India's Kids Fall Into the GAP

No two words can scare a company or business more than "child labor." It's a hot-buttoned issue that brings controversy and emotions around whenever it is uncovered. Recently, a British news source broke the story of international retailer GAP using child labor in one of its Indian factories to produce clothes and accessories that would have hit the stores just in time for Christmas shopping. It should be clear that the GAP isn't directly responsible but an independent subcontractor is to blame for the hiring (most children weren’t paid) of children to do the work. Nonetheless, GAP faces a crisis just weeks before its most important time of year.

Going back to Guth and Marsh, this case can be evaluated using the RPCE formula.

Research- GAP did its research. They “launched an immediate investigation” as soon as the story about child labor violations within their company broke. They determined that one of their vendors that is responsible for a small portion of their orders was indeed using children as its main means of labor.

Planning- They have dealt with this situation before, so they seem to have been relatively prepared for the situation if it happened again. According to the press release published on GAP's website, they had a few tactics already planned. First, they cancelled the work order from that specific vendor. They also ensured that none of the clothes that came from that vendor would ever sell in stores. Finally, they called a meeting with all the suppliers in that region to go over and reinforce their child labor policy. This economic times article goes on to say that GAP also called a meeting with their domestic vendors. GAP has 90 people working for them to enforce their labor laws and last year alone stopped doing business with 23 companies for violating the rules they set forth.

Communication- As said, the GAP issued a press release on its website discussing the recent news. This is a good way to reach some of its publics. I was unable to find whether or not GAP was issuing a statement or release using any other means (postal mail, email, etc) to reach even more of its constituents. My guess is that they will.

Evaluation- Overall, I think the GAP did a pretty good job with the handling of this case. Their number one advantage was that this had happened before, and they were prepared for it. They stopped the shipments, called meetings to reinforce their policies, and got right to the problem as soon as it occurred.

Recommendation- I have a few recommendations for this case with GAP. First, they should put a link to the press release on their gap.com site so that public can be made aware of what happened. Second, they should launch investigations into other factories to make sure they don’t get hit with another bombshell in the coming weeks (reporters will be looking for a story). Last, since GAP owns Banana Republic and Old Navy, they should have a plan in case one of those stores comes under scrutiny.

JetBlue's Valentine's Day Blues

Many of you may remember the JetBlue snow storm crisis from this past Valentine's Day.

If you happened to miss the disaster, let me recap it for you. On February 14^th, 9 JetBlue planes full of passengers were stranded on the tarmac at the JFK airport for more than six hours each, as a wicked ice storm froze the plane’s wheels to the tarmac and much of the equipment that helps move and de-ice them. JetBlue was the only airline not to cancel flights. The planes couldn’t take off and there were no open gates to which they could return, so passengers sat on the planes for as long as 8 hours! Some of the planes weren’t heated, while others ran out of food, and the toilets got unbearably filthy. It was one of the worst cases of passengers being stranded on tarmacs in recent years.

A little background on JetBlue is that the airline began business in 1999 and quickly shot to the top of customer satisfaction surveys conducted by J. D. Power and Associates. For 2007 it was the top pick among low-cost carriers. This disaster was the first major crisis for the young company.

JetBlue had no previous planning in place for such an event, therefore, they had no contingency plans in place. However, once the disaster took place, it didn’t take long for a plan to come into effect. According to Guth and Marsh, this process of identifying issues as they emerge and preparing a timely response to address them is known as issues management (2005, p 7).

In David Weinberger’s book titled “Small Pieces Loosely Joined”, he says “companies talk in bizarre, stilted ways because they believe that such language expresses their perection...This rhetoric is as glossy and unbelievable as the photos in the marketing brochure. Such talk kills conversation. That’s exactly why companies talk this way.” JetBlue however did quite the opposite.

As for communication, JetBlue’s target message was clear and simple: the company had made a mistake. Many other companies use these long, complicated, and drawn-out statements to make an apology. JetBlue took the more traditional route with issuing its apology. The PR spokesman simply said, “what happened on Wednesday was totally unacceptable”. Their main goals were to satisfy disgruntled passengers, get people to understand the company made a mistake, and change the cancellation policy for future flights.

David G. Neeleman, chief executive of JetBlue, said he was personally overseeing the airline’s recovery efforts this week and also acting as chief apologizer. This was a smart and strategic PR move by JetBlue. It showed that the most powerful person in the company was very concerned about what had happened. He promised that JetBlue would have to be better prepared to deal with freakish weather in the future. “We will change our operational strategy based on this,” Mr. Neeleman said. “We would prefer to be in control of how we compensate customers we have inconvenienced.”

Neeleman released a video clip outlining all the changes that JetBlue would be making in the days following. He said, “we are going to make some major changes in our organization to make sure this never happens again.” For JetBlue to state that the company made a mistake and then shows how they will overcome the mistake gains credibility.

Neeleman did an interview with NBC Today, explaining why JetBlue had such a big problem with this compared to other airlines.

The day after the storm, JetBlue announced that passengers traveling on the airline from February 15^th to February 19^th could voluntarily choose to rebook a different flight for travel through May 22^nd. If customers chose to rebook the same route for different days, JetBlue would waive all change fees and fare differences. This helped ease the blow of many angry passengers.

The Tuesday following the disaster, JetBlue announced a new Customer Bill of Rights. This was a great move
by JetBlue because it shows that the company had long-term goals for this
situation. According to Wilson, strategic planning and management needs to be built around long-term thinking as opposed to short-term (2000, p 8).

The evaluation can be put into tangible results through the number of customers that still use JetBlue. After reading several different blogs, including this one it is apparent that people are still choosing to the low-cost carrier. As you read, you will see that many people commented that the President’s apology on youtube and the simple fact that their flights are cheap are two good enough reasons to keep using the airline.

I believe that overall JetBlue did a good job handling the crisis. When it comes down to it, I would still fly JetBlue because of the low cost, but it better be sunny out! Would you fly JetBlue?

Stupid is as stupid does.

To begin this post, I would like to quote an exact line from the U.S. Secretary of Homeland Security, Michael Chertoff:

"I think it was one of the dumbest and most inappropriate things I've seen since I've been in government," Michael Chertoff (pictured on left) said. (CNN).

If you have not yet heard, watched, or read in the news, FEMA made a PR boo boo. Pat Philbin, FEMA's external affairs director, held a fake news conference to address FEMA's response to the victims of the wildfires in SoCal. "The agency — much maligned for its sluggish response to Hurricane Katrina over two years ago — arranged to have FEMA employees play the part of reporters at the event Tuesday and question Vice Adm. Harvey E. Johnson, the deputy director" (FOXNews).

To see the entire news conference, including questions from phony media personnel, feel free to play the video below, compliments of YouTube.



