What happened to clean cut, serious Secret Service agents in suits with earpieces and dark sunglasses?  Where are the dedicated professionals who would take a bullet for those they protect? A series of bad choices by the advance security team for President Obama’s trip to the Summit of Americas in Cartagena, Columbia have left the U.S. Secret Service struggling to save its reputation.

The Secret Service prostitution scandal continues to get a lot of media coverage.  “Hookergate” stories focus on the drunken behavior of the team and how they allegedly brought as many as 20 prostitutes to their hotel and then tried to cheat them out of their money.  The paramount concerns are that members of the team violated top secret security clearances by boasting about their affiliation with the president and that they put foreign nationals into contact with sensitive security information that could have been passed on to terrorists or drug cartel leaders. The latest headlines wonder if they were using taxpayer dollars from their “per diem” to pay the prostitutes. The actions of a few have jeopardized the image of the entire agency.

To its credit, the agency moved quickly. It immediately replaced the employees in question. It assured everyone that security had not been compromised. The director, Mark Sullivan, apologized and initiated an internal investigation.  His swift reaction was text book crisis communications. There was obviously a plan in place including holding statements, messages and protocols for a fast response. Without a detailed, concrete plan, it can be difficult to respond quickly.

Fast action that came down hard on offenders has resonated with the media and the public. So far, the sex scandal has cost six agents their jobs. Five more members of the elite presidential protection agency have been put on leave and are expected to soon be gone. The investigation also includes eleven military personnel.  Aside from the internal investigation, the Department of Homeland Security and Congressional leaders have launched their own reviews and yesterday, there were calls from the Senate for an expanded probe that would extend to White House personnel who were assigned to prepare for the President’s trip.

The continuing concern and debate demands full disclosure.  When the investigations are complete, transparency will be key. There have been too many situations where organizations have covered for their own. The public wants to know what went wrong and why.  And, while you can never say never, it will want to know what measures will be taken to prevent this sort of thing from happening again.

The pressure is on. Republican presidential candidate, Mitt Romney says he would “clean house” at the agency.  He contends that there’s been a violation of public trust and that these individuals put “ personal interests ahead of the interests of the nation.”

If the agency is to continue to manage this crisis effectively, it will require full, open disclosure and more action. If the investigation finds this incident was an abnormality…a few guys who made bad choices… it’s an easier fix.  Systemic problems will call for more effort.  The scandal has raised questions about the culture that exists within the Secret Service. Many consider it arrogant and anti-female.  The employees are ninety per cent male.  If these broader questions are not answered, lingering negative perceptions could cause lasting damage to the Service’s public image and its once stellar reputation.

Robocall protestors gathered in cities across Canada yesterday to call for a public inquiry into the election fraud scandal that’s been brewing for weeks. Waving placards and shouting through megaphones, protestors were demanding accountability and a more transparent election process.

Initially, Prime Minister Stephen Harper didn’t want to deal with the emerging crisis. The tactic was to ignore it…a wait and see strategy…hoping the whole thing would blow over.  It didn’t.  Political debate on Parliament Hill in Ottawa has been dominated by the robocalls controversy.  The Liberals and New Democrats accuse the Conservatives of being behind the calls. While the focus has been on the riding of Guelph, Ontario, the Opposition argues the automated calls sending people to the wrong polling stations occurred in dozens of ridings during the federal election last May.

Critics have labeled Harper and his Tory government both defensive and righteous…claiming that those are the hallmarks of almost every challenge they face.

As the robocall crisis gained momentum, the Tory tactic switched from ignore to deny.  Harper and his senior team categorically denied involvement and said they were victims of “baseless smears”.

When that didn’t seem to work, the Tory tactic shifted again…this time to attack. The Prime Minister stood in the House of Commons and blasted the Liberals saying they were “sore losers” engaged in a “sleaze campaign”. He accused them of using an American call centre to send the fraudulent calls.

