With all of today’s news, it was hard to decide on just one topic for today… address the latest on how Domino’s reacted to those gross videos posted online? Overdone by now. Comment on Pizza Hut’s latest announcement looking for a summer intern to run their Twitter? Yawn. Ponder how Freddie Mac will react publicly to their CEO’s suicide?  Too distressing.

Continue Reading »

It may not be national news but for some allergy sufferers, it’s huge news.  Last November, the Chicago Tribune did another investigative report similar to one from several years ago during the height of the stories about lead paint on children’s toys. This time, the testing and subsequent report was on various food products labeled “gluten-free” that are on the shelves of several Chicagoland grocery stores. 

Continue Reading »

Corporations sling around the words “biggest” and “best” so often, the words have lost what little meaning they once had.  The terms are vague at best (noticed that, did you?), and typically don’t help paint a picture for consumers anyway.  Why is the new phone the best?  Does it have super sexy technology or really freakin’ cool design?  That’s what consumers really want to know.

Rather than claim your company or product is best, why not define the particular stand-out aspect.  I did something unprecedented in a meeting the other day: I asked a client if their product was actually the best and why.  In doing so, I was able to delve into the details of the product and learn why it was special.  Lucky for me – and the client – there is substance to back up the superlatives.

I must be on the alert for this type of thing, because today’s coverage of Apple’s new products caught my eye. As a PC person, I usually roll my eyes and click past.  But I may have to change my tune, due to this headline. Can you imagine what would happen if Apple actually wrote a release with that headline? It would turn heads in newsrooms for sure.

I think I see the next big thing in PR…we’re pretty ordinary, but we look good doin’ it.  —  Brigitte Lyons

If you’re really looking for the definition of spin, let me introduce you to Rahodeb, the pseudonym of Whole Foods chief executive John Mackey.

Mackey posted messages under the Rahodeb username on Yahoo chat forums for years before being revealed in a sealed court document that was filed last month by the Federal Trade Commission and became public Wednesday evening, as reported by the New York Times.  The problem with this you ask?  Some of Mackey’s posts included talking up his own company while shedding a dark cloud on the future of competitor Wild Oats.

While law experts share banter about whether Mackey’s postings and comments are illegal, I think someone should share a dictionary with him.  We could go ahead and highlight words like transparent, ethical, etc.  Falsely portraying yourself and making comments about your company and competitors are grounds for serious ethical issues.

Mackey included a note on the company’s Web site Wednesday night saying that his postings were just for fun and that they don’t represent the “beliefs, policies or intentions by either Whole Foods Market or by me,” according to the New York Times. But does that make it all better? Falsely portraying yourself and making comments about your company and competitor are grounds for serious ethical issues.

So, what do you think? Should Mackey be asked to step down based on his questionable actions?

And as a bit of a random side note, does anyone else find it ironic that President Bush cut the ribbon on the multimillion dollar new press room in the White House Wednesday, but declined to take questions? — Angela Loiacono

Here’s the $643 million question.  How could the makers of painkiller OxyContin downplay the addictive qualities of the drug, which produces a high similar to heroin, and was responsible for at least 146 deaths in 2002?

Their answer?

“We promoted the medicine only to health-care professionals, not to consumers.”

That seems like a less than sincere apology for a company that was just found liable for a sum of more than half a billion dollars.  The most sinister part of the story is that prosecutors say executives from Purdue Pharma, the makers of the painkiller, had closed door sessions to strategize on how to downplay the drug’s potency.

That was in 1995.

Despite its claims of implementing new oversight tactics to prevent future gaffes like this, companies like Purdue are responsible for consumers that abuse their products.  The fact is that Purdue masked the drug’s qualities and didn’t publicize its dangers.

It’s the same thing Big Tobacco did for decades, and no one can argue that smoking is a dangerous habit.

It’s ethics, people.  Large corporations are deemed faceless and look upon with skepticism because of instances like this where greed trumps the right thing to do.  It’s irresponsible.  It’s unethical and it’s illegal.  The three executives named in the suit are lucky they’re not facing jail time.   

Those three are paying a combined $34 million, and no drug can ease that kind of pain. — Alex Parker

Even though Second Life has been around since late 2003, it now tastes its first life of stardom with the emergence of companies buying locations and building virtual replicas of their buildings.  Sky News, a British news channel, is building a replica of the Sky News Centre making them the first television news channel to make residency in the Internet world.  Members of Second Life will be able to go to the building and write their own news reports, load videos on to the server and broadcast their “news,” and even “bump into and chat with Sky News presenters and reporters”.

