#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.