package was conceived in a bubble. This is going to invite a lot more negative press for the exchange. 

In life, when people make mistakes that hurt others, lie, cheat or steal, the best thing to do is acknowledge the error, say “sorry” and then take the appropriate steps to make the injured party whole.  In business, at least have a public relations strategy that acknowledges the issue, quickly get out and make the appropriate statements publicly and then consider key stakeholders and their responses when offering to address or compensate for those errors.  And do it quickly, not three weeks later. Three weeks is an eternity in this environment. 

You’re doing a heck of a job Mr. Greifeld. 

Who is Happiest With The Facebook Debacle?

Now that most of the breaking news is about Facebook, Nasdaq and Morgan Stanley, the heat has come off of JPMorgan. At least from a press perspective things have likely quieted down for Mr. Dimon and his communications team.  I am sure it is a welcome break to get off the front page, for now at least.  This is a good opportunity for them to have a breather, even though it will be a brief one. Plus, they can relish the fact that Mr. Dimon has been named one of the best-dressed CEOs, according to CNBC.

Or is the happier party NYSE Euronext? They suffered a blow when they lost the Facebook IPO after successfully listing other tech-based firms including LinkedIn and Pandora.  But now they can jump on this opportunity get Facebook back in their corner as well as sway other firms that may have been on the fence about where to list their IPO.

Not all bad news is bad for everyone.  

NASDAQ. WOW.

I believe that I speak for many of my peers when I say that watching the swirl of media around Nasdaq OMX’s handling of the Facebook IPO is cringe inducing.  Let’s be clear, this is obviously a mess created by the business not the poor pr folks trying to put out the press fires.

I apologize in advance for this awful comparison. The Facebook IPO was about seamless as Kim Kardashian’s marriage.  A lot of hype, a lot of money, a lot of press coverage, and apparently a lot less rehearsal and preparation than needed. It appears that neither was fully prepared for the speed bumps ahead. 

Nasdaq seems to be making a lot of enemies right now.  This event was supposed to earn back its credibility and make it some new “friends” along the way.  But now everyone is coming out swinging against Nasdaq. Knight Capital’s CEO Thomas Joyce told CNBC that he dubbed the fiasco “the worst performance by an exchange on an IPO, ever.” EVER!

On Monday, The Wall Street Journal added insult to injury by outlining all of the crises that have occurred in the past 18 months under Bob Greifeld’s watch.  That paragraph alone likely caused the most angst for Nasdaq and its press handlers.  And today, the New York Post rubbed it in a little more by featuring an eleven-year old whose highly anticipated Facebook stock purchase is still in limbo.  It’s never good for any firm to have an eleven-year old victim. Ouch.   

So what is a pr and communications team to do? Get ahead of the problem when possible.  Make sure that all hands are on deck during any large event. Second, decide early on how to best handle potential pitfalls.  Nasdaq’s initial response to the press was to decline comment and avoid any press questions on Friday. The press and the public do not expect to have all of their questions answered during such frenzy but they expect something beyond a no comment.  There was obviously a problem at Nasdaq.  How about “We are addressing the issues and when we have definitive answers, we will communicate them.”   It wasn’t until two days later that reporters were given any answers. That was a lot of time for others to fill the gap of silence.  And finally, be sure that you loop in industry observers who can speak positively about your organization.

We can safely assume that the executives at the New York Stock Exchange are closely watching the press coverage.  They are likely confident that they would have handled the Facebook IPO better than Nasdaq.   Well, based on the bungling of this latest IPO, I think the NYSE has a pretty good shot of winning its next pitch.

JPM Handling PR the Right Way

THE DALY DOSE

JPM IS HANDLING THEIR PUBLIC RELATIONS ISSUES THE RIGHT WAY

It’s obvious that JPMorgan is dealing with a PR nightmare right now.  In these situations, it’s very easy to criticize their handling of a $2 billion trading loss.  But JPM is doing a great job of owning up to its problems, communicating what went wrong and the steps that they are taking to address them.  Lifting their veil to show vulnerability and humanity is gutsy and will pay off in the long run.  The public and government officials do not want to see arrogance or a lack of accountability.

The easiest thing to do right now would be to hunker down, keep journalists at arm’s length and decline to comment.  It’s commendable that the executives at JPM appear to want to set the record straight, admit to faults, show their pain and demonstrate that they are not infallible.

JPM is telling their story before others can tell it for them.  It would appear that they are actively engaging with journalists to help them understand the problems and potential solutions. If the execs at JPM decided to bury their heads, journalists would be left with no alternative other than to speak with outsiders.  Those outsiders can only guess about what is going on in the JPM war room and they have little to lose by criticizing JPM either as a named source or industry insider.

No business is perfect and every organization has the potential to have something or someone derail which could jeopardize a brand. It’s the handling of a crisis that shows the true strength and grit of a firm and its people.