How to Recover after a Blunder

Eventually, every leader will make a mistake for which he or she must apologize. The screw-up might be personal (Arnold Schwarzenegger’s extramarital escapades), corporate (TEPCO president Masataka Shimizu’s mishandling of his company’s nuclear power plant crisis), or simply banal (inadvertently insulting a colleague’s wardrobe).

The rash of mea culpas we’ve seen in recent months — culminating this week in Congressman Anthony Weiner’s press conference to explain his tawdry tweets — had brought to mind a mistake-fuelled media frenzy from my past: Howard Dean’s famous scream, and the lessons we learned from it.

As New Hampshire communications director for Dean’s 2004 presidential bid, I watched on TV as he gave that now-infamous concession speech after the Iowa caucuses. Disappointed with his third-place finish, he decided to rally the troops with his bold vision for a national comeback. “We’re going to South Carolina and Oklahoma and Arizona and North Dakota…” As the list of states got longer and Dean’s voice became more feverish, our press intern Greg laid it out: “He looks like the Incredible Hulk.” This was not good.

When the campaign plane touched down in New Hampshire at 3 a.m., we greeted the candidate with a rally and Joan Jett concert at a freezing air hangar in Portsmouth. But we knew the “Dean Scream” was going to become a problem. In truth, he didn’t do anything wrong: the room in Iowa was painfully loud; he was only screaming to be heard above the crowd. But that’s not how it played (again and again) on cable TV, which turned a minor screw-up into a media maelstrom. So how do you move forward?

First, you have to acknowledge the elephant in the room. If you’re running a business and something publicly embarrassing has transpired, no one can focus on real issues (sales targets, expansion plans, the quarterly financials) as long as they’re fixated on the error. It might temporarily feel better to slink off but to admit the mistake expedites the recovery process. (Weiner could have saved himself a world of hurt by admitting upfront he sent the naughty tweet, rather than letting it play out in the media for a week.)

Next — if appropriate — try to laugh at yourself. That gives others (much-needed) permission to do the same. Dean went on David Letterman and subjected himself to a scream-related “Top 10″ list of campaign turnaround strategy suggestions. (The first was “switch to decaf.”) After all, nobody wants a leader who takes himself too seriously.

For the complete article, visit the Harvard Business Review

How to Repair a Damaged Online Reputation

Several months ago, as a favor to a friend, I did an informational interview with a recent grad — a nice young woman with an Ivy League degree. At the end of our coffee, she leaned in and lowered her eyes. “There’s something else I should mention,” she said. “I’m not sure if you Googled me before we met, but… there are some negative things being said about me online.” Her distinctive name and a deranged ex-boyfriend conspired to create a reputation nightmare that’s taken years to resolve and crippled her job search efforts.

So what can you do if your online reputation has been damaged, whether by others or your own mistakes? Here are four strategies to hasten your comeback.

1. Be upfront. Let’s face it: any sane employer/customer/prospective date will Google you the minute they’re serious about doing business with you. It’s far better to control the terms of disclosure — like my young “informational interviewee” did — than wait for them to discover the negative information on their own. Let them know what’s out there, what the truth is, and what you’re doing to respond to it. (I advised the recent grad that she could even spin her experience as a positive: since she’s looking for a communications job, she knows personally the power of online branding and reputation management.)

2. Apologize if necessary. Sometimes — alas — you’re responsible for the mistake. A central tenet of crisis communications is to apologize as quickly as possible, so you don’t inflame the public or your bosses by appearing clueless or defiant. A good example is Washington Post columnist Mike Wise, who earlier this year bizarrely decided to tweet out misinformation about an NFL quarterback (see the Post ombudsman’s coverage). With a one month suspension in hand, he manned it up and took responsibility, tamping down the furor over his breach of journalistic standards: “I’m paying the price I should for careless, dumb behavior in the multi-platform media world,” he announced on his radio program.

Read the rest at the Huffington Post.

Can Bad Publicity Be Good for Your Brand?

When can bad press actually be good for you? It’s been debated for decades by PR professionals, but a recent New York Times article by Rob Walker (author of the excellent Buying In: What We Buy and Who We Are) highlights some Wharton School research that breaks it down:

• If you’re relatively unknown, bad press can be helpful because people forget what  they heard about you. Net result? Higher name recognition.
• Unfortunately, if you already have a strong brand, negative publicity usually hurts, because people are more likely to remember the distasteful context.

Now that there’s proof that “bad press” works, watch out for even more legions of wannabes fighting for a reality TV slot…!

Q&A with Dorie: Newspaper and Blog Online Comments

Let’s take a question from the field. One reader in Ohio asks, “Any idea on how often people read online comments to newspaper articles? I often have clients that obsess about these and would love something more definitive to tell them.”

Bring 'em on, readers! Dorie Clark takes your questions.

Here’s my short answer:

1. Though increasing numbers of people are reading articles online, regular folks aren’t scrolling down and ogling the comments section. They really don’t care; it’s an insiders’ game.
2. That being said, one audience that reads the comments (besides your clients and your competitors) does actually matter, and that’s members of the media. Desperate for relevance, they fixate on the number and type of comments. They want to cover stories that generate reader response, and often (sorry, guys) have a naive understanding of the fact that most comments posted, at least in a “campaign-style” context, are planted. Thus, to them it can seem to be  a barometer of public opinion.
3. Thus, I’d advise putting a little bit of time into this (posting online comments responding  to coverage) – but not too much. It’s far less important than other things you can be doing, like direct voter contact (in a political context) or taking your own initiative to create favorable press, such as starting a blog or videocast. To make your efforts  successful, it’s best if you: 1) rely on volunteers and not paid staff to do the posting, unless it’s meant to be an “official response” (you run the risk of too much trouble if a paid staffer is perceived to be masking his/her identity); and 2) have that person comment frequently and over time on a variety of articles. That way, they’ve built up a reputation as a member of the online community, not just someone who dive-bombs in to promote your cause or product.

So readers, did I miss anything? And what are your questions? Let’s have at ‘em!