To me, this is the first step in many, in which a cornucopia of businesses and news stations will set up locations and are given free reign.  Information will be dispersed, much like blogs, with little to no regulation.  I see this going one of two ways: Companies will get their information out to the masses and people will understand it is just a “virtual reality”, or people will think that what they see is actually “news”.

Now the first option would be great.  Businesses can get their information out on Second Life and people understand it’s just another medium to disperse news.  But what about those people who get sucked into these kinds of “realities”?  I’ve heard stories of people getting carried away with SimCity and Dungeons and Dragons.  They get too involved with these other realities to decipher the difference. 

As PR people, what should be our role in Second Life?  How do we use this medium to our advantage without pushing boundaries?  How can we create the difference between real and fake news?

A lot of the spin we talk about here at F.A.D.S. deals with corporate deceit and unethical practices by fellow PR folks.  Whether it’s misleading blogs or manipulating Wikis, destructive spin is there.  Sometimes we applaud folks for being straightforward and not falling into the spin zone.

And sometimes we recognize spin that is so egregious, you wonder how anyone got away with it.

I. Lewis “Scooter” Libby, Vice President Cheney’s former chief of staff and he of salacious novel fame, was found guilty Tuesday of four charges stemming from the outing of former CIA operative Valerie Plame.  Libby conspired with the Vice President’s office to discredit a damning report by Plame’s husband Joe Wilson, who investigated and disputed claims that Niger was the source of yellowcake uranium.  They offered that Saddam Hussein planned to use this material to build weapons of mass destruction.

While we’re not quite sure what all the hoopla was about – especially since Libby wasn’t on trial for leaking, he was on trial for lying about his role in the leak – we do know this: The spin that was spun leading up to the war in Iraq was the worst kind.  It was contrived, it was ridden with bitter vitriol, it was opportunistic and it was, above all things, false.

I think there will be debates for years to come about what was known and other known unknowns, but if this mess has taught us anything, it’s that the consumer – those who buy the product, be it goods or information – must be wary of what is said.  That makes our job harder.  But it makes us strive to do that much better, to be more ethical and transparent, lest our destructive habits spin out of control.

I think messengers of information have a responsibility to be as honest as possible.  In some cases, that’s just not going to happen.  Many people might argue that a person’s worldview shapes his or her position and vision of honesty.  I wonder how big a factor worldview played in Scooter’s story and the yarn cooked up by the White House.

Venting aside, do you think we have a responsibility to be truthful at all costs?  Who does?  Corporate and agency practitioners?  Public affairs folks?  Political mouthpieces?  Does it matter?  What are the costs of truth?  What are the costs of lying?

Wait, we already know that.

As health awareness continues to infiltrate culture today, many wonder whether the right message is being sent or whether people are taking the health craze too far.  This obsession has even made its way into the world of Girl Scout Cookies.  
            Celebrating its 90^th Anniversary, Girl Scouts have initiated change to their famous cookie recipe by taking out all the trans fat, still emphasizing the great taste.  Most people would think this means that buying a few boxes of the new cookies would be an improvement from the one box that they used to buy because it doesn’t have trans fat.  But what about all the other ingredients in cookies such as sugar? Or carbs?  
            This type of campaigning is misleading because people think they are buying something healthful when, in reality, they are still buying cookies.  Unless these bakers are magicians and have figured out a way to remove all the calories or cholesterol-casing ingredients from these cookies, they are still not good for you.  
         This type of promotion would also lead to some people believing they could buy double or more of the amount they used too because they believe they are being health-conscious. Although it is very important to be mindful of one’s health it’s hard to do so when cookies are on the table.  Will the concern for the actual dietary value be lost forever?         

Traveling is a hassle, there’s no doubt about it.  From the need to arrive hours ahead of departure, to taking off your shoes at security, folks face a stream of inconveniences at the airport.  It’s usually a relief to finally get on the plane.

Not so for JetBlue patrons, who were stuck on planes for upwards of 10 hours last week.  It’s understandable to prohibit passengers from disembarking if planes are waiting for clearance to take off.  But 10 hours!?  It’s absurd.  What’s more, the  service at JetBlue has been interrupted for days following the Valentine’s Day ice storm which grounded its planes, causing mass delays and cancellations, adding insult to injury for beleaguered passengers.

Here at F.A.D.S. we were silently hoping for a corporate response that would be fraught with spin and the usual company b.s.  (Un)fortunately, we were surprised to see the straightforward manner with which JetBlue CEO David Neeleman addressed this calamity.

