Articles published in February, 2009

1. Wanted: real remorse

   Published on Friday, February 20th, 2009

   For those of us who are imperfect, by degrees life is becoming a whole lot more complicated.

   On Wednesday evening at 8:30pm former broadcaster Tony Veitch appeared for the first time on one of Murray Deaker’s sports shows.  By around 10:30pm TV3’s late night news segment was covering the story.  This included an interview with the chief executive of an “anti-violence group” postulating that Veitch should not be on television because he hadn’t displayed “real remorse”.  Ok for him to have a job, but not on television.

   Aside from the fact that this chief executive would have been interviewed before Veitch went to air with Deaker at 8:30pm – he was pre-recorded – the question for communicators is: how do you do or show “real remorse” in this context?

   We know from the family of young Pihema Clifford Cameron who was stabbed one night out tagging, how to do “real hatred”, because they told us, and of course that is a wholly negative emotion.

   We are sinking into an abyss of clichés where we can supposedly interpret the unfathomable, and then feel free to expound our judgement on such matters as who does or doesn’t show real remorse.

   Don’t get me wrong, I’m as judgmental as next man. Prudently I am not confident enough to go on national television and share these judgements.  Why?  At times like this I reach back to lessons learnt as a young reporter.  I’d return to the newsroom to report on a court case I was covering, and write:  “The magistrate was red-faced and angry……”  The editor challenged me: how did I know that the judge didn’t have high blood pressure or the flu?  He didn’t say he was angry, did he?

   Since then I have been more careful about subjective assessments of the emotions displayed by others.  Certainly it would be hard for me to pick “real remorse”.

   In communications we must be careful to not confuse reality with something of lesser substance. Perish the thought that it might be: lights, action, camera – now this time give me some real remorse!

   

   Posted in PR Matters

2. Sticks and stones: when name-calling gets nasty

   Published on Friday, February 13th, 2009

   What is in a name? Well rather a lot actually, particularly if you are young, male and a car enthusiast. Setting off any alarms all you boy racers out there?

   That boy racer label has been making headlines again after Judith Collins threatened to become the Minister of Car Squashing.  As pleasing as it might be to see the fuel injected fools lose their toys, we already have laws around street racing. The 2003 Land Transport Amendment, better known as the Boy Racer Act covers off nicely what is legal and what is pushing it. But there’s that name again. Boy Racer. Actually it sounds rather sweet, young and peppy but the label has become a dumping ground for all sorts of carbon-fuelled idiocy.

   There’s no love lost for boy racers in some quarters of Christchurch. Mayor Bob Parker called them “ugly, immature and embarrassing”. Hard to disagree with, but Canterbury University academic Dr Simon Kingham points out that not all boy racers are criminally minded. And he has a point that you can talk tough without negatively labelling people. Name the behaviour, not the hooligan. Hang-on ‘hooligan’? When does a soccer fan become a hooligan? When a headline says it seems. Labels, we’ve had loads of them, just ask the punk, the yuppie, the like radical, or the barmy army.

   When nicknames cease to be cute though is when a bit of a moral outrage gains traction and before you know it you have a panic on your hands. Jeering headlines can get neighbourhoods up in arms and in no-time-flat the labelled group has one mighty negative image to live up too.

   For those in the business of communication, care needs to be taken in how labels are bandied about.  The point is if you stigmatise you desensitise and throw down the gauntlet for the label wearers to play up more than ever. After all they’ve been handed a tough rep, best they follow through and go raise some rowdy hell.

   

   Posted in PR Matters

3. The first response is all that matters

   Published on Thursday, February 5th, 2009

   When it comes to consumer complaints about food quality it’s the initial response that defines the future. This was evidenced again just after Christmas when a Napier family found what looked like a carpet tack in a large lollipop.

   In reality the tack had done no damage because the youngster dropped the lollipop as soon as the tack was visible.  But the parents were concerned enough to contact the distributor, Universal Trading Limited.

   Concern turned to outrage when they detected a lack of sympathy and concern from the distributor.

   The next call was to One News which made a meal of the story during a very dry news time. The reporter contacted the store where the lollipop was purchased, Pak ‘N Save Napier, which immediately withdrew the confectionery sale, and through their co-operative Foodstuffs, initiated a nationwide withdrawal.  A call to their competitor Progressive resulted in the same for their stores.

   In the scale of food issues this was not a biggie, although the statement on TV news was that the family said only a “Christmas miracle” saved the toddle from injury.  In fact the toddler has dropped the lollipop of his own accord so the risk was small, if one at all.

   Why did this become an issue?  Because the distributor responded poorly to the initial call from the consumer! As a result they got unwanted national coverage. 

   The story was overblown – there was coverage two nights running on the major bulletin – but the lollipop’s distributors only had themselves to blame.  The first consumer contact is really critical.

   

   Posted in Crisis Communications