Author Archive
Delta/NWA and Flight 253: A Failure to Communicate
Like many people today who are back in the office for the first time since before the holidays, I’ve been spending the day catching up, including going through my Google Reader. I subscribe to a number of corporate blogs, and as I got to the Delta Air Lines blog, I expected to read something - even a short post - about the attempted bombing on Northwest Airlines Flight 253 as it made its way to Detroit on Christmas Day.
But there was nothing about the incident on the blog, an incident which caused a ripple effect of newly enacted security measures and massive disruptions in international air travel around the world.
I went to the Delta Air Lines website, found the News section of the site and one very short official statement, “Delta Air Lines Issues Statement on Northwest Flight 253.” The official statement described a passenger who “caused a disturbance” on the flight and was restrained. The description of events is vague enough to apply to any number of types of potential “disruptive” activities, and wouldn’t necessarily lead one to believe that an attempted terrorist act had been committed. While directing “additional questions” to law enforcement, the statement goes into no additional detail about what happened, even though some of those details were already being reported by the media.
So, I checked Delta’s Twitter account, to see if additional information or context was being provided there. There’s exactly onetweet specifically about the December 25th attempted bombing:
Now, the Delta Twitter account appears to have sat dormant from June 17th till December 22nd of 2009, when traveler outcry over U.S. domestic travel delays due to various winter storms was reaching a fever pitch. But the one tweet about the 25th simply redirects back to Delta’s website, where no additional statements about the incident have been provided since the 25th. There have been additional tweets on @DeltaAirLines advising travelers to expect delays due to new TSA regulations, but nothing specifically about the incident on the 25th.
I’d guess that there were at least three factors working against Delta’s communication efforts:
- The attempted bombing occurred on Christmas Day, one of the very few days of the year when almost no corporate employees are in the office. But in today’s age, it’s inconceivable that “the world’s largest airline,” a company responsible daily for hundreds of thousands of people’s lives, wouldn’t have some kind of chain of communication in place to deal with an event like this, even on Christmas Day.
- Delta and Northwest have been in the process of merging in the last year, and just in the last week were given government permission to fully complete the merger. There’s some confusion (for an average reader) in the company’s statement, with Delta as the company issuing the statement and the flight branded/operated as a Northwest flight. I can imagine that there’s still confusion in corporate communication operational role clarity as well. I know, as a frequent Delta/Northwest traveler, there has still been confusion on the ground. Again, I can’t imagine that a company of this size and complexity wouldn’t have negotiated a crisis communication response process as part of the merger details.
- From this and other articles, it appears that there’s some behind-the-scenes dissatisfaction between the Delta CEO and the government agencies responsible for airline safety. But “inside baseball” talk isn’t what the average member of the public needs or wants to hear in the aftermath of this kind of event.
Also, what I find unfortunate in this communication situation is that Delta had the two social media channels - its blog and its Twitter account - already established, had an audience eager for more information, and provided only the scant minimum of content or context. What I find particularly disconcerting about the blog is that there have been two posts since the 25th about totally innocuous content, which in the wake of the serious events of the 25th read as even more out of touch. (I imagine they were probably scheduled to post in advance, but again, when crisis happens sometimes the response calls for suspending business-as-usual activities.)
Other companies have used their social media channels in the wake of attempted terrorist attacks despite restrictions on detailed disclosure due to ongoing legal investigation. For example, look at the heartfelt message on the Marriott blog after one of its hotels in Pakistan was the target of an attempted attack in 2007, which lead to the death of a hotel employee and severe injury of another.
Thankfully, Northwest Flight 253 landed safely and disaster was averted, due in large part to the response of the flight crew and other passengers on the flight. But what a lost communication opportunity for the company to provide context, as well as show some humanity and thankfulness, for what in the end was as good an ending as could have been expected.
*Note: I’m a very frequent Delta/Northwest flier, but other than being a long-time customer have no professional ties to the company.
The FDA and Social Media
Today and tomorrow, November 12-13, the FDA is holding a historic public hearing regarding the “Promotion of Food and Drug Administration-Regulated Medical Products Using the Internet and Social Media Tools.” This is the first time since 1996 that the FDA has examined the role of technology in pharmaceutical and medical device communication and advertising.
The FDA is looking at five questions, as stated in the Federal Register notice about the hearing:
- “For what online communications are manufacturers, packers, or distributors accountable?
- How can manufacturers, packers, or distributors fulfill regulatory requirements (e.g. fair balance, disclosure of indication and risk information, postmarketing submission requirements) in their Internet and social media promotion, particularly when using tools that are associated with space limitations and tools that allow for real-time communications (e.g. microblogs, mobile technology)?
- What parameters should apply to the posting of corrective information on Web sites controlled by third parties?