Neeleman was “humiliated and embarrassed” by the situation.  “We had so many people in the company who wanted to help who weren’t trained to help,” he told the New York Times. “We had an emergency control center full of people who didn’t know what to do. I had flight attendants sitting in hotel rooms for three days who couldn’t get a hold of us. I had pilots e-mailing me saying, ‘I’m available, what do I do?’”

That’s certainly a frightening scenario.  Just imagine if you were a JetBlue passenger.

Kudos for Neeleman for addressing the problems facing JetBlue.  He announced changes for JetBlue, “This is going to be a different company because of this…It’s going to be expensive (to implement).  But what’s more important is to win back people’s confidence.”

Part of this resolution is the drafting of a passenger bill of rights, which demands passengers are made aware of problems are not confined to the cabin for more than three hours while delayed, among other highlights.  Congress is considering similar legislation.

Curious in all of this, as pointed out by blogger Stowe Boyd, Neeleman’s blog hasn’t been updated since Feb. 1.  Wouldn’t it be prudent to address these issues on his own terms, his home turf? 

Boyd decries the “Flight Log” (would that be a flog?) as being a marketing tool and nothing more, and an ill-regarded one at that: “The blog setup is so phony they don’t even consider it as a meaningful way to talk to the community of Jetblue (sic) users.”  Shel Holtz (and Todd Defren) notes the blog doesn’t take comments.

While JetBlue certainly missed an opportunity to communicate its message, we commend Neeleman for his human response and encourage him to continue this sentiment by blogging for himself.  The blog, as it stands now, is clearly the work of a flack (not that there’s anything wrong with flacks!).

Neeleman is certainly forward-thinking, as evidenced by this clip from the WSJ.  He notes that companies can better themselves by facing adversity.  Let’s hope JetBlue becomes a better company from this flap.

It’s refreshing to hear some straight talk from suits and not the usual statements that come out of incidents like this.  Neeleman gets a thumbs up for his response (but not his blog).  Still, F.A.D.S. will probably not be flying JetBlue any time soon.

UPDATE: Neeleman’s blog is updated, at long last.  Hi David!  We didn’t know you read F.A.D.S.!  Also, the Chicago Tribune’s take on the flap.

Photo courtesy of NYTimes.com

In the 2007 Nextel Cup Series, veteran NASCAR driver Michael Waltrip was accused of cheating, apologized, and then vindicated himself by driving his way into the Daytona 500. After creating one of the biggest cheating scandals in more than 50 years of NASCAR history by tampering with fuel before qualifying, it was hardly the start Waltrip’s team wanted for new sponsor Toyota who was making its debut in the NASCAR elite series.

Waltrip was docked 100 series points for the fuel tamper, his crew chief was fined $100,000 and kicked out of Daytona International Speedway, and his team director was expelled. We’re not experts on NASCAR rules, but we are surprised that Waltrip was allowed to participate in the Great American Race. In our opinion, the team got off easy under the watchful eye of NASCAR.

At a press conference, Waltrip apologized for his team’s role in the cheating scandal, saying he was so embarrassed he almost pulled out of Daytona 500 preparations. The two-time Daytona 500 winner said he “had to be talked into racing by his wife, and Toyota officials who are seething that Waltrip tainted their Nextel Cup debut.” Waltrip blamed an unidentified individual within his team, adding that no one had been fired … yet. The story continues to unfold and we don’t expect race fans to forgive too quickly.

While the news of a race team cheating sent shock waves through the NASCAR community, the team handled the scandal by the books: Admitting wrongdoing and discussing the steps to be taken to fix the situation. In any crisis, large or small, we advise our clients to be forthcoming with information about why the crisis is happening and how the company plans to address the issue. An attempt to avoid dealing with a crisis always spells trouble through increased media attention on the negative, potential decrease in consumer loyalty, or worse.

The team did the right thing by admitting fault, and despite its soft hand, NASCAR did the right thing by disciplining the cheating team. However, the silence observed by the team’s major sponsor, Toyota, is surprising.  Already entering an arena where domestic automakers are king and pride in American brands is a way of life, Toyota is faced with difficult hurdles during its inaugural sponsor season and this scandal pushes acceptance by race fans further back. 

By taking a stance of virtual silence during the scandal, does Toyota create added distrust of its brand among NASCAR loyals?

Do you think the Toyota sponsorship of NASCAR is tarnished as a result of this scandal or did Waltrip Racing squash the crisis before it had time to spread?