Image Patrol: ‘Tiffany Network’ CBS Shatters Its Credibility

For the first time ever, Image Patrol this month devotes its
entire column to just one company: CBS. There is an ample number of
other media crises, but CBS' crises have been so frequent, so
public and so endless that we figured it was time to put the
network in the hot seat.

When I was a reporter, the first lesson I learned was to keep my
name out of the news. Journalists seldom handle crises well; they
seem to be genetically incapable of a good sound bite when you need
one and look incredibly uncomfortable when the microphone is turned
towards them. CBS is guilty of all those sins -- and worse.

The first crisis that surfaced was the storm of controversy
stemming from CBS' cancellation late last year of "The Reagans" - a
miniseries based on the former president and first lady that some
conservatives found objectionable. Fellow journalists and pundits
blasted CBS for bowing to right wing pressure. In response, CBS
chose to remain lip-locked.

A few weeks later, in a remarkable demonstration of the power of
the Internet and free speech, the Web site MoveOn.org solicited
anti-George Bush ads in a contest called "Bush in 30 seconds." The
solicitation generated thousands of submissions from amateurs,
advertising executives and just about anyone with a camera and an
imagination. Visitors to the Web site voted on the results, and the
winning spot was supposed to air during the Super Bowl Feb. 1. But
CBS, citing its aversion to cause-relate ads, refused to air it.
MoveOn.org then called on its hundreds of thousands of members to
protest what they considered "censorship," and CBS was swamped with
e-mails, phone calls and letters. Again, CBS stuck its collective
head in the sand.

Part of the controversy was that while refusing to air the Move
On.org ad on the grounds that it doesn't want to air "advocacy"
advertising, CBS did, in fact, accept Bush administration ads
promoting the Medicare bill. Once again, CBS had no comment.

But all of these controversies pale in comparison to the
most-watched replay in TV history, when Justin Timberlake ripped
the bodice from Janet Jackson at the end of the Super Bowl halftime
show, revealing Jackson's right breast. The FCC has mounted an
investigation into CBS and the show's producers. Finally, CBS had
something to say - that they were shocked, shocked at what had
happened (despite the fact that they had screened and approved the
show in advance). And then CBS placed the blame squarely on MTV,
Janet Jackson and anyone else but themselves. Rule No. 1 of crisis
management: don't point fingers, accept responsibility.

To make matters worse, CBS followed up by demanding that Janet
and Justin apologize for their actions if they still wanted to
appear on another CBS extravaganza, The Grammys. Justin agreed to
grovel; Janet did not and was therefore banned from the Grammys.
That move generated another flood of angry comments in the media
and dead silence on the part of CBS.

Either the folks at CBS' communications department are woefully
incompetent, or they've been given a permanent muzzle. Whatever the
case, the series of missteps makes the head spin.

CBS' Black Eyes

Criteria	Grade	Comments	Advice
Extent of coverage	F	Each of these controversies generated a media maelstrom, earning coverage not just in this country but also throughout the world.	As much as they don't want to be the focus of the limelight themselves, the media is relentless on one of their own.
Effectiveness of spokespeople	F	Other than Mel Karmazin of Viacom, CBS spokespeople were invisible through just about the entire crisis. Only when the FCC called for an investigation did parent company Viacom's chairman step up to the mike.	Don't wait until the feds step in to bring out your big guns. Particularly if you are a media company, the media will be expecting a good, solid credible spokesperson to talk to. If you don't have one, they'll just go with whatever rumors are flying around the newsroom.
Communication of key messages	F	The major message that CBS has been communicating of late is that it goes which ever way the wind is blowing. Whoever exerts the most pressure on it wins. This is hardly the attitude that the media will respect, or that stakeholders will endorse. The news has been so continuously strife-torn, it can't be good for any target audience.	Whatever the controversy, tie your messages together and be consistent. Remember: if you don't control the message, the opposition will.
Management of negative messages	F	Without any counter to the speculation and charges of folding under pressure, CBS allowed the opposition free rein to say what it liked about the network.	Just because you have spokespeople who don't want to be seen or heard doesn't mean your enemies do. Journalists abhor a vacuum, and will fill it with a quote from whoever is the most available - particularly someone who is around on a holiday weekend.
Impact on viewers	A	If all that counted was viewers, these crises haven't hurt CBS at all. Both the Super Bowl and The Grammy topped the rating charts.	When you're dealing with the world of entertainment, scandal does bring out the voyeurs as well as the viewers.
Impact on shareholders	D-	Viacom's stock has been spiraling downward for months. And with the number of missteps, you have to wonder when management will start to take the blame.	Investors hate controversy, especially ones that don't seem to go away.
Impact on employees	D-	No one likes to work for an institution whose principles are publicly shifting in the wind.	Studies show that employees are more loyal to organizations that stand up for things they can believe in. The opposite is also true: they are less likely to be loyal to a company that they can't believe in.
Overall score	D-	Not only is CBS an organization in serious need of crisis counseling, but, frankly, as long as management continues to make bad decisions its image will continue to slide.	I'd like to say that "no comment" is the root of all crises, but when your top management continuously makes bad decisions, almost any comment will exacerbate the problem.