- When is the use of links appropriate?
- Questions specific to Internet adverse event reporting.”
- Pharma Marketing Blog, John Mack, @pharmaguy
- Med 2.0, Shwen Gwee, @shwen
- PRforPharma, Chris Iafolla, @PRforPharma
- Fabio Gratton, @skypen
- Pharma Strategy Blog, Sally Church, @MaverickNY
- Scott Hensley, @scotthensley
Coca-Cola and Personal vs. Corporate Brands: A Note of History
Coca-Cola Cover of Time, May 15, 1950 (time.com)
I was in Atlanta last week for work (and a little fun), and happened to stay in a hotel across the street from the Georgia Aquarium and the World of Coca-Cola museum. With a little extra time one day, I managed to fit in visits to both.
I’m a reader at museums, so as I was picking my way through the historical information in the various exhibits at the World of Coca-Cola, I came across a cover of Time magazine from the 1950s. There was a note next to the cover, with a little fact stating that the Coca-Cola glass bottle was the “first commercial product” to appear on the cover of the magazine. Time had wanted Robert Woodruff, the charismatic leader of the company for more than 60 years, to appear on the cover, but according to the note at the museum, he declined, saying the company and its product came first.
This fact of history caught my attention because of the way the tensions between corporate and personal brands are being played out online. While the issues are thorny, sometimes (often?) history can be illuminating.
(For more on the subject of personal branding, here are a few blog posts from others I’ve saved on delicious.)
Note: This has been cross-posted on my personal blog.
Bias and Social Media
Do you ever have one of those “A-ha!” moments when you find some piece of information that’s the missing piece of the puzzle to some problem you’ve been stewing over?
In mid-June I attended the 2009 New Media Academic Summit in Washington, D.C. It’s a conference for academics (from the U.S. and internationally) that’s been put on by Edelman for the last three years. (I was attending in my new role as an adjunct instructor in the M.S. in Public Relations and Corporate Communications program at NYU.)
One of the sessions was on employees and social media, “Employee Engagement: Encouraging New Conversations,” with speakers from McDonald’s, GE and Alcoa. (Full webcast of the session here.) In listening to Jason Greenspan from McDonald’s, I was stumped about how the average McDonald’s crew employee could interact with the company’s social media initiatives. I asked in a tweet, “How do McDonald’s employees interact with their internal social media if not in front of computer - expected on personal time? #nmas09″
Dawn Gilpin, an Assistant Professor at the Walter Cronkite School of Journalism & Mass Communication at Arizona State University, responded: “@laurelhart Your question touches on the rarely discussed hierarchy issue wrt internal social media use: white collar only. #nmas09″
(The hashtag for the conference was #nmas09. More info at its entry on wthashtag.com.)
We didn’t get a chance to talk about this issue during the employee section, but I’ve been concerned about issues of bias or potential bias in social media, and have been struggling with how to frame what seem to be some problematic issues.
Today, on a somewhat unrelated topic, I was reading Ethan Zuckerman’s blog post, “Activist Media and Selective Amplifiers,” and in talking about the information coming from Iran in the wake of the Iran election, he said, “We face at least three filters in the voices we hear - access, language and bias.”
The magical three.
“Access” was the filter I found most hard to understand in the McDonald’s example. Most of us have been in a McDonald’s store at some point in our lives. How would an average crew member have access – both in terms of time and technology? Is there a real or implied expectation that employees access these tools outside of normal working hours?
“Bias” is the filter that Dawn pointed out. How do we make sure that internal social media initiatives aren’t biased against blue collar workers – or anyone else for that matter – who might not be in front of a computer all day?
And “language” may be another or additional impediment for many employees.
These are questions that I’d wished we’d had time to explore, and in the case of McDonald’s, there may be very simple answers, too. But it’s something that as communicators we should be very aware of as more institutions adopt social media initiatives, and thinking of these issues in Ethan’s terms of “access, language and bias” could provide a helpful framework, both for internal and external communications.
What else might be still missing from this puzzle?
Complexity, Social Media & Iran
I’ve been hesitant to write about the Iranian election and the role (or possible role) of social media in its aftermath in the last two+ weeks. Initially, quite a lot was written about social media’s place in the demonstrations and calls for a recount or new election, with some calling it a “Twitter Revolution” (see Moldova’s so-called “Twitter Revolution.“) But it was unclear to me at that early stage what the final outcome might bring. “Social media transforms Iran!” just didn’t seem a likely end result.
These two pieces seemed to be a challenge:
First, I know very little about Iran - its politics or particular religious practices - but what little I do know has left me with the impression that it’s a complex mix of BOTH politics and religion, entirely foreign to most Americans. While in the days (and even week) after the Iranian election there seemed to be a small hope that either the political or religious bodies might accept the calls for a recount or new election, it seemed unlikely that BOTH would.
