REICH COMMUNICATIONS

Does (Should) Business Have a Social Conscience?

 

Does big business have a moral obligation to do more than earn profits and returns for shareholders?  It’s an issue that surfaces from time to time and too often the reality makes big business look like evil money-grubbers with a single-minded goal of profits and damn everything else – employees, customers, the environment and society at large. 

The public relations profession generally tries to offer business a moral conscience  -- make money and also do good.  I say “tries,” because in many companies the PR voice gives in to the company goal of profits, profits, profits – coupled with stock price and shareholder return.

Before I continue, let me say many companies do good.  Whether under the heading of public relations, community relations or simply goodwill, many large companies do things to support their communities, charities and customer constituencies.  But in too many cases, the good is offset by the shortsightedness that comes from the pressure of the perceived need for ever-growing profits and bigger shareholder dividends.  Add to that the outright greed of some top executives whose pay and/or bonus are pegged to profits and share price.

That’s why the Business Roundtable’s position on corporate responsibility, issued Monday, is significant.

Leaders of 181 of the nation's biggest companies signed on to a new "Statement on the Purpose of a Corporation" that says companies have "a fundamental commitment" to all of their stakeholders, which puts employees, suppliers and the broader community on a footing that has, for a long time, belonged only to shareholders. This puts social responsibility higher on the scale of corporate priorities than it's traditionally been.  These CEOs have gone on record to say profits, share price and dividends, while certainly important, cannot always negate or diminish responsibility to society.  This can translate to concerns about green energy, recycling, fair pay and employee benefits and more, that should be factored into decisions where in the past, the driving -- and often only -- concern was profits and return. 

I was disappointed that The Wall Street Journal, in its lead editorial, seemed to take the old-fashioned and short-sighted view, saying executives shouldn't "abandon" shareholders.  I don't think it's about abandoning anyone, but about doing the right thing while making money and rewarding shareholders.  The two do not have to be mutually exclusive, which is what the Business Roundtable is saying.

The New York Times reports that a major investor group, The Council of Institutional Investors, disapproves of the Roundtable's position, saying government, not corporations, should address societal needs.  That sounds like the attitude of "the 1 percent," the super-rich who push for special tax breaks and the destruction or defunding of government programs that help the rest of us who are lower down on the economic scale.

The Business Roundtable is acknowledging that big business has a broader responsibility beyond profits and shareholder value.  I think it's time.

 

 

If It Quacks Like a Duck ...

 

There cannot be room for words of racism and hate in our public dialogue and from our elected leaders... especially from the very top.

A big part of the president's job is to unite and heal, not divide and hurt. The person in the White House is supposed to set a high moral example that the rest of us would strive to follow, rather than demean the office and this nation with hateful racist words.

Congress was right to issue a statement condemning the president's racist words. Yet I can't help but wonder how 187 legislators in the House could, in good conscience, sit on their hands when it came time to officially and publicly call out racism. I understand party loyalty, but this issue should rightfully go beyond whether a Congressperson has a D or an R after their name.

The Republicans in Congress have allowed themselves to sink to a new low that belies one of the core values upon which this great nation has been built. Whether you chalk it up to fear or spinelessness, it still is so wrong and so damaging. Other nations are watching and noting that Americans -- or many of our leaders, at least -- implicitly support racism and hatred.

This is not good and it must change.

We have the power to bring change. I just wish we didn't have to wait another 16 months to implement that change. Serious damage is being done every day.

Credibility: A Key Asset in PR

 

One of the most valuable things a person in public relations can earn and maintain is credibility. 

The media are, understandably, a skeptical group.  It's their job to verify information they are given, especially when it comes from a spokesperson for a company, organization or politician.  And if that spokesperson gets caught lying, their credibility goes out the window.  Media people won’t ever trust anything coming from that person.

Sometimes a spokesperson gets incorrect information, whether intentionally or in error.  A good and confident PR person will push back and try to convince his or her bosses to stay with the truth or, at worse, say nothing.  It’s not always easy and many of us have been pushed to give in and tell lies.

I feel bad for any PR person who works for a boss who lies and puts that spokesperson in an untenable position with the media.  I could never imagine working for Sarah Sanders’ boss, who constantly lies, contradicts himself and makes or tweets off-the-cuff statements that often create a frenzy, as politicos and the media try to figure exactly what he meant.

But I don’t feel sorry for Sarah Sanders.  She agreed to the job she’s in and, through so many presidential lies, has remained there, often repeating or reinforcing her boss’ lies with yet more lies. 

The White House media have long been on to her game, yet they must rely on her since she is the media gatekeeper to the president.

The Mueller report has proven she is a liar.  On at least two occasions, the report shows, Sanders made "erroneous" statements and, when called out on them, lied again when she explained why she lied.  She lied about the lies when under oath before Mueller and his investigators.  Even when her lies have been exposed, she has not apologized and instead went on the attack against Democrats who have been saying there’s been Russian interference in our elections.

