Last month, The Washington Post profiled a new tactic being implemented at webMethods, a Fairfax, Va.-based technology company. "The magic number at webMethods Inc. is $6.17.
That's what every employee must save each day, including weekends, to rescue his or her job," the Post article started out. Unfortunately, according to webMethods execs, the
"magic number" is a fairy tale.
Although the company did come up with that number to encourage employees to save on their expenditures after a tough round of layoffs, saving $6.17 per day is certainly not a
mandate, they say.
In fact, the company felt so strongly that it had been mishandled in the Post's coverage that it took out an ad with The Washington Business Journal responding to each
allegedly erroneous point in letter format, signed by webMethod's chairman and CEO. For example, the ad read:
"The Post: 'Every employee must save [$6.17] each day, including weekends, to rescue his or her job.'
"The Facts: For 12 months we have been successfully reducing our cost structure and improving profitability without resorting to layoffs. To suggest that we have asked
employees to save $6.17 each per day or risk losing their job is preposterous. We have used this number internally simply to demonstrate how easily each employee can make a
positive difference to our bottom line. The webMethods employees who talked to the Post about our cost savings programs are offended that their comments could be so grossly taken
out of context."
Mark Bisnow, SVP with webMethods, says there was no other way to handle the situation. "The article was so diametrically at odds with how we feel [about our business]. We have
been very enthusiastic and excited about how we've been doing in this difficult market."
When asked why the company didn't respond with an actual letter to the editor, Bisnow asks, "Have you ever written a letter to the editor? We knew it would be cut up into
little bits and possibly thrown out." And the company wasn't getting what it considered an appropriate response from the author of the article or the editor of The Washington Post
business page, Bisnow says. When webMethods execs raised their concerns, "they put out a little correction, but it was not much. They're a fine paper, but once in a while they
make mistakes, and they should admit them," Bisnow says. "The reporter has never set foot at our company, although we've invited her to come out and kick the tires. She called and
did some interviews and decided to compromise the integrity of her story in the interest of readability," he claims.
The staff of PR NEWS was divided on the merits of webMethods' ... er ... methods. So we took it straight to the experts - our Advisory Board. Here's what a few of our advisors
had to say about handling a media misrepresentation in this manner:
Alisa Fogelman-Beyer
General Manager
Hill and Knowlton, Washington, D.C.
I believe that if a company feels it was misrepresented by the media, it should feel obliged to respond adequately and effectively. The various tactics for responding are
dependent upon the level or degree of misrepresentation. In this particular case, webMethods probably felt it was necessary to respond in that manner since they rely on investors.
And if there was any doubt that webMethods was not financially sound, future investment and funding might have suffered. So if investors are involved, it's probably worth it.
As public relations practitioners, we always should counsel our clients to respond immediately to any type of misallegations. As far as using an ad versus a letter to the
editor, I would recommend a letter to the editor first and follow up with an ad in the Business Journal to target investors and analysts.
Brenda Siler
Director of Public Relations
The American Speech-Language-Hearing Association
"This tactic may serve the company well if they can afford the ad space. Calling the reporter, editor or producer does not always turn into a correction.
Could this be keeping the issue alive? Probably. But since this is a technology company, they probably have a lot to prove by not being put in the pile with all the other dying
technology companies. They probably saw this as a way to maintain consumer/ stakeholder confidence."
Siler's advice for avoiding misrepresentations in the press to begin with: "When at all possible, tape interviews. Ask if there is any data or research the reporter may want so
that you can have it ready at the time of the interview. That may give you a clue [as to reporters' potential angles]."
Katie Paine
President
KDPaine & Associates
This strategy definitely serves to keep the crisis going longer, and it heightens the visibility of the issues. On the other hand, if [the company] needs visibility, it may not
be such a bad thing. At the very least, it gets the messages out.
(Contacts: Bisnow, 703/460-5906; Fogelman-Beyer, [email protected]; Paine, [email protected]; Siler, [email protected])