Swine Flu: What Companies Can Do
Prize Pig by The Pug Father
“An informed and responsive public is essential to minimizing the health effects of a pandemic and the resulting consequences to society.” One principle of the HHS Pandemic Influenza Plan
Several years ago, when there was a large fear of avian flu, I spent a considerable amount of time researching past flu outbreaks, and what worked and what didn’t work for business preparedness planning and response.
Businesses and other large organizations (like non-profits and religious organizations) play an important part of the broader communication efforts both before and during a pandemic flu. The tricky balance for businesses (as well as governments, officials and other bodies) is in communicating important and helpful information while not unnecessarily alarming or panicking employees.
It’s important to note that we’re not currently at the pandemic flu phase with the swine flu situation. As of today, there are 64 confirmed cases of swine flu in the United States and hundreds of cases worldwide, the United States has declared a public health emergency, and the World Health Organization (WHO) has upgraded the pandemic alert level from phase 3 to phase 4. The phase 4 designation means that “the likelihood of a pandemic has increased, but not that a pandemic is inevitable.”
This is not the first time swine flu has affected human populations in the U.S. The 1978 book, “The Swine Flu Affair: Decision-Making on a Slippery Disease” is a review of the federal swine flu program from March 1976 to March 1977 by two Harvard professors, Richard E. Neustadt and Harvey V. Fineberg.
The 1970’s swine flu outbreak in the U.S. is believed to have started at Fort Dix, NJ. At Fort Dix, there was 1 death, 13 illnesses, and 500 people who caught but resisted the disease. The federal swine flu program launched in March 1976, and over 40 million Americans were inoculated.
(If you’re interested in the history of pandemics, the book “The Great Influenza” by John M. Barry is a fantastic account of the 1918 pandemic.)
Whether in response to swine flu, avian flu, or other potentially pandemic flu’s, there are some best practices that organizations can adopt to help employees.
General flu prevention and communication generally boils down to a “everything I need to know I learned in kindergarten” approach:
1. Cover mouth + nose when coughing or sneezing (but avoid touching)
2. Wash hands frequently for the length of time it takes to sing “Happy Birthday”
3. Keep work area clean
4. If sick, stay home
5. Avoid close contact with sick people
Pandemic flu communication from businesses should include:
1. Basic protection information for employees + their families
2. Unique aspects + symptoms of swine flu (vs. other types of flu)
3. Facts + misconceptions about vaccines
4. Company policies about working from home, office leave, transportation, etc.
5. Support services available and/or mental health resources
6. Discussion about uncertainty
The best practices for pandemic flu communication for businesses:
1. Coordinate communications internally
2. Develop language and culture-appropriate materials
3. Communicate uncertainty
4. Plan for rumors and misinformation
5. Coordinate with all stakeholders, including public health agencies if necessary
6. Use correct information
7. Stress universal hygiene behavior and show ways to minimize risk
8. Use multiple channels to communicate
9. Communicate a company response plan (if there is one, and if not, think about developing one)
10. Explain HR policies
Companies should also be prepared for unexpected questions with uncertain answers. For example, some employees might wonder if their pets are at risk. It may seem silly, but pets are an integral part of many of our households (certainly in mine), and often feel like members of our families.
Social media is also playing a role in how people are learning about and sharing information on swine flu through Twitter, Google Maps and other channels. (There’s also some debate about whether social media is a contributing factor in spreading more panic.) Ogilvy’s London office has a “Swine Flu Dashboard” that shows the aggregated swine flu conversation across the social web.
Other Resources
There are many pandemic flu resources from governmental and health sources that may be helpful for businesses:
- Centers for Disease Control and Prevention: General Information on Swine Flu and Key Facts
- Department of Health and Human Services Pandemic Influenza Plan
- U.S. Government site on Pandemic Flu with specific information on workplace planning
- OSHA Guidance on Preparing Workplaces for an Influenza Pandemic
- Pandemic Preparedness Planning for US Businesses with Overseas Operations (checklist)
- Section 7: Public and Media Relations of Pandemic Influenza: Preparedness, Response, and Recovery from the Department of Homeland Security
- World Health Organization on swine flu
We’ll be covering this topic as it progresses. What else do you want to know about swine flu? What else should organizations keep in mind? Do you think social media is playing a role in amplifying fear?
Domino’s Social Media Crisis
I’ve been a little reluctant to chime in on the Domino’s social media crisis this past week because of the sheer volume of coverage, but after a few conversations I wanted to post some thoughts here.
If you’re not aware, on Monday, April 13, two Domino’s employees at a Conover, NC restaurant filmed themselves doing “