The approach backfired. The Tories had their facts wrong.  The U.S. company has the same name as one in Canada, but has nothing to do with Canadian politics.  It’s always wise to do your homework before you engage in finger pointing. Trying to shift the blame is always a risky strategy in any crisis.

Conventional wisdom in crisis communications suggests that you need to acknowledge a crisis quickly, show concern at a senior level and take positive action. That doesn’t mean you admit guilt. From the outset, the Prime Minister could have focused on the government’s willingness to investigate. At the same time, he could have reminded the public that this type of thing is not government policy.

Along with country-wide protests, tens of thousands of people have signed an on-line petition calling for a public inquiry saying the on-going Elections Canada investigation is not enough.  Beyond that, the Council of Canadians is trying to mount a group lawsuit saying “voters were misled, harassed and subjected to dirty tricks”. Whatever the Tory agenda may have been, it has, to some degree, been de-railed by the robocall crisis and the way it has been handled. Communications choices were made and now the fallout continues.

Costa Concordia

We continue to watch the Costa Concordia crisis unfold in Italy.  Last month’s cruise ship tragedy cost 17 people their lives and at least 17 more people are still missing.  Also, there continue to be concerns about fuel leaking into the ocean because bad weather and rough water have delayed the salvage work.  The company’s reputation has taken a direct hit and now Costa faces the daunting challenge of trying to re-build its public image. From a crisis communications perspective, let’s look at three rules for damage control to analyze Costa’s response.

1. Communicate Early – Don’t Delay:

In a crisis, your initial response is critical. You want to think things through, but, ideally, you shouldn’t delay too long. Your crisis communications plan should kick in immediately so that you can be pro-active and not just reactive. You want to start communicating your messages as quickly as possible…before people start to judge, blame or say “you’re hiding something”.

Think about the initial timetable in Costa’s response. The Concordia ran aground during the evening of Friday, January 13.  The first press release from the parent company, Carnival Corporation, came out in the late afternoon on January 14.  The first news conference with the CEO of the Costa line wasn’t scheduled until January 16.  By then, we had been flooded with photos, videos, news stories and opinions. The ship could be seen from the island and the passengers were going ashore.  And, unlike those on the Titanic, these passengers had all kinds of equipment to help spread the news.

With advances in technology, the speed of the digital age and the social media revolution, everyone can be a broadcaster. We are living in a time when the term “journalist” is being redefined. CNN has just passed the one million mark of registered ijournalists. These are citizen journalists ready to help cover the news if there are no reporters nearby or when more perspectives can improve coverage for an event. In today’s world of communications, you don’t have the luxury of time. Social media, in particular, has been a game changer. You can’t hesitate in your response.

2. Take Responsibility – Don’t look for a scapegoat:

Generally speaking, in a crisis, placing blame squarely on one or more individuals before there has been a full and proper investigation can be a very risky strategy. We saw how quickly Costa put the blame on Captain Francesco Schettino, now nicknamed “Captain Coward”.  Schettino admitted fault, but as more details come out, we see it may not be completely clear cut.  Apparently, there were precedents for going too close to shore to offer “a salute”.  And, leaked transcripts of bugged conversations suggest the captain was told to go close to shore by a company manager. The criminal investigation and the class action lawsuit are also raising questions about company procedure, employee screening, the equipment on the ship and the training provided for the crew.

In a crisis, looking for someone to blame might be a clever tactic, but it could also be a PR gaffe.  The company continues on its path to prosecute the captain who is still under house arrest. Today, prosecutors asked he be returned to jail and that he face a sentence of 2,697 years for charges ranging from manslaughter and causing a shipwreck to abandoning his post.

3. Show concern – Be sincere:

The rules of damage control stress how important it is to express concern and to appear sincere. Certainly, Costa has offered condolences and the passengers of the Costa Concordia have been offered a full refund and reimbursement for all expenses. But when the ship’s parent company, Carnival Corporation, offered them a 30 per cent discount off future cruises, the mainstream media coverage and the tone on social media took a decidedly negative turn.  The offer was called “ridiculous” and an “insult”.  Not only was the gesture completely inappropriate, it had strings attached. The offer was only available for 18 months from the original cruise date. Is it a wonder that many passengers said no thank you and have opted for the class action lawsuit? This bungled attempt at compensation has done little to help re-build a very tarnished reputation.

