Right Wing Groups Renew Anti-Gay PR Offensive at Corporate America

Last month saw a new volley in the PR offensive by politically conservative groups opposed to corporate America's support of gay and lesbian organizations and the inclusion of

this demographic in corporate diversity strategies. While this type of PR offensive is not new, the results of the latest push forced corporate America back into the

controversial crossfire. The result was a corporate PR dilemma that created ill-will for some and confusion for others,

On December 1, the American Family Association announced plans to end a threatened boycott of Ford Motor Co. The boycott threat began on May 31 when Donald E.

Wildmon, chairman of the AFA, unveiled a BoycottFord.com Web site and sent an e-mailed call to arms that castigated the automobile manufacturer on charges from "redefining family

to include homosexual marriage, to giving hundred of thousands of dollars to support homosexual groups and their agenda, to forcing managers to attend diversity training on how to

promote the acceptance of homosexuality, to sponsoring a 'commitment (marriage) ceremony,' to sponsoring Gay Pride Parades."

The exact reason for AFA's withdrawal of the boycott threat was not immediately clear, although it was reported that several Ford dealers brokered on-going meetings between the

AFA and Ford's executives. On December 3, Ford announced it was withdrawing advertising for the Jaguar and Land Rover product lines from gay-oriented magazines. A Ford

spokesman, quoted in an article from the online edition of The Advocate, a gay-focused news magazine, stated the decision was strictly business-related; Ford's Volvo brand

would continue as a gay media advertiser.

Ford's decision set off a fury among gay rights organizations who demanded and received a meeting with Ford's senior executives. Besides creating a PR headache, Ford also

faced an IR dilemma - New York Comptroller Alan G. Hevesi, also the trustee of the state's government pension fund (which owns 9.4 million shares in Ford), made a pointed query to

Ford's leadership of its actions. Addressing William Clay Ford Jr., the Ford chairman, in a letter that was later made public, Hevesi asked: "As a shareholder, I am interested to

know what cost/benefit analysis you performed in order to reach the conclusion that ending advertising to that particular customer base would be a positive strategic move for the

company."

Less than two weeks after announcing it was withdrawing its gay magazine advertising, Ford reversed itself and announced it would advertise all eight of its product lines in

the gay-focused magazines while continuing its corporate sponsorship of gay groups and events.

Withdrawal and Deposit

Also on December 1, the conservative socio-political organization Focus on the Family announced that it "fired its banker" - Wells Fargo, which the group declared

to be "among the largest corporate contributors to homosexual causes."

Focus on the Family issued a press release stating it was "switching all its banking to First National Bank Omaha, described as a family-friendly institution." Focus on

the Family then noted in its announcement: "Wells Fargo declined to comment."

Yet Chris Hammond, vice president for communications and business development at Wells Fargo, disputes the notion that the bank declined to comment. "No, I wasn't apprised of

that," he says. "I personally spoke with Focus on the Family several months ago, in late June or early July. They told us they were going to put something on their radio show.

But I didn't see the press release before they put it out."

Focus on the Family's actions also put its new bank in a PR squeeze. An initial PR News inquiry to First National Bank Omaha immediately after the Focus on the Family

announcement was answered by a bank spokesman stating: "We are not ready to make a statement at this time." PR News contacted the bank two weeks later and spoke with Russ

Oatman, senior vice president. Oatman told PR News he was aware of the conservative group's press announcement before its release. "We haven't received negative comment,"

he says about the announcement from his newest client. "We've had inquiries about our practices and social views."

While First National Bank Omaha did not distribute a specific press release regarding the Focus on the Family announcement, it nonetheless created a statement designed to

address its politically-charged new client. Oatman read the statement to PR News, which said: "The bank is not commenting on political and social views of its customers.

We do not give potential customers a litmus test on any social and political issue." However, Oatman declined to forward the hard copy text of the statement to PR

News.

(Focus on the Family did not make a spokesperson available for this article. An AFA spokesperson would not discuss the Ford boycott and its aftermath with PR News and

referred all inquiries to the official statements posted to the group's online pressroom. Ford also refused to comment on the AFA boycott.)

Defusing the Crisis

As for Focus on the Family's jettisoned bank, Wells Fargo was not apologetic about its support of the gay and lesbian demographic. "Wells Fargo believes it is our

responsibility to serve every corner of our community," says Hammond. "We received a lot of calls of appreciation and support."

The feedback received by Wells Fargo did not surprise Paul Maccabee, president of Maccabee Group Public Relations in Minneapolis. "Most Americans believe in fairness,"

says Maccabee, who has provided PR support for gay-related events including the AIDS research fundraising Diva's Ball in Minneapolis. "Focus on the Family is doing what smart

politicians always do - preaching to its base, not to Wells Fargo's corporate suite or customers. At rock bottom, these particular campaigns are cynical and opportunistic. They

will continue as long as the media covers them, and as long as they are good fundraising tools for those organizations."

For other corporations that may face similar threats of boycott or the severing of business relationships, Maccabee urges companies not to send mixed PR signals. "Stay true to

your values," he says. "Is one of your corporate values the commitment to diversity? Do you rely on gay consumers? If so, then hang tight."

Nate Towne, president of Xanadu Communications in Portland, ME, believes that corporations should incorporate the possibility of anti-gay PR campaigns as part of their

crisis communication game plans. "Be proactive," says Towne, who provides PR counsel to several gay-owned businesses and gay advocacy alliances. "Even the smallest boycott can

explode into a media frenzy. How prepared are you in case this happens? If you are not prepared, don't be afraid to reach out to groups like the Human Rights Campaign to

help you deal with gay and lesbian issues in the workplace."

Towne acknowledges this is often a lose-lose situation for any corporate PR office. "Companies always wind up stuck in the middle, regardless," he says. "You are going to

wind up alienating somebody."

In a few cases, however, some degree of common ground has been found between right wing groups and the corporate targets of their PR wrath. The Walt Disney Co., which

had been the subject of a nine-year boycott by the American Family Association because of the release of several controversial movies by its Miramax subsidiary and for

allowing gay organization to hold events at its theme parks, found itself working in close partnership with the AFA to promote its fantasy film "The Chronicles of Narnia: The

Lion, the Witch and the Wardrobe" (the boycott ended when the marketing and PR campaign was put into motion). The film, based on the C.S. Lewis novel, was heavily marketed via

the AFA media outlets to the fundamentalist Christian audiences for whom Lewis is a beloved author.

Towne believes the Disney approach is a PR home run, with former adversaries sharing a joint success. "Meeting with any group is important," he says. "It shows that you

understand their concerns. If it is possible, listen to their demands and see if something can be done. In some situations, there is room to negotiate - and you could possibly

mediate a nice middle ground."

Though sometimes, the heat of the argument prevents people from seeing that common ground exists. Hammond at Wells Fargo points out that while the bank has provided grants to

gay-related organizations, its corporate contributions actually stretches to a wide number of nonprofits. "We're on track to contribute $100 million to more than 15,000

nonprofits nationwide," he says. "Including many nonprofits that Focus on the Family also believes in deeply."

Contacts: Chris Hammond, 415.623.7680; Paul Maccabee, 612.337.0087; Russ Oatman, 402.431.0500; Nate Towne, 207.793.2600.