New York Times White House reporter Peter Baker said Monday that “a press secretary’s most important asset is credibility.  If you don’t have that, there’s not much point.”  We all make mistakes, he added, but the key to credibility is to own up to them.

CNN analyst and American Urban Radio reporter April Ryan said about Sanders, “She has acknowledged that she lied under oath.  You can’t trust her.  End of story.”

Ryan has called for Sanders to be fired, saying, “She’s been caught in lie after lie. It’s beyond spin.  In any other job, if someone acknowledged they’d lied under oath, they’d be gone.. terminated.”

In the Washington Post, media reporter Paul Farhi wrote that, “to some extent, Sanders’ credibility is a moot point, given her increasing isolation from and limited contacts with the press.” 

This administration, under Sanders’ hand as press secretary, has, as of today, set a record for the longest stretch – 43 days -- without a media briefing.  So far this year, she has held only two press briefings totaling about 30 minutes.  This, as the spokesperson for the man holding the most important job in the world.

 

Shining the Light

 

As expected, immediately after Attorney General Barr released his 4-page summary of the Mueller report, many on the right began calling up conspiracy theories about the "hoax" of collusion and Russian interference in our elections. They blamed Democrats, who they say are still sore losers over the 2016 election. And they also placed blame on the media.

It's interesting that we are now hearing reports from inside the Dept. of Justice that AG Barr's summary is not accurately reflective of the Mueller report and that it does find some questionable, even if not criminal, behavior in the president's camp.

An op-ed in Murdock's Wall Street Journal, whose hard news coverage I generally respect, rekindled the "fake news" claims, citing a few instances where the media got it wrong. It didn't bother to note the many more cases where the media got it right, often uncovering things that run counter to honesty and integrity in government.

The media play a crucial role in our democracy, keeping we, the citizens, informed by questioning our elected officials on policy and actions and, yes, tweets. The media also serve us by by finding and reporting on bad or even illegal behavior in our government.

The president and his enablers don't like this, since it hampers or prevents them from doing as they please behind the scenes. Media oversight and investigation expose actions that may not be in the public interest or in keeping with ethics and moral values most Americans hold dear.

So of course those in power will try to push back and silence the media. It's painfully clear and obvious.

That's why it's so important that the majority do our own pushing back, calling out the lie about " fake news" and standing behind the media. Buy and read newspapers. Watch the news on the networks. Write to advertisers who support papers and network news or, if you can, buy the products and services they advertise.

It's on us to support the media so they can continue shining light on the darkness.

How Can We Believe Him?

When you catch someone in a lie once, you might give him a pass.  We all stretch the truth occasionally, even if just a little bit.

But when someone seems to lie constantly, even about little things, we start to doubt anything that person says.  Unfortunately, that’s the case with our president.  In his State of the Union address, fact-checkers say he lied or stretched the truth at least 30 times.  That’s a lie every two minutes.

He’s lied about so many things that most of us have lost track.  Those who do keep track of these things tell us he’s told more than 7,700 lies or misrepresentations of facts since he’s been in office.  The crazy thing is that so many of those less-than-truthful statements can easily be exposed thanks to video and audio tape showing he says or does the opposite of what he claims he’s said.

Most of us are so tired of the lies that we put absolutely no stock in what he says.  And these days, many world leaders feel the same way.  Trust in the United States globally has dropped precipitously, which is both sad and frightening.

I should admit here, before I go any farther, that I did not watch the State of the Union address Tuesday night.  I just couldn’t force myself to sit through what was likely to be an hour of lies and self-praise.  I am relying on reports from people who had to watch it – reporters and media that I trust.  And those media include not only The New York Times and Washington Post, but also the conservative editorial writers at The Wall Street Journal.

The president talked a lot about unity.  To many, including me, those calls to end divisiveness rang hollow.  In the State of the Union address, he asked that both parties work together.  Yet only hours before the address, at a luncheon with major media, he talked derisively about his political opponents.  And the next day, he went back to his old ways of name-calling those he disagrees with, calling Rep. Adam Schiff, who leads a House Committee that’s doing its job of Constitutionally-mandated oversight, a “hack.”

He lied or misrepresented facts in immigration, including the amount of crime in a border city he used as an example – El Paso.  The mayor of that city, a Republican, said the president is wrong.

He talked about the “great threat” to our national security posed by migrants coming to our southern border, even as his own intelligence chiefs told Congress that the southern border did not make their list of top security concerns.

“Do as I say, not as I do” seems to be the president’s behavioral model.  And because what he constantly does is the opposite of promoting unity – whether in politics or international relations or racial relations here at home – it really is hard to believe anything he says about anything, whether in a press gaggle or before Congress and the nation in the State of the Union.   