Jerry Sandusky

The former assistant football coach at Penn State is charged with multiple counts of sexual assault against children.  Jerry Sandusky’s lawyer suggested he do a media interview with NBC’s Bob Costas. The result was disastrous. He couldn’t answer the questions. His only clear response was to say he was not a pedophile. He also admitted to “horsing around” with boys in the shower.  In criminal cases, it’s usually best not to play out your defense in the media. That’s especially true when you can’t simply and directly state your innocence.

Lesson: Media interviews are not always the best option in a crisis.

Irene Bakaric is the Principal of MediaPrep. She specializes in media relations, media training and crisis communications.

Victoria’s Secret

When news broke that some of the fiber Victoria’s Secret uses is produced using child labour in the impoverished African nation of Burkina Faso, the parent company, Limited Brands, was quick to respond.  It re-stated its values and its practice of buying only certified and fair trade cotton, but the statement issued was full of big words and corporate jargon.  “We are vigourously engaging with stakeholders to fully investigate this matter” sounds cold and inappropriate considering the delicate, emotional nature of the crisis.

Lesson: Keep language simple and sincere.

Irene Bakaric is the Principal of MediaPrep. She specializes in media relations, media training and crisis communications.

Herman Cain

Another politician…another sex scandal.  Did Herman Cain harass that woman? Did he have a 13 year extramarital affair? His lawyer kept saying it was nobody’s business.   The story kept dragging on and Cain kept dancing around the answers in his media interviews. It was almost painful to watch.  The truth still isn’t clear and the accusations took their toll. The man who was once considered a frontrunner quit the race and cancelled his presidential campaign.

Lesson: Let all the bad news out at once.

Irene Bakaric is the Principal of MediaPrep. She specializes in media relations, media training and crisis communications.

Anthony Weiner

For a guy who chose a life in politics, he really didn’t seem to understand what it means to live in the public spotlight.  Anthony Weiner’s sex scandal became headline news.  What set him apart is that he conducted his affairs via social media. Recall the now infamous tweet showing a picture of his crotch. His initial strategy was to deny, deny, deny. It soon became clear he was lying when numerous “friends” came forward with similar photos. Weiner was forced to resign his seat in Congress.

Lesson: Always tell the truth.

Irene Bakaric is the Principal of MediaPrep.  She specializes in media relations, media training and crisis communications.

RIM

When Research in Motion suffered a massive service disruption, its two CEOs somehow went missing. It started off as a small outage overseas and mushroomed into a crisis that affected many countries around the world and tens of millions of Blackberry users. The fury was building and there was no response at all from Jim Balsillie and Mike Lazaridis, the two people who helped to revolutionize the way people stay in touch.  They didn’t seem to realize that lack of communication is not a communications strategy. The conference call with a tech executive that the company offered reporters was not enough or effective for media relations.  Later, Lazaridis’ online video expressing regret and that his team was working to solve the problem was, again, too little and far too late. News this week suggests Balsillie and Lazaridis may not continue as co-chairs of the Board at RIM.

Lesson:  During crisis communications, people want to hear from the people in charge.

Media communications has become an interactive hybrid.  The integration of traditional media, the Internet and social media has created a new playing field that requires a layered approach to media relations.  This is especially important to remember during a crisis when social media can fuel the fire. In a crisis, you can’t ignore social media.

Studies have shown that social media crises are on the rise. These can be crises that ignite and exist primarily on social media or those that are amplified by social media platforms such as Facebook, Twitter, blogs, YouTube and now Google+. In spite of the trend, social media is still often a neglected area of risk management.  Most organizations have some form of social media marketing strategy. But many do not have a crisis communications plan that includes a specific, detailed approach for social media. And, that can be their downfall.

