During the course of a year, Don Smeraldi of the U.S. Postal Service distributes about 100 postal stamp-related news releases to the trades and general press. But the release he mailed to about 50 philatelic trade journalists April 28 won ink for all the wrong reasons.
A teaser that the 60-cent Grand Canyon stamp was among an upcoming cast of international rate stamps lost its zip to the flap inspired by the artwork which accompanied the announcement. Transparencies of the proposed stamp showed a photo of the Grand Canyon with the inscription "Grand Canyon, Colorado."
For the geographically challenged, the Grand Canyon is in Arizona.
Smeraldi was contacted about the mistake May 13 when a writer with the trade Linn's Stamp News contacted the USPS about the mix-up and was forwarded to Smeraldi. An eight-year veteran of the USPS's corporate communications division and a former letter carrier, Smeraldi's PR radar kicked in immediately. He contacted highers-up, including Creative Director Terry McCaffrey (who handles project design development), and told them about the call.
While few in PR will never have this kind of crisis to contend with (explaining the destruction of 100 million postage stamps before they are circulated), there are broad-stroke lessons to be culled from this debacle. As the initial point person, had Smeraldi allowed the controversy to snowball without acting quickly, this would be an entirely different story.
Remember Intel and its chip errata?
To quell the controversy, USPS decided not to issue a press release, but to have Smeraldi handle media queries one-on-one ("no comment" definitely wasn't an option). Execs decided that a press release would invite additional publicity. Its plan was to pound home the message that the stamp was never officially issued and the geographic blunder won't show up on the Grand Canyon stamp when it goes into circulation in early 2000.
Stop the Presses
Within three hours of the call from Linn's Stamp News, Smeraldi heard back from the USPS's Stamp and Services Department. The reporter was right and an investigation into the mix-up was underway.
It wasn't until several days later that Smeraldi learned the mistake was made by a contracted art director. The text was an addition relayed verbally by the consultant to North Carolina-based printer Banknote Corp. of America, but the USPS still opts not to name names. The stamps, which hadn't been released and didn't yet belong to the USPS, were destroyed at a cost to the federal government of about $500,000. (A highly formal procedure exists before stamps become the possession of USPS, so the postal service isn't claiming ownership.)
"We tried to convey that it was human error, but [the media] didn't settle for that," says Smeraldi, community relations specialist/senior. He is one of about 10 employees handling PR functions at the USPS headquarters in Washington, D.C.
An in-depth Linn's Stamp News story about the blunder broke May 31. Other coverage ensued, including pieces by Reuters and USA Today. For days, journalists wrangled with the same question: how could this have happened?
Which leads us to the final PR lesson.
You should understand your firm's quality-assurance procedures and other aspects of your employer's business to be an effective communicator. If you're in PR and it's ultimately going to be you fielding calls when a crisis erupts, find out when internal checks-and-balances are in place, suggest improvements and always investigate what plans have been hatched that might affect your company's services/product reputation.
You must understand the intricacies of your employer's business-unit functions, because PR in the future will be about brand stewardship as much as it will be about being an information source. You're sure to be miffed if you don't. (USPS, Smeraldi, 202/268-6524;http://www.linns.com)
The Rubberstamp On Stamps
Ever wonder who decides that a movie star, landmark or piece of artwork is worth a 32-cent (sometimes more) cause celebre? Leave it to the Citizens' Stamp Advisory Committee, a 15-member organization that serves at the pleasure of the Postmaster General.
The committee meets four times a year in Washington, D.C., so members can review proposals and provide input on artwork and designs for yet-to-be-issued stamps. As many as 40,000 letters recommending new stamps are sent to the committee each year.
While there are no formal procedures for submitting stamp proposals, subjects must have stood the test of time; be consistent with public opinion; and have broad national interest.
The committee is tasked with providing to the USPS "breadth of judgment and depth of experience in various areas that influence subject matter, character and beauty of postage stamps."