"The truth emerges"

"The truth emerges."

 

Bob Woodward, talking about his new book, quotes his former boss, Washington Post editor Ben Bradlee, about the decision to publish the Watergate stories 46 years ago.  He said those words remain in his mind as his new book is being published.

Swoosh

Most brands work hard to avoid controversy, which means they often come off as plain vanilla -- staying quietly in a safe space.

Nike, though, has plunged right into a red-hot polarizing issue, and I think they'll come out ahead long-term.

 

The iconic footwear/athleticwear company, which had maintained its endorsement relationship with controversial football star/pariah Colin Kaepernick, has gone a big step further -- featuring the embattled player in its new ad campaign that celebrates 30 years of the "Just Do It" ad slogan.  The new ad with a close-up of Kaepernick, has the headline "Believe in something, even if it means sacrificing everything."

The tweeter-in-chief could not, of course, sit quietly on the sidelines for this, and his divisive comments have brought even more attention to the new campaign.  Ad experts estimate Nike has so far received $43 million worth of publicity -- nearly half of it positive, about 20 percent neutral and a quarter negative. 

Among the brand's key demographic -- 18 to 34-year olds -- 56 percent felt on-field protests like what Kaepernick was fired for are appropriate.

Not surprisingly, social media is ablaze with calls to boycott Nike products.  But many online and in surveys are praising the company and say they will buy more Nike products to support its bravery and its standing on principles they agree with.

In the face of the presidential bluster on Twitter, the NFL issued a statement in support of Nike and Kaepernick.  "The NFL believes in dialogue, understanding and unity.  We embrace the role and responsibility of everyone involved with this game to promote meaningful, positive change in our communities.  The social justice issues that Colin and other professional athletes have raised deserve our attention and action," the statement said.

Calling attention to the troubling and complex issue of alleged police brutality, especially in minority communities, is a good thing.  It is not an act of disrespect to our flag, our national anthem or our military, as some would have us think as a way to confuse the issue. It is simply a quiet and peaceful way to call attention to a real issue that we as a society need to deal with.

 

 

 

There ARE Consequences

 

 

The brouhaha over Rosanne Barr's racist attempt at humor has brought home an important point.  For most of us, there are consequences to our actions. 

Comedy can be tricky.  Humor often treads that fine line between what's funny and what's hurtful or offensive.  Often, jokes shouldn't and can't be taken literally.

But racial and religious jokes can cross over that fine line, even if that wasn't the joketeller's intent.  It looks like Rosanne's joke -- which, to me, wasn't even funny -- provoked a lot of anger and disgust, even among castmates on her show.  One of the producers and writers, Wanda Sykes, announced she would quit the show.  Actor Sara Gilbert, who plays Rosanne's daughter on the show, put out a statement that she was upset by the joke and that it didn't reflect the beliefs of her, her castmates and the crew. Rosanne's agent - powerhouse ICM - said they were dropping her as a client.

Rosanne apologized, but it was too late.  The nasty cat was out of the bag and ABC, tossing finances to the side, announced Rosanne's show is being cancelled.  It's been a ratings leader for ABC, but the network has to consider other people that it works with and relies on -- producers, writers, actors, crew and, oh yes, the audience at home.

The whole episode shows that for most of us, there are consequences to what we say and what we do.  Words do matter.

We saw this as the #MeToo movement has taken hold, where seemingly innocent or harmless jokes go awry and cause people to lose their jobs or, as in the case of Al Franken, their Senate seat.  And many people who had been taking advantage of their positions of power have been rightfully taken down.

But it makes me wonder how one person, who should be a role model, has continuously gotten away with racist, mysogenist and religious slurs on Twitter and in public, with seemingly no consequence.

I'm talking about the President of the United States. 

He has slurred entire races (Black, Asian, Latino), religions (Muslims), continents (Africa), nations, people with disabilities, Americans alarmed about Russian interference in our elections, important government institutions (the FBI and CIA, the Dept. of Justice, individual judges) and other institutions that help make and keep us a free nation (the free press).  And instead of "draining the swamp," as he promised, he has made it deeper and murkier, illegally and immorally enriching himself, his family and his super-rich cronies.

There seems to be a whole group of Americans who think none of his actions and statements should have consequence.  He can say whatever he wants, call anyone names, and tell lie after lie, take actions that enrich himself and his family, and nothing happens.  No call for censure from Congress. It's just business as normal.

It is not normal, though.  Many of us feel that way and continue to be upset at how this man makes our great nation look small and petty in the eyes of the world.

Hopefully there will be consequences in November, when some of those who have supported him and allowed him to run roughshod over decency and decorum get thrown out of office.  There must be consequences for bad things, whether words or actions.

