PR Fumbles at Univ. of Colorado Could be Costly

In 1992 the Naval Investigative Service released a report on the
September 1991 convention in Las Vegas of the U.S. Navy aviators'
Tailhook Association. Its conclusion: 14 female naval officers and
12 female civilians were sexually abused by a gaggle of drunken
navy pilots.

Nearly 15 years after the scandal, the Navy is still paying the
price.

"The Navy gets it thrown back in its face periodically," says
Ned Barnett, owner of Barnett Marketing Communications (Las Vegas),
who is currently a PR consultant to the Air Force Academy. "You're
talking about 12 years of PR rehabilitation that, in my view,
hasn't made an impact on reversing the images suffered from
Tailhook."

Now, a similar scandal at the University of Colorado (CU) -
including accusations of sexual misconduct run rampant -- is
drawing mixed opinions from members of the PR community on whether
the university will suffer any long-term consequences because of
the scandal.

The scandal, centered on accusations that CU's athletic
department used alcohol and sex to recruit high school athletes,
erupted last month when federal lawsuits were filed by three women
alleging they were raped by CU football players or recruits in
2001. In all, seven women have accused football athletes of sexual
assault since 1997, though no charges have been filed.

At press time, CU chancellor Richard Byyny and president
Elizabeth Hoffman had put CU-Boulder football coach Gary Barnett on
paid leave for remarks he made disparaging the athletic ability of
a woman who alleged assault by a football player. (Barnett has said
his comments were taken out of context.) Meanwhile, an independent
investigation is underway; members of the panel include a former
State Supreme Court justice, an advocate for women who have been
victimized and former state legislators and prosecutors. Colorado
Attorney General Ken Salazar has been appointed special prosecutor
for the case and former Tufts president John DiBiaggio - a
nationally recognized expert on athletics reform - has been tapped
to examine the policies, practices and culture of CU's athletic
department. The U.S. Congress is also getting into the act,
scheduling its first hearing on the use of sex and other tactics in
recruiting college athletes.

A statement released March 1 from Ms. Hoffman referred to the
various investigations and added: "Our priorities include finding
the facts and creating a safe environment for all students -- on
and off campus. Once we have the facts we are committed to fixing
any problems that are determined to exist."

While the scandal has sparked several investigations, the jury
is still out on whether CU will pay a long-term price in terms of
reduced admissions and damage to the university's reputation.

Barnett (no relation to Gary), says it will take CU at least
five years -- an entirely new cycle of four-year students -- to
repair what he sees as significant damage. "There's going to be
huge skepticism out there," he says. "The university turned a blind
eye to [rape allegations] and hasn't even fired the coach."

Others PR execs who have been following the story disagree. "I
don't think it will have a huge impact," says Bob Threlkeld, a
principal with Denver-based Johnston Wells Public Relations, who
handles the company's crisis communications practice. "For years CU
has had a reputation as being the nation's No. 1 party school and
it hasn't been effected."

Christopher Simpson, president-CEO of Williamsburg, VA-based
Simpson Communications LLC, who was VP/Public Affairs and
government relations at Indiana University during the trials and
tribulations of Indiana basketball coach Bobby Knight (who was
eventually fired in 2000), was more blunt: "There's too much money
at stake. Reforms don't have as much clout as dollars...The
pendulum may be swinging [in favor of athletic reforms] but I'm not
optimistic simply because of the amount of money involved."

One thing PR observers agree on is the failure among CU
officials to properly respond to a (festering) problem that was
bound to blow up in their faces. Indeed, the scandal is shaping up
as a case study on what not to do when a public institution is
facing serious allegations. (See sidebar.)

The first mistake was not firing Barnett outright, which left an
impression of a football team wagging the university dog. "From a
communications standpoint they first need to get out in front of
the Barnett culture, which is a culture of entitlement among
college athletes," says John Baldoni, an Ann Arbor, MI-based PR
consultant who works on behalf of the University of Michigan.
"Universities have made Faustian bargains with media and money and
created cultures in which bad things can happen."

Others say Barnett's insensitive remarks at the outset of the
scandal should serve as a wake-up call to any public official,
including corporate executives. "Every public leader needs to
remember they are highly visible and might as well consider
themselves candidates running for public office," says Clarke
Caywood, a professor of public relations at the Medill School,
which is part of Northwestern University (where Barnett coached
football before jumping to CU). Politicians "may not be the best
model but they understand that every word they say will be watched
closely and need to be sensitive to multiple and diverse audience
and not just the mass."

Simpson, from Simpson Communications, says there's four steps
universities and public institutions must take to preempt any
potential scandals:

  • Develop an integrated marketing plan to help sell the
    university's success stories and lock in a culture of reputation
    management.
  • Design and implement a crisis communications strategy that is
    tested at least annually.
  • Provide media training to administration and athletic officials
    "so you can respond effectively when the inevitable hits the
    fan."
  • If the institution hasn't taken steps 1-3, developing an
    integrated marketing plan is crucial

"The bottom line is college administrators have got to play a
much more active role in athletic programs, which have operated as
islands unto themselves," Simpson says. "When the focus is on wins
and losses -- and nothing more -- it shouldn't come as a shock that
you have scandals. Without accountability, they're going to
happen."

Contacts: John Baldoni, 734.995.9992, [email protected]; Ned Barnett,
702.696.1200, [email protected]; Clarke
Caywood, 847.491.5011, [email protected];
Christopher Simpson, 757.345.3940, [email protected];
Bob Threlkeld, 303.623.3366 X138, [email protected]

Updating the (Crisis) Playbook

There are some lessons to be learned from CU's misfortunes,
starting with the need to plan and role-play various crisis
scenarios in advance. In our experience, academia has been less
appreciative of comprehensive crisis planning than the private
sector. This is particularly unfortunate because public
universities generally face a more daunting task during a crisis
than most corporations.

In order to manage its message, CU was forced to deal with the
governor, legislators, an elected governing board, local district
attorney, local police, faculty, students, parents, alumni and
major donors. Throw in the Athletic Department, coaches, players
and former players and you have a real octopus on your hands.

Perhaps CU's most glaring error was its failure to designate
from the beginning a single, well-trained, high-level spokesperson
who could show appropriate concern and discuss the allegations in
an overall context. The Athletic Department, not the president's
office, dominated the initial response to the allegations of rape.
This fueled the perception the Athletic Department called the shots
at CU and that the administration was insensitive to the
seriousness of the charges.

If university presidents do no other crisis planning, they
should at least sit down with major department heads - particularly
the athletic director - and determine who speaks and doesn't speak
during various crisis scenarios. Athletic departments should not be
islands unto themselves. The director should report directly to the
president and the athletic budget should be embedded in the
president's office.

Bob Threlkeld/JohnstonWells Public Relations