Now comes the exciting part. Utilizing our knowledge of Guth and Marsh's (2005) RACE and RECAP, let's analyze how FEMA has handled the national exposure of this case:

After reading both the CNN and FOXNews articles, it appears as if some informal research was conducted by FEMA Director David Paulison. Paulison probably did not have any time to engage in formal research, but he most likely questioned Pat Philbin to see what exactly happened and why the fake news conference even took place. Through their informal research, FEMA probably identified their key publics as the American public, including the media and FEMA employees. The CNN article suggests that more formal research will be conducted in the form of an investigation of this incident.

The research that FEMA conducted allowed them to formulate a plan to handle the situation. Their main goals were most likely to a) publicly address Philbin's (pictured on right) decision to hold the phony conference by removing him of his duties and b) regain their credibility by releasing video coverage of the fake conference to the media and disclosing all information about the case. The message that FEMA wanted to send out to America was that of disapproval and apology for Philbin's "error in judgment" (FOXNews).

FEMA communicated its messages via the release of an internal memo from David Paulison (check the left side of this NY Times article for the pdf. of this memo), and via their formal letter of apology. This memo communicated Paulison's (pictured on left) disapproval of the incident, and highlighted the mistakes that were made. This memo was intended to reach its internal audience, the FEMA employees; since it was released to the media, its scope then widened to address the American public. Overall, the main message of FEMA (their disapproval and letter of apology) were communicated by using the memo, removal of Pat Philbin, and letter as tactics, and the mass media and FEMA website as a channel of communication to its publics.

Since this event has just become public over the past two days, FEMA has not yet had the opportunity (in my knowledge) to evaluate the success of their PR strategy for this case.

After analyzing this case in depth, I have a couple recommendations for how FEMA could, and still can handle this situation more effectively:

• The should have publicly addressed this situation much earlier. It took them six days to release their knowledge of this. A speedier response might have helped to better preserve their credibility. A speedy response is crisis management 101 (Seitel, 2006).
  
• FEMA should issue a formal, publicly televised statement of apology to the media, FEMA employees, and the American public. It was not until six days after the incident that FEMA issued any formal apology and that was only on their website.

Joe Torre Leaves the New York Yankees

Anyone who lives in the North East region, and probably most of those who don't, are aware of the man pictured to the left. This man is Joe Torre. He used to hold the title of New York Yankee's Manager; however, he most recently picked up one word in front of that title: former. For twelve years, Torre successfully managed the team leading them to three world Championships and numerous other titles along the way. Now, the challenge for the New York Yankees is to find someone who can replace the man who "is not just winning but a sense of attachment and identification that he effortlessly inspired among the fans and the players and the millions of sports bystanders." For an in depth account of Joe Torre and his New York Yankees team click here.

Now a big job for the New York Yankees is to find a new manager to replace Joe Torre and live up to his reputation. After Torre was upset in this World Series run, he decided not to take back his position of manager for the Yanks. (Okay Boston fans, that's enough!) Refer to www.newyorkyankees.com for recaps of the final games of the season and scores for the Series games.

Yankee fans say hello to your new team manager: Joe Girardi (to the right). The job of the public relations team is to inform the public that this is going to be the new manager and to get people excited for a new era of the New York Yankees.

The first step in the process by Guth and Marsh is research. The public relations team would have had to research to find the right audiences to pitch this story to. It is obvious that the Yankees would want to contact all major media outlets in the New York area such as this article in the New York Times. The Times being a very large publication would get the word out about this exciting event and to many different publics along the way. What the Yankees want is for the public to be excited about the new manager so that sports fans will attend Yankee games. They hope that a new manager means a new round of excitement for the avid fans. As far as researching to appoint a new manager. The team looked at different candidates, including Don Mattingly, and did an intense round of interviewing to chose the best new manager.

The next step is planning. I have not found much on how the PR team planned to get the word across about the new manager. However, it was just announced this afternoon that Girardi would be Torre's replacement. The did; however, hold one press conference when Torre decided to not accept the contract he was offered this year. This is planning on the PR teams part to announce that he was not coming back. I would assume that there is a press conference in the works to announce the new manager; however, I have not been able to find any evidence of one. The announcement is brand new; therefore, there are not any new plans yet.

In this video: Joe Torre announces at his press conference that he will not be returning to the Yankees.

The third step in the process is communication. The PR team has to find a way to communicate this event to its publics. Through press releases and different medias, they will get the word out that Girardi has accepted this position. Major press publications will cover the story such as the New York Times, Daily News, and many others all over the country. This is a topic that many sports fans, no matter what team you root for, are interested in. They also will get the word out to television media. Many news media will cover the story as well. They will set up interviews with important Yankee contacts and with Girardi to talk about his new position.

Lastly, evaluation must be done on this case. Since the case is so new, there is not much evaluating to be done yet. It is still in the beginning works, and there are many media channels that have not even covered the story yet. When they do end up covering the story, I am not sure how the Yankees will measure the success of their public relations dealings. They can see how many different publications cover the story, but until next baseball season, it will not be noticeable if the management change will help or hurt the Yanks.

For an unprofessional view of the press conference with Torre visit this website. It has one person's comments and criticism of the press conference as it goes on with a blog underneath.

As an endnote to the Yankee season:

Blog Discussion Period 2

Our second and final individual blog case study discussion begins on Monday, Oct. 29. I would like to kick off this discussion by addressing a unique example of how one person can inspire a world-wide movement through simple yet powerful communication strategies and tactics. I hope this encourages you to think out of the box in terms of public relations and have some fun with our discussion at the same time. Remember, for our discussion to succeed (and for you to achieve the desired outcome), each of you needs to post early, comment often, and invest creativity and intellectual energy in this assignment.

Searching Shel Holtz’s public relations blog, I found a reference to a social marketing campaign called Free Hugs. I started to collect information about the public relations aspects of this campaign by watching the movement’s video on YouTube. Click on the following image to watch the video, with theme music by Sick Puppies.




Inspired by the images and music on this video, I drilled deeper. I reviewed the Free Hugs campaign official Web site and discovered that the movement was launched spontaneously in an airport in Sydney, Australia by Juan Mann (allegedly a pseudonym for one man). Juan explained how his campaign began in the airport: “Standing there … watching other passengers meeting their waiting friends and family … faces, hugging and laughing together, I wanted someone out there to be waiting for me. To be happy to see me. To smile at me. To hug me” (Mann, 2007, paragraph 6).

Thus, Juan engaged in little or no research before launching his campaign – but this is understandable, since the campaign began informally. However, I would add that Juan probably engaged in informal research. For instance, as he was “watching other passengers” (Mann, 2007, paragraph 6), he was practicing empirical observation (see the Wilson, 2000 readings). When Juan decided to make a sign that read “FREE HUGS” and stand at a busy intersection in the airport he engaged in participant observation, which is also a form of primary research. Still, he did little to identify specific audiences, instead picking public places like busy airports and city streets to interact with people at random. He was interested, however, in finding out more about people’s interest – or stake – in hugging!

