One of the pleasures of writing about communications and PR is that the field is vast and exposes you to a variety of topics and sources. Reporting about brands in the food space last year put us in contact with the U.S. Dept. of Agriculture and a slew of excellent food-safety publications. It was a mixed blessing. When delving into the food space you discover quickly recalls and safety issues occur nearly every day. In fact, the recalls point out that we have better technology to oversee food prep and packaging than previously. On the other hand, reading editorials in food-industry pubs about the lack of government spending for food safety tends to weigh on the mind. In sum, trips to the grocery store seem less pleasant.
The majority of recalls and safety-issue actions fail to gain national media attention, of course. It’s likely the same with recalls and issues in most sectors—it’s the major events that receive coverage. On the other hand, communicators are unable to relax. What seem to be small or middling incidents can grow like, er bacteria, thanks to social media. And then, of course, the huge events, like Chipotle ( PRN, Nov 9, 2015) or the July 19 recall of 350,000 pounds of Bar-S Foods’ hot dogs and corn dogs are always possible. Moreover, social media scrutiny has prompted regulators and lawmakers to take stronger action. Brands are reeling from the impact.
So when negative news, such as a recall or a possible E. coli outbreak, hits the headlines, how should brand communicators handle it? And since most PR News Pro readers are outside the food sector, let’s broaden the discussion: How should communicators react when negative items about their brand make news? We’ll use food as a jumping-off point. The tactics and strategies we’ll cover apply to most sectors.
Partner, kGlobal
For Gene Grabowski, the veteran communicator who’s handling two large food recalls, CRF Frozen Foods and Dole Package Salads, and a major auto parts supplier, there are several tactics specific to brands in regulated industries, such as food, but much of what he counsels is applicable across the board.
Speed Kills…a Negative Story: A partner at kglobal, Grabowski says speed is paramount on several levels. First, it’s essential for a brand to get out in front of negative news, such as a recall. “You can’t wait for the government be the first voice to be heard,” he says. With regulated sectors a brand often needs to include various elements in its first release, Grabowski says, to meet statutory regulations.
VP, Feld Entertainment
After that’s been released, a brand should put out a second release, telling its story and adding context. It used to be a second release was harmful, not anymore, he says. Broadening his advice to communicators generally, he says, “If you don’t frame your story, others will.” Adds Stephen Payne, VP, corporate communications, Feld Entertainment, “I’m a firm believer in rapid response, even if the communications are not in response to a crisis. By rapidly addressing issues you help prevent something small from mushrooming and being more difficult to manage.”
On another level the message has to be speedy, too. “If you can’t say it fast, you’ll lose,” Grabowski says. “Nobody’s reading anything that’s not short…nobody’s even reading long blog posts.” Look at the candidates, Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton, he says. “They’re not talking to reporters, they’re tweeting out…even regulators are using social.”
President, Inspire PR
A veteran of food industry PR, Hinda Mitchell, president, Inspire PR Group, urges brands to have “a dark page, or hidden website page, ready to take live to share recall-specific information.” Broadening that to other industries, she says, “There just simply is no substitute for preparation. Any company can and should identify the highest risks, most likely crisis scenarios and then work a plan to address them.” She adds, “Figuring out how to post in 140 characters is not something you want to be doing while in crisis mode. Craft template responses now.”
Social Makes Brands Like Politicians: The immediacy and ubiquity of the digital world has forced brand communicators to strategize as if they were managing a political campaign, Grabowski says. “Due to social media, [a brand] can’t allow a statement [about it] to go unchallenged…the culture today, particularly millennials, often assume the first thing they hear is the truth…and if it’s not corrected quickly, it certainly is the truth.”
Lights, Camera…: After you’ve issued your statement, or your second statement in the case of a regulated industry, it’s time to “think about your video,” Grabowski says. The video should be done and online within the first 72 hours of the negative news hitting. You have options for the vid. It can be an apology video or an expert’s retort to the negative news. Perhaps your CEO will appear.
In any case, it needn’t be a polished, smooth corporate video. In fact, those are not as credible, he says. Grabowski prefers “a simple, unscripted video…I like to brief the subjects, but let them work from 4-5 talking points.” Another tip: shoot with two cameras, as it will make editing easier.
Ideal Transparency vs Foolish Transparency: Certainly be “as transparent as possible,” Grabowski say. “Rip off the Band-Aid and tell the story…[yet] plenty of companies talk about transparency and few deliver.” Still, Grabowski cautions, “Don’t be foolish” about transparency, set limits. Payne agrees. “In the case of a systematic campaign against [your brand] by outside groups, transparency can be used against you. Understand the situation and realize the players before deciding how open to be.”
CONTACT: @crisisguru @savethecircus Hinda@InspirePRGroup
For Subscribers: See crisis resources at the PR News Pro Essentials page: prnewsonline.com/pr-news-pro-essentials/
This content appeared originally in PR News Pro, July, 25, 2016. For subscription information, please visit: https://www.prnewsonline.com/about/info