There must be consequences.

Press Freedom Day

 

Today is World Press Freedom Day, following an annual tradition since the UN General Assembly voted to approve it as an official designation back in 1993.

In the 1990s, no one would have considered the United States as a nation whose press freedoms were under threat.  That would have been more rightly aimed at so-called banana republics or authoritarian nations like Russia, China and some places in South America, Asia and Africa.  But the U.S.?   Never.

And here we are, 25 years later and the media here in "the land of free" are under attack.  Under attack by, of all people, the very person whose job it is to uphold and protect our Constitution, whose wise words recognize, very specifically, the importance of a free press to keep those who govern us honest and working in the public interest.

Who among us would have ever thought we'd be hearing daily attacks on our press, coming directly from the White House and from some top leaders in our government?

It's a dangerous path we're on. 

The theme of the 2018 celebration highlights the importance of an enabling legal environment for press freedom, and gives special attention to the role of an independent judiciary in ensuring legal guarantees for press freedom and the prosecution of crimes against journalists.

At the same time, it addresses the role of the media in sustainable development, especially during elections - as a watchdog fostering transparency, accountability and the rule of law. The theme also aims to explore legislative gaps with regard to freedom of expression and information online, and the risks of regulating online speech.

United Nations Secretary-General Antonio Guterres said, "On World Press Freedom Day 2018, I call on governments to strengthen press freedom, and to protect journalists. Promoting a free press is standing up for our right to truth."

 

Freedom of the press is a very important issue everywhere, including here in the United States.  We cannot allow ourselves -- or our leaders -- to lose sight of that.

 

 

 

Some advice for PR students (and some PR pros, too)

 

 

A longtime friend from my college days, Barry Zusman, graduated Clarkson College (now University) a year ahead of me. We stayed in touch as he was continuing for his MBA in Public Relations at Pace University.  While finishing my senior year at Clarkson, Barry and I talked and he told me what he was learning about PR.  It sounded interesting so I followed his footsteps, went to Pace and earned my MBA in Public Relations.

Like me, Barry spent many years working at PR agencies in New York.  Unlike me, though, Barry began teaching a PR course several years ago at LIM College here, where he's now beginning another semester.

He's been recognized by O'Dwyer's PR News columnist Fraser Seitel as one of several distinguished PR professors around the country. 

Barry sent me a recent column by Seitel and it has some good pointers worth sharing with any young people considering or now studying public relations.  I think these same pointers could be useful for many people already in the PR field, especially these days as we are hearing and seeing so-called "spin doctors" working for presidential candidates sometimes stretching the truth or outright lying to the media and the public. 

The article cites one of Barry's fellow PR professors, Jeff Morosoff at Hofstra.  Each year, Prof. Morosoff assigns students to seek out PR professionals to answer relevant questions on ethics. Here’s how one practitioner answered this year’s batch of PR ethics questions.

Why is it important to always tell the truth in PR?

All one has in public relations is his or her reputation -- credibility. Once you lie and you’re found out — and you will be found out — you lose that. And no one with whom you do business — reporter, client, potential employer, etc. — will look at you the same way after you’re caught in a lie. Truth, therefore, is paramount in public relations.

Why do some communications practitioners spin the truth instead of coming clean with the actual information?

They’re probably reluctant to reveal unpleasant or bad news about a client or the client doesn’t want them saying anything troubling. But it’s eminently preferable to say nothing than to lie. Again, once caught, no one will ever trust you or the client.

What values are the most important to do the public relations job?

A bias toward disclosing rather than withholding information.

An advocacy or belief in your employer.

A compelling desire to advise/counsel senior managers in proper action and communications.

An absolute commitment that the counsel you deliver is always ethical.

A willingness to take risks, to stick your neck out.

An always logical, but also positive, predilection.

How much of a role does PR ethics play in daily work?

Ethics, or stated another way, “doing the right thing,” must be the anchor of every decision you make in public relations.

Why are PR practitioners referred to as “spin doctors?”

They are referred to as “spin doctors” because they appear to have a mentality — or do have a mentality — of doing whatever the client tells them to do; whether right or wrong, fair or unfair, honest or dishonest. That’s a recipe not only for professional disaster but also for an unhappy practitioner.

Why does the good work of PR people often go unnoticed?

Public relations work is not as noticed because the work of PR professionals should be anonymous. If you write the CEO’s speech, and it’s a winner, it’s the CEO, correctly, who should get the credit, not you. Public relations people generally toil in anonymity. But as long as the client appreciates — and pays for — your contribution, that’s what counts.

 

These ethics for PR people, based around truthfulness, should really be key ethics for anyone in business, not just the PR folks.  But we in PR should be the ones who try to keep the rest of the business world honest.  It's a tough and often thankless task, but a good PR person will keep trying.