Likewise, I could find little evidence that he did any formal planning for his campaign. His campaign seemed to evolve from his first spontaneous encounter in the Sydney airport. As he repeated this social experiment in other locations around Sydney, he was told that he had to stop because he did not have the required insurance and other permissions for his public demonstrations. As a result, he decided to start a petition, with the goal to enlist supporters for his actions. His overall message seemed to be clear. From Juan’s Web site, I know that he believes in the power of the human spirit to overcome social ills and give us hope. According to Juan, “In this age of social disconnectivity and lack of human contact, the effects of the Free Hugs campaign became phenomenal” (Mann, 2007, paragraph 2).

Juan Mann’s communication and evaluation activities were the most interesting aspect of his public relations campaign. First, just Google free hugs and you will see 4,450,000 results! He has his own Web site, a MySpace site, numerous videos on YouTube, a long entry in Wikipedia, appearances on major news media outlets like the Oprah Winfrey Show, and an active blog. He has executed many other communication tactics across various media channels.

While I couldn’t find evidence of Juan having established any formal goals, he seems to have achieved phenomenal success in spreading his messages about hope, the human spirit, and physical contact. You can find evidence of this in his Google returns and the way his message has spread like a virus across the Internet.

In terms of evaluation, it’s worth considering how Juan achieved this success:

1. Can we attribute this to excellent public relations, which is defined as management of communication between an organization and its publics (e.g., Grunig & Hunt, 1984)?

2. Or is the success due to an Internet-based viral marketing campaign? Public relations is often confused with marketing. The two practices are similar but have important differences. Cutlip, Center, and Broom (1999) wrote: “Marketing is the management function that identifies human needs and wants, offers products and services to satisfy those demands, and causes transactions that deliver products and services in exchange for something of value to the provider” (p. 7). Furthermore, Wilson (2000) (not the same Wilson from our readings) defined viral marketing as “any strategy that encourages individuals to pass on a marketing message to others, creating the potential for exponential growth in the message's exposure and influence. Like viruses, such strategies take advantage of rapid multiplication [and channels like the Internet] to explode the message to thousands, to millions” (paragraph 4).

Finally, thinking back to that petition that Juan planned in Sydney to allow him to continue his demonstrations, he obtained a very quantifiable 10,000 signatures, which enabled him to keep spreading his message.

Overall, I think this is a most interesting, worthwhile and successful public relations case. How about you? Also, what do you think about the public relations versus marketing aspects of this case?

Mark

P.S. If you liked the music behind the video, check out the Sick Puppies promotional music video, below. Oh, and how about a hug?

Armed Student Arrested at St. John's University

To no surprise, when typing in “St. John’s University shooting” into the Google search engine, an overwhelming number of hits came up on Omesh Hiraman, a 22 year-old freshman at St. John's University arrested for rifle possession on-campus.

On Wednesday September 26, 2007, a masked Hiraman was spotted walking through campus in a hooded sweat shirt, carrying a black-powder rifle wrapped in a dark plastic bag. When Christopher Benson, a cadet and student at the University, witnessed the man walking past in a Halloween-type mask, he immediately began following Hiraman. Campus security officers quickly approached the scene and with the help of Cadet Benson, disarmed the man and took him in custody. Police arrested Hiraman shortly after.

According to 7Online, Hiraman was carrying a .50-caliber rifle, loaded with exactly one bullet. Now my question is, why one bullet? Although this case isn't based around the fact that the suspect was carrying around a one-rounder, it's something I'd like to quickly address. His one bullet leads me to believe that he intended to use it on a certain victim. Why else would he walk around with exactly one bullet? (On a side note, it was reported Hiraman traveled to Poughkeepsie to purchase this rifle).

"Hiraman's father, Pat Hiraman, said the incident was "a misunderstanding" and his son, who lives at home near the school, "would never harm anyone."" (7Online). A misunderstanding? Right. I don't buy it.

Research: St. John's University addresses the incident by immediately issuing a Press Release. The main page of their website reassures visitors all is safe on their campus. The calming welcome note that reads, "Safe Outcome After Gunman is Apprehended at St. John’s University’s Queens Campus" directs visitors to the Release in which it comforts all students, parents, professors and anyone else potentially affected by this incident that the gunman matter is under control and nobody is hurt. The Release also provides Press Conference Photos for further reassurance that this situation is being dealt with in the most professional way possible.

St. John's also did their research prior to their gunman incident by acknowledging that the Virgina Tech shooting is likely to occur on their campus as well. They researched an alert system which would notify everyone on campus of an emergency, in which they implemented a "Text Messaging System".

Planning: With their research, came planning. As mentioned above, post the Virginia Tech tragedy, the University administered an Emergency Response Plan at the beginning of the 2007-08 school year. The plan includes its “Text Messaging System,” which notifies students of an emergency via text-message. The down side to this is that students must register, and those who failed to do so, did not receive the text-message. This is a good strategy that all bodies on campus should be required to sign up for.

Communication: I found a lot of evidence on the communication tactics dealt with this case. St. John's realized there was absolutely no delaying the communication of this matter, and updated their website with all sorts of information related to this topic. A Press Release was their primary message, in which contact information for Dominic Scianna, Director of Media Relations, was available for parents and media inquiries. Also, an information link is provided for updates on the incident reported as they become available. St. John's is continually updating their website and welcoming all questions and/or concerns.

The University categorizes website communication to news pertaining to prospective students, current students, faculty & staff and alumni & friends. All of whom are affected by this event.

Although I believe St. John's University did very well in communicating the problem here, they did so via Internet. The older population (i.e. grandparents) do not go online for their news source. Therefore, it leaves them in the dark. I am not certain on whether or not the University published the Press Release in major newspapers, but this would be a great alternative for these individuals.

Evaluation: I was unable to find any information that measured the severity of the gunman incident. Clearly, the University went great lengths to address this matter by utilizing the media outlets, as well as their own, to reach out to the public . I don't doubt that they may analyze the problems with on-campus violence in the near future and evaluate an action plan in minimizing such an occurrence from ever happening again. I hope to see a decline in on-campus violence over the next couple years.

Click here to watch the latest on the gunman: Video (I could not get the video clip to work, for some reason).

Security Breach for TJX Companies, Inc.