In a crisis, your initial response is critical. In the digital age, acknowledging a crisis quickly has become even more important. Everyone is discussing your organization and your problem so you need to be prepared on the social media front.  As we head into 2012, we will see even more changes to the media landscape as vehicles like Twitter become re-defined as news platforms and no longer just social platforms. Today, a Saudi Prince invested $300 million dollars into Twitter because he believes social media will change the media industry.

While it can be challenging, social media is a useful communications tool during a crisis. If managed effectively, it provides an opportunity to get your messages out directly…without filters, without editing…. to a far-reaching audience. To stay ahead of the curve, you need to monitor mainstream media coverage and the social media conversation. If your crisis is a trending topic on Twitter, you need to be engaged and responsive. When Jerry Sandusky was arrested, Penn State’s usually busy Twitter and Facebook feeds were unusually quiet.  In a crisis, you need to state your position and convey your messages quickly. Be frank, empathetic and factual if you want to sway sentiment and contain the negative tide.

Johnsons & Johnson’s handling of its Tylenol crisis in the 1980s became a blueprint for the general rules for damage control.  While the rules still apply, the context has changed. And, even Johnson & Johnson has been criticized for its slow response during a series of recalls and concerns about the safety of its products.  Its lack of preparedness on the social media front was especially evident last month when angry parents expressed their worries about cancer-causing agents in the company’s baby shampoo.  The company has missed several opportunities to re-affirm its brand as a champion of consumer safety.

Many other companies including Toyota have also shown they were not up to the task of managing social media in a crisis. Effective crisis management requires strategic communications.   These days, your crisis plan must include social media if you want to limit damage to your brand and avoid an emotional storm that could ruin your reputation.

Irene Bakaric is the Principal of MediaPrep.  She specializes in media relations, media training and crisis communications.

The sex abuse scandal that has engulfed Penn State University brings to mind a Canadian tragedy that also made international headlines.  At Penn State the name of the game is football.  At Maple Leaf Gardens, it was hockey.

It’s been fifteen years since the world was shocked by the revelation of the sexual abuse of young players that was occurring within the historic walls of Toronto’s hockey shrine. So much time has passed, but so much seems the same. In both cases, the abuse went on unchecked for years.  And, when the truth was revealed, there was a less than stellar reaction from those in charge.

In any crisis, your initial response is critical.  You can’t delay because silence just raises more questions and gives people time to judge and blame. You need to respond quickly and make your position clear. In the digital age, acknowledging a crisis quickly has become even more important. During the Maple Leaf scandal, we didn’t have social media to fuel the fire.

Penn State, like Maple Leaf Gardens, was slow in its response.  It appeared to have no crisis communications plan.  Initial statements from the President of the University, Graham Spanier and the legendary football coach, Joe Paterno, seemed cold and self-serving.  Cancelling news conferences, blaming the media, worrying about lawsuits and Saturday’s big game… Did they not anticipate the negative image they would create?

First and foremost, this is a story about the victims. Some prefer the term survivors. The focus should have been on them and the fact that molesting children is wrong. It was not until the third statement…released by the school’s trustees…that we heard an expression of outrage and horror that this could have been happening in their football program. Finally, there was a show of concern with a sympathetic/empathetic voice that was ready to take responsibility. In the statement, the trustees promised swift action and followed through by immediately firing both Spanier and Paterno. As far as damage control is concerned, this was the right thing to do. But it took too long.

This crisis continues to unfold. Former Assistant Coach, Jerry Sandusky has admitted he “horsed around” with kids in the shower. But, he says, he’s not a pedophile. It is a dark and disturbing story and Penn State is right to worry about its reputation.  Maple Leaf Gardens never regained its former glory.  Not to connect any dots, but the hockey players moved to a shiny new home and the Gardens is now being turned into a grocery store. There are crisis communications lessons to be learned.

Irene Bakaric is the Principal of MediaPrep.  She specializes in media relations, media training and crisis communications.