Many of us use credit cards to pay for everything. It is an easy, no hassle way to buy things online, from mail-order catalogs, or to use in stores to lessen the amount of cash you have to carry on you at all times. When you use your credit cards how often does the concern of identity theft come into mind? My answer, and probably most other shoppers, would be never. However, it can happen. The TJX Cos. Inc., which includes discount stores TJ Maxx, Marshalls, Bob’s Stores, A.J. Write, HomeGoods, and a few others, experienced a security breach back in December 2006. This has been an ongoing battle for the TJX Corporation, which fortunately came to somewhat of a close this week. This article found on CNNMoney.com reports that the customer lawsuit against TJX Cos. Inc. was settled this week.

Looking at Guth and Marsh’s PR process I have evaluated the case from the public announcement of the breach to the time of the settlement.

Research: There was a lot of information about this security breach online. Boston.com, a website connected The Boston Globe, has a complete time line of all the articles printed about the incident from January 2007 to now. TJX conducted a large sum of research in response to the breach. According to this press release, found on the TJX website, TJX immediately involved law enforcement officials to help identify the suspects, contacted General Dynamics Corporation and IBM Corporation to compile data and find affected information and contacted major credit card companies to attempt to find who’s information had be tampered with.

Planning: The company had to think quickly and handle the legal issues of this case immediately. The company did begin an investigation right away and some of the PR tactics used included press releases, developing a helpline for customers and updating their website with any news or important information relative to the case. With the recent settlement TJX has made the following agreements and promises to their customer. TJX was also very compliant to the news media. There are many newspaper articles that outline the updates of this case.

Communication: The main communication of TJX was to keep the customers happy and help them through the process, however, TJX waited a month to educate the public on the security breach. When they did finally address the ,they gave a complete overview of the case and issue at hand and how they planned on handling the crisis. TJX had a number of communication channels available to the public including, press releases, news media, and a helpline.

Evaluation: TJX believes to have done an adequate job in their crisis management. Their sales reports show that they have maintained customers and kept sales up from last year. Based on financial data TJX maintained their credibility and people continue to shop at their stores regardless of the security breach last December.

Personally, I believe that TJX could have done a better job at handling this security breach crisis. Waiting a month to inform customers of the breach is ridiculous. A month is too long of a time to allow people to be unaware of the dangers they may be facing in an event of identity theft. Also, waiting till the end of the holiday season to release this information seems a little too convenient. TJX may not, however, had had a choice in the wait to release information. The company may not have been properly prepared for a crisis of this size. If TJX had a contingency plan already in place for a crisis they would have been able to provide information much quicker. The company also should have planned for a longer time to work out the crisis. They reportedly spent over $25 million in investigations and damage control. With a thought out plan they would have been able to save money and come to conclusions quicker. This article shows that both customers and consultants also believe that TJX could have done a better job with communication and keeping the public informed. I do, however, have to commend TJX for making customer satisfaction the number one priority and for continuing to apologize for any trouble or harm this might have caused. This was a major crisis that TJX had to address and I believe that they could have been more prepared for the crisis and could have done a better job communicating to their publics.

Bad Newz for Michael Vick

As many of us already know, Atlanta Falcons quarterback Michael Vick has been indicted on federal dogfighting charges. More recently, Vick is being indicted on those same charges in the State of Virginia. There are rumors that Vick could spend up to five years in prison but many believe that he will serve 12 to 18 months. This is an obvious time of crisis for Michael Vick and this is where public relations could help to one day restore his image. An article from CNN describes the recent State charges brought against Vick and says that Vick will be sentenced on December 10.

After orignally denying his connection to "Bad Newz Kennels" and the illegal dogfighting ring Vick took a guilty plea and admitted to his crime. All of us have learned that in public relations lying is the first thing on your list of things not to do. Although it would be kind of hard not to admit to dogfighting after your partners already gave you up. You can also get a look at the federal case against Vick as well as a timeline of Vick's case by viewing the CNN article above.


The PR process according to Guth and Marsh involves four steps: Research, Planning, Communication, and Evaluation.

Research: It was very easy to find news on Michael Vick's issue. Many of the sources had the same information so it was simple to compile the facts. What Michael Vick and company should do, and I'm sure already is, is take a look back on past situations regarding high profile athletes and the law. Learning from other peoples' failures and successes is crucial. As previously mentioned Vick had orignally lied about his involvement so that immediately put him in a hole. It was smart for Vick and whoever was giving him advice to come forward and admit to his crime. Now Vick's lawyers and publicists must start planning on how to restore his image.

Planning: I think that Michael Vick's lawyers are working hard to lessen Vick's punishment but more importantly is what Michael Vick's PR professionals are doing to improve his image. It is important to make sure that information about his issue is being released frequently to the public. Keeping people informed is a good start. Next, Vick needs to try and salvage any professional relationship that he has ever had. (i.e. NFL commissioner Roger Goodell, and owner of the Atlanta Falcons Arthur Blank) Apoligies need to be made by Vick, and he needs to take a lot of time to reflect on his decisions, which shouldn't be hard sitting in a jail cell.

Communication: Michael Vick has been all over the news since the middle of summer and now that he is guilty of dogfighting it has stirred up a lot of emotion across the country. Vick held a press conference on August 28th, 2007. Many people who have gotten themselves in some trouble have usual spoke using notes or a speech during a press conference. Michael Vick explained how he wanted to speak from the heart and it sounded like it was. That was a very good way to start heading in the right direction for Michael Vick. He seemed sincere and the public will most likely respond well to it. He is cooperating and is accepting whatever consequences will be brought upon him.

Evaluation: It is a hard time for Michael Vick and restoring his image will be difficult, although it can be done. He may never redeem his spotlight status but he can change his life around. If you take the time to watch the video you can see how the press conference couldn't have hurt Vick's case in any way. The only thing wrong is that we haven't heard from Vick since the press conference. I feel like Vick and company have done all they could have at this point. Michael Vick will be sentenced on December 10, 2007. This is a current issue and will continue to be in the news for several months, therefore the entire situation can not be fully evaluated.

If you want to learn more about Vick's case you can visit ESPN's website.

Just when we thought it was over...

As we kick off things for the semester, we are bound to meet new people. From freshmen going out and seeing what it's like to not have mommy and daddy there any more, to the upper class-men finally seeing what it's like to live off campus, people are just asking for trouble. Recently at Lehigh University, a familiar school to most, 19 swimmers and divers were accused and arrested with alcohol charges.


Some what cliche of me to do a story on my fellow swimmers and divers, but lets see how the school is handling this situation:

Research: Looking around for this article was very hard. All the articles that I found were more or less the same and gave the same type of information. However, when I went to the athletics's website, I found more in depth decision about the situation. Also, it gives personal apologies from certain swimmers that were involved and personal statements from the Athletic Director and swim coach. However, when you go the school's main web page, there is nothing the school has done to acknowledge the situation aside from personal testimony's from past team mates (only after searching with their search bar).

Planning: Leigh's Athletic Director and Head Swimming and Diving coach met with all the members of the incident and decided that they would do the following: "One set of consequences is applied on an individual level to each of the athletes involved. Those consequences involve loss of participation privileges because we believe that participating in college sports is something that should never be taken for granted. Another set of consequences will be felt by all who are members of the swimming and diving team. At this point they have lost the opportunity of a team training trip at the semester break." This was from the most recent press release on the swimming section of their athletic website. It was posted only six (6) days later, which shows their immediate response and decision-making time. Though some students and parents may feel that the school's actions were a little harsh, I feel that they did the best thing to protect the image the college has for the university and their athletics.

Communication: I believe the college and the athletic department communicated very well to their respective communities. They got out what they needed to say and within a very good time span. I also thought it was a good idea that they used personal testimonies from the athletes to show that they had words for their families and communities as well.

Evaluate: Overall, I believe that the college handled this situation rather nicely. They kept it under control and did not let it turn into something bigger than it has been before with other university sports. The public relations person did well and used a channel to post the reaction of the college. Also, I think that not finding a lot of information on the situation helped their cause because it showed how intensive they were to keeping this rather low so it would not hurt the reputation of the school.

Ideas For Case Analysis Discussion

Dear Class:

As we enter the second week of our first graded discussion period, I thought I would suggest some ideas for students who might be struggling to find a public relations case to evaluate. If you are still trying to find a case – or if you want to continue looking at interesting cases – try the Web site of the Public Relations Society of America (PRSA). The PRSA hosts an annual awards competition for the best public relations programs in the world. The organization’s Silver Anvil and Bronze Anvil awards are coveted within the industry.

For example according to PRSA: “The Silver Anvil, symbolizing the forging of public opinion, is annually awarded to organizations who have successfully addressed a contemporary issue with exemplary professional skill, creativity and resourcefulness. In the over 50 years that these citations have been made, more than 1,000 organizations have been awarded Silver Anvils for excellence in public relations. Silver Anvil Awards recognize complete programs incorporating sound research, planning, execution and evaluation. They must meet the highest standards of performance in the profession” (see http://www.prsa.org/awards/silverAnvil/).

Click here to see a list of 2007 Silver Anvil award winners. You can also go to the PRSA Web site and click on the link for Awards, Silver Anvil, and search for award entries. Click hereto see an example of one of these entries. As you will see, the format of each entry is very similar to the research, planning, communicating, and evaluating process that we evaluate in this class. And the entries provide information about how organizations conducted each phase of this process.

OK, continue to have fun with your analysis and discussion of cases. Well done to students who have posted and commented already. Again, you should have already posted an analysis of a case, to allow others time to comment before Sunday’s deadline. If you haven’t posted a case or commented yet, you are falling behind. So let’s make good use of the second week of discussions.

Regards,
Mark

Eat Like Snake Commercial

And would you like some tasty Snake Heads with your Green Beans?

Last night someone told me about a snake head turning up in a can of green beans. This is disgusting! Think back to rats in people's Wendy's and all those horrible cases of food that was contaminated. A lot of PR cases handled contamination of products well, ie Tylenol. However after searching for the snake stories, I have found two recent cases of snakeheads and neither have been handled well.
Let's see how great these companies have handled their slithery messes according to Guth and Marsh's PR method.
Ultimately I have found two cases, one in Philadelphia, and another in Iowa.
I will break them down case by case.

Research: The Philadelphia man, Earl Hartman, bought a can of Green Beans in a local PathMark. He brought them home, cooked a meal and then found a slimy snakehead hanging out in his chicken and noodles (See the story from NBC). The can was packaged in Seneca Falls, NY according to another article from the Trentonian, as well as the NBC article. So the company at least knows where the food was packaged. Apparently knowing where the bad food came from was enough research for Pathmark.

Planning: According to the NBC article I hyperlinked, it really shows a lack of planning from Pathmark and the packing company. The Seneca Falls packing company intends to do research by having Hartman send them the snake head. Luckily Hartman is not intending to sue, but I think I would in that situation. Also Pathmark and the packing company should really plan for a case. If Hartman feels that the problem is not sufficiently addressed, he may decide to sue out of anger. I think neither company has made a solid plan, and are treating this issue as if it isn't a big deal.

Communication: Overall there is an overwhelming sense of "no comment" in this case. The only Pathmark communication has been from Rich Savner, a spokesman for Carteret, N.J.-based Pathmark Stores Inc. According to the Trentonian, Savner "confirmed that a customer reported finding a "foreign substance" in a can of green beans, but said officials had not determined what it was." Also the NBC article said that the manager of the store was not allowed to comment. The Trentonian has claimed that the store where the beans were purchased at least spot checked cans and removed them from the shelves. The problem with Savner is that here he is saying that Pathmark won't even confirm that the man found a snakehead. There are pictures of it, and they are claiming something was found, but we aren't sure it is a snake head. WHAT HORRIBLE COMMUNICATION!

Evaluation: Pathmark has denied, denied, denied. Nothing is even posted on their website. This company is ignoring the issue, and if Hartman gets upset, he may make it a larger issue. Green Beans are not the main source of income for Pathmark, but ignoring a problem like this could bring down the whole company. I personally will not shop at a pathmark again. This is a PR issue that has not done too much damage yet, but it can easily become a big deal.

Now let's look at the Iowa case; another quality example of when PR goes wrong, or non-existent in these cases.

Research: According to a local NBC network, Amy and Michael Schneider and their four children are suing Lakeside Foods of Manitowoc, Wis., and Supervalue Inc., of Eden Prairie, Minn., the parent company of the Iowa City Cub Foods store where the can of green beans was bought. Lakeside foods offered the same great research as Pathmark. Send us the snake head and we will do research on it. Great research. Maybe they should have seen how far wide-spread this story is, seeing as how here in Poughkeepsie we are outraged. They also may have wanted to see how upset the Schneider's were in order to avoid a huge lawsuit. Lakeside Foods and Supervalue's PR reps really skipped a few classes when their PR professors told them to do research.

Planning: Interestingly I again see a lack of a plan for Lakeside Foods and Supervalue. Their great idea is clearly shown in an ABC article on the Iowa snake head. They decided to give the Schneiders some coupons. Now if I was dealing with something this big, I would probably give these people more than a few coupons, especially when the customer was saying she would never buy their brand again. Interestingly enough this court case was raised recently, and brought to media attention on September 21, however the incident happened on March 24th, 2006. This company had a year and a half before these people hit their final straw started a lawsuit and got media coverage, and Lakeside Foods and Supervalue did nothing but send a few coupons!! They are nuts! The only other possible plainning that has occured is a recall of Lakeside Food green beans this past August. I wonder if they got served with papers and then decided to recall. Notice this recall gives "potential problems" as the reason for pulling green beans across the nation.

Communication: Here's another great example of communication: None. Lakeside did respond to the initial incident by saying, "that type of snake is common to the area where they pick the green beans. This happens"(NBC). The only other communication was the giving of coupons, and no comment to all news networks. According to ABC's article, Lee Ann Jorgenson, a spokeswoman for Cub Foods, and Jim Ferguson, vice president for customer service for Lakeside Foods, both declined comment.

Evaluation: This companies really hit rock bottom on their PR here. No comment is completely incriminating. These companies don't care about their publics, as they show but saying it's a commin problem and sending coupons. If I found a snake head in my green beans I would flip out as I'm sure most of this class would. This company had a year and a half to take care of this women before any media was even aware of the situation. They really did nothing. Coupons were a poor choice of a PR plan, and maybe some research or effective communication or planing, would have saved this company a lot of headaches. I hope this woman wins her case because Lakeside Foods and Supervalues should really think about a better PR plan than coupons.

So that's the snake news, bad PR all over the place. I tried to get some video coverage of these cases but could only find articles. However I did find one really interesting that I guess fit nicely with this blog. I couldn't figure out how to nicely post things in this blog so I put it in another blog. I'm technilogically challenged but I did get as far as getting it in another blog post.

Knock, knock. Who's there? Apple. Apple who? Apple iPhone silly!

Apple Inc. has a public relations issue on their hands. Remember the critically acclaimed, much anticipated iPhone that was released a few months back? Yes well that little gem of technological greatness originally cost its buyers a pretty penny. How about $600 big ones ($599 in Apple marketing language)! On September 5, just 68 days after the iPhone’s debut, Apple dropped the price from $599 to $399. Needless to say, this “slightly” ticked off thousands of early iPhone buyers who dropped the extra $200 to acquire this gizmo. Watch this clip from CBS to see how Apple’s publics are reacting.

Applying the theories of Guth and Marsh, how has Apple used the public relations process to deal with this issue?

R: Not having access to Apple’s internal intelligence leaves me partially clueless about the research in which they conducted before dropping the price of the iPhone so drastically. According to some analysts, Apple wanted to boost sales of the phone, thus decreased the price. Apple probably saw a great opportunity for increasing sales and jumped on it. Apple also considered how this would affect its stakeholders, and planned appropriately to address them.

P: Apple obviously took steps to plan the delivery of this announcement. The main evidence of their strategic PR plan is CEO Steve Jobs’ letter to all iPhone customers. In this letter he honestly addresses why Apple decreased the phone price, and he empathizes with those negatively affected. Another part of Apple’s plan was to address its stakeholders. They did this by recently offering $100 gift certificates to the Apple store for early iPhone owners (check this FOX News article for more detail). To see if you are eligible for this rebate, click here.

C: Steve Jobs and Apple addressed their publics very affectively and appropriately through their letter to all iPhone owners. This letter was basically a public service announcement to current and future iPhone/Apple customers. Once Apple released Jobs’ letter, news outlets all across the country commented. The coverage ranged from reputable papers such as the NY Times and Chicago Tribune, to Business Week blogs and other random blogs. From written media to broadcast media, there is no debate that Apple successfully communicated its plan.

E: Since this is such a recent event, and multitudes of opinions (negative and positive) are still coming in from iPhone owners, we will have to wait and see how Apple evaluates their decision. I’m sure if sales boost into the Christmas season, they will be happy with their decision.

Want to see an iPhone get put to the test in a blender? Check this out...

Florida Student Tasered

On Monday night, September 17, John Kerry appeared at the University of Florida to speak and answer questions from a panel of audience members. For two hours, the event went on without incident. Then, 21 year old Andrew Meyer got his turn to ask Kerry a question. Rather than explain it with my interpretation, you can see the video of what happened here and decide for yourselves. Here is an article written by abcnews.com about the incident.

Research: As Guth and Marsh say, this is the information gathering phase. Right now, the University of Florida is under a lot of heat to get to the bottom of what went on and come to an official stance on the matter, from Meyer’s actions to the actions of the UF police. Since the incident is only two days old, this phase is not complete yet. However, you can read this and see what the University is going to do as stated by the school’s President. To me, the President seems to be right on in what he has said will be done to understand the matter.

Planning: Undoubtedly, UF will begin planning for incidents such as these and how to handle them in the future. They probably didn’t give much thought to something like this happening, and I can’t imagine they would ever let something like this escalate as much as it did again. They have already commenced with an ad-hoc plan, to address this specific situation, and they should certainly come up with some contingency plans for the future.

Communication: The University has been taking hundreds of calls and emails on the matter already, which is what led to the President releasing the statement you have already seen above. They should continue to stress that there is an ongoing, independent investigation, so as to show their commitment to uncovering the truth- whatever that may mean for the University. If the investigation turns out badly for them, they can handle it from there and tell the public what they are going to do to make up for their wrongdoings. You can click here to see the UF Police Chief’s webpage and the type of system they have there (MUCH more serious than Marist Security)

Evaluation: Again, since the incident is so recent, it is tough to evaluate how the University is ultimately going to handle the situation. So far, they seem to be on the right track by hiring an independent investigator and placing two of the police officers involved on leave. In my opinion, the police acted with unnecessary force on a kid who can be heard saying, “I’ll get up and leave right now,” then pleading, “Please don’t tase me, bro,” before ultimately getting shocked and filled with pain. But, we will have to wait and see what the investigation uncovers. As the ABC story above said, Meyer likes practical jokes and has his own website. Whether that is relevant in this incident, I don’t know. Here is his website.

US banana firm must pay $25million fine

I was very surprised when searching for an article to come across this one, that deals with such an odd but familiar company, Chiquita. BBC News reports a United States Judge has required the company to pay a 25 million dollar fine for have given $1.7 million to the United Self Defense Forces of Columbia (AUC) in March. (The EU and US list the AUC as a terrorist organization) Prosecutors claim Chiquita also made payments to the Revolutionary Armend Forces of Columbia (Farc). Both paramilitary groups have been involved in conflicts resulting in the deaths of thousands of Columbians.


Research: When Chiquita pleaded guilty to giving protection money to the AUC in March they said their motive was for the safety of its Columbiam workers. They later agreed to pay the $25 million to resolve an inquiry by the United States Justice department. Research in the case shows that both the AUC and Farc are organizations that have been involved in violent conflicts for the past forty years.

Planning: I was unable to locate crucial information about the PR tactics and practices used by Chiquita, which has its headquarters in Cincinnati, Ohio. However the company agreed to pay the $25 million fine as a settlement with the department of justice.

Communication: After Chiquita had leagally dealt with the department of justice they sold the Columbian sector of the American based business. From a Public Relations point of view this was the right move. I also think that rather then try to excuse their payments as safety measures for Columbian workers they should have just agreed to pay the fine.

Evaluation: The article only went into so much detail about the communication tactics used in dealing with their problem but I can imagine that with the Columbian part of the business gone that operations at Chiquita are going smoothly. I think we can also assume that the money paid to the AUC was not worth the $25 million fine they are now faced with.

Tthis story is a good example of a situation that could be a potential Public Relations nightmare. Chiquita was lucky to get out of this one unscathed. I don't know of any other companies to thrive after being linked with terrorist organizations, especially American based companies given our involvement in the War on Terror.

College and University Financial Aid Investigation

As everyone in this class attends a 4-year college, we are all too familiar with the rising costs of higher education. The cost of a four-year degree from a public university averages $115,000, according to The College Board. Here at Marist, the average cost of a four-year degree is over $150,000.

According to the Council of Better Business Bureaus (CBBB), financial aid scams rose by an astounding 60 percent in 2006.

Research: This nationwide student scandal surfaced in March of this year, after an investigation by New York’s Attorney General. It was found that many financial aid offices were receiving stock fees, consulting fees, and other perks from student loan lenders. In return, the financial aid offices gave preference to these lenders for their school’s student loans.

Planning: ABC News reported at the beginning of May that the parent company of Student Loan Xpress, CIT Group, would pay $3 million to end an investigation into its operation. Also, two of the country's largest lenders, Citibank and Sallie Mae, each paid $2 million to settle the Attorney General’s investigation. They also agreed to follow a new set of stricter guidelines regarding their relationship with financial aid offices.

Communication: With many prestigious colleges and universities such as Columbia University and Johns Hopkins University involved in this investigation, I found many statements from such schools. All were worded differently but came down to this main message: restoring the credibility of the Office of Student Financial Services was their main concern.

Evaluation: Once the lenders agreed to pay the New York Attorney General, there wasn’t much communication. It was said that these lenders would now follow set guidelines to restrict their communication with financial aid offices. In this article, it states that schools would have to make reimbursements to students. It even goes as far as to say that the Attorney General applauds the cooperation from the lenders.

From a public relations standpoint, I feel that the colleges and universities made a very conscious effort to make sure everyone understood that they would get their offices back on the right track. They showed that their primary concern is for the students. Marist does a great job of communicating its financial aid policies with students and their families. It is a difficult process and many families don’t understand it. Marist does an excellent job of helping and properly communicating what needs to get done.

Also, I found this website which can be used by students and parents to help protect themselves from scammers. Scambusters.org is a a public service website that sends out a weekly newsletter outlining the newest frauds, scams, and schemes.

New York State and City Sue Merck Over Vioxx

Merck & Co. Inc. is being sued by both the sate and city of New York. Merck is a global pharmaceutical company, which provides products such as Vioxx, Singulair, and Gardasil, the one and only HPV virus vaccine on the market (see product list). A lawsuit was filed against Merck in the State Supreme Court in Manhattan accusing Merck of, " ...intentionally concealing the dangers of Vioxx, and therefore defrauding the state Medicaid program, which paid for the prescriptions." Many individuals are also suing Merck for damages. Vioxx was originally prescribed as a painkiller for arthritis and migraines, but led to a high risk of heart attacks and strokes. (NYT Article)

RESEARCH: Vioxx became available to consumers in 1999 and was withdrawn in 2004. Many elderly used Vioxx to treat arthritis, therefore Medicaid and The Elderly Pharmaceutical Insurance Program spent over $100 million on prescriptions. There are over 25,000 lawsuits pending against Merck. States including New York, Alaska, Louisiana, Mississippi, Montana, Utah and Texas have all filed demanding reimbursement, claiming consumer and Medicaid fraud, and voicing concerns about the safety of the product. The New York lawsuit claims that if the manufacturer had informed doctors about the risks of taking Vioxx, they would not have prescribed it.

PLANNING: Although the steps of the planning process are unclear, it is clear that Merck planned on addressing the public. Merck also planned on taking Vioxx off the market, which the did in 2004. It would be a reasonable assumption that Merck and it's lawyers prepared for legal matters after removing the product from the market and becoming aware of consumer side effects. Merck planned on fighting each case individually and set aside almost $2 billion for litigation costs (IHT article).

COMMUNICATION: Much information is available on Merck's website under the Vioxx Information Center link. They also issued a statement in September 2006 stating that, "...there is no basis for the claim that Merck knowingly put patients at risk for cardiovascular events." Merck lawyers claim that New York's allegations are unfounded. Kent Jarrell, a spokesperson on Merck's legal defense team, states that Merck acted responsibly in previously researching the drug, monitoring it while available, and withdrawing it when they did. The FDA issued a public health advisory in accordance with Merck removing the product for safety concerns.

EVALUATION: Within the last few months, New Jersey courts have ruled in favor of Merck in numerous court battles, however, they have also been found guilty in some instances and are appealing. In Texas, Merck was charged with having to pay over $250 million in damages. People from Britain have also tried to sue Merck, but a New Jersey court ruled that their legal matters cannot be argued in a Unites States court. Good for Merck. The biggest PR issue for Merck is that some are claiming that Merck knew about the harmful effects and kept selling the drug anyway because they were only concerned with revenue.

In my opinion, if Merck can convince people that they were completely ignorant of the safety concerns, then I think they will continue to be successful--that is if they don't go bankrupt first. They need to keep positive public opinion and fix what they have damaged. Standing behind their faulty product is not the route I would have taken. We'll see how they stand up in court!

Grocey Store 'Stew Leonard's' Handles E. Coli Breakout in Yonkers

As the discovery of food diseases continues to grow, there are constantly cases popping up in restaurants and food stores. There are many cases that are brought to the attention of the public, and this case is no exception. On September 14, it was discovered that three people from one family had become sick from E. Coli. It was later discovered that the E. Coli came from 96% lean Ground Round beef bought in the Stew Leonard's store located in Yonkers. To learn more about the E. Coli disease click here.

Guth and Marsh (2005) teach how the strategic public relations process involves research, planning, communicating, and evaluating. The way the case has been handled so far has included some of these steps.

RESEARCH: When it was discovered that three people from one family were sick after eating the same beef from Stew Leonard's, research began to find out what kind of beef, when it was packaged and where it came from. Once it was found that the beef the family purchased was the 96% lean and the date it was purchased, Stew Leonard's was able to put out the information. According to this article, Stew Leonard's was able to find the exact dates and that there were 65 packages of that meat sold because of the production records they keep.

PLANNING: It was stated in many articles and on news broadcasts that Stew Leonard's planned to deal with this issue by refunding any meat purchased between June 30 and August 1. It was detected in the research that the exact date the meat was sold and packaged was July 21; however, they expanded the date range as a precautionary. I was not able to find how Stew Leonard's plans to handle the family that was harmed by eating the meat.

COMMUNICATION: There have been many communication tactics. With an issue like this it is important to let the public know so that more people are not harmed. I was not able to find any press releases; however, I did see the article in many places online. I also saw the newscast of the problem on major new networks such as ABC and NBC news. There was a great deal of media coverage to make sure the public in the New York area was made aware.

EVALUATION: There has not been a lot of evaluation on the topic as of yet because the issue is not over. They are still waiting to see if anyone will come back with meat from this time span and how the sales will be. Since Stew Leonard's has a good reputation and acted on this situation right away, it is hopeful that this will not affect the store too much.

Stew Leonard's is a great store to shop in and to work for. This was my first job, and my father has been with the company for many years and now is a store director. Therefore, this topic was close to my life and worried me when I heard about it. In my evaluation, I believe it was handled the right way and everything will turn out fine for the store.

Bloomsburg University Student Body President A WasteCase!

In relation to this case, I found another having to do with drunk and reckless driving. At Bloomsburg University in Bloomsburg, PA, the student government present was caught drunk driving on campus. This article was featured on abcnews.com on September, 9/16.

Bloomsburg University Office of Student Standards clearly states that behavior such as this is not acceptable and in addition to any legal issues the students will be subject to judicial review.

Using Guth and Marsh's public relations process as used in previous cases, I was able to review this case and how it was handled.

1. Research: My research of Bloomsburg University's website only gave a brief overview of which activities were punishable by the university and a statement that students would be subjected to judicial review. I also found this document which explained the dangers of drugs and alcohol and about some nearby treatment centers, which tells me that most likely Bloomsburg has a drug education program.

2. Planning: I did not find that much on any public relations practices by the university, but I was personally expecting a more profound statement than the one it provided to the Associated Press. This statement focused on the student himself and didn't address Bloomsburg and its policies as a university.

3. Communication: I have yet to see any follow up communication from the college, which is surprising because the student who was caught drunk driving was so outspoken about the image that students have as irresponsible. In fact, there was no mention of this incident on the university's website at all. By not saying anything, Bloomsburg University is not confronting the issue and is basically pretending that it hasn't happened.

4. Evaluation: Since I did not find any communication by the college on this topic, I doubt very seriously that much evaluation has been done.

My opinion on this is that public relations emphasizes that there should be communication and early and often, which is not happening in this situation. Bloomsburg University should have been ready with a statement and since they're not protecting their reputation, they basically look as if they don't care.

Blog Discussion Period 1

This week marks the beginning of our first online case discussion. Read the syllabus for a description of this assignment. In summary, you should review current news sources and identify a case that represents a public relations situation (e.g., an organization or individual that uses public relations to manage an issue).

Choose your case carefully. Avoid publishing a post that relies mostly on your personal opinions. Back up your analysis with facts. You should be able to collect enough information on the case through your own research to analyze how an organization or individual used research, planning, communication, and evaluation in the public relations process. Of course, we may not have access to the information we need to judge all aspects of internal management like research, planning or evaluation but do the best that you can with this assignment – and have fun with it!

Also, use the tools in Blogger to add textual elements and design features that facilitate understanding. For instance, if you refer to an item on the Web, insert an active hypertext link that lets us click and jump directly to the item. Also, use design elements and images (as well as tools like spell check) to enhance the appearance of your post.

I’ll lead by example and present a case that I found last week.










Issue: Alcohol abuse on college and university campuses.

Background: On Sept. 12, The New York Times featured a story about efforts by the University of Wisconsin at Madison (UW-M) to crack down on alcohol abuse. Click here to read more information about UW-M’s policy on alcohol abuse.

-- UW-M’s chancellor called alcohol abuse the school’s top health and safety issue.
-- UW-M security officials administer Breathalyzer tests to students who appear to be drunk on campus and administrators call parents of students who are taken to detoxification.
-- 44 students were taken to detox, 2004-5; 112 were taken to detox, 2006-7. Repeat offenders have fallen sharply and nearly none of these students have dropped out.

Discussion: According to Guth and Marsh (2005), the strategic public relations process involves research, planning, communicating, and evaluating. UW-M’s handling of this case illustrates many of these steps.

Research. A review of UW-M’s Web site (click here) revealed many documents that contained research data about the effects of alcohol abuse and statistical trends on and off campus. For instance, one document, “Prevention – Historical Overview,” provided information about the issue, publics affected by alcohol, remedial measures, etc.

Planning. I couldn’t find much information about how UW-M planned its public relations effort to deal with this issue – not unusual since this type of information might be considered proprietary. However, it looks like the current policy to manage alcohol abuse has been in planning for years. I found one press release (click here) dating back to 2004 that talked about a campus study of this issue.

Also, it is apparent from UW-M’s Web site and coverage of the school’s policy that the school did an effective job of articulating strategic messages and desired outcomes. I found many examples of these messages in The New York Times article and in news releases on the school’s Web site. These messages include the university’s efforts to change drinking policy, work with affected communities, create awareness of consequences, sponsor alternatives to drinking, and showing leadership (see Aug. 29, 2001 news release).

Communication. I found lots of examples of communication tactics and media. Tactics included press releases, like the one I mentioned above. The university’s Web site also contained useful information, including a great site for news releases with search tools that made research easy. It was evident that news media outlets like The New York Times picked up on such releases. UW-M also used various channels of communication and tactics to reach campus audiences, too, and members of the surrounding community. For instance, I found evidence that deans were talking directly to students about this issue.

Evaluation. I couldn’t find any evidence that showed how UW-M measured its public relations program related to this issue. However, it was clear from the data released to news media that the university is measuring and reporting quantifiable progress in curbing alcohol abuse. The drop in detox incidents between 2004 and 2007 looked pretty impressive.

Recommendations: Later in this course, we will make specific recommendations in a point paper that reports our analysis of the River Communications case. You can offer recommendations in these blog discussions, too; or you can use this space to offer a short summary of your blog post.

I would like to conclude by saying that UW-M appears to be achieving success in promoting awareness of its efforts to curb alcohol abuse on campus – at least in terms of national news coverage. However, I would need to research this case further to assess how well UW-M has used other tactics and channels of communication and how it has evaluated its communication efforts.

I’ll also add my opinion – for the sake of discussion – that I think this is an important issue for college, university, and public relations officials to engage in. Many young alcohol abusers are not aware of the dangerous consequences associated with this problem – and others just don’t care enough, until the problem takes a life … or lives. I’m no teetotaller, but I do drink responsibly and I think this is one of those social responsibilities that organizations and public relations officials must accept in order to safeguard our students and other citizens.

I look forward to reading your posts … and seeing your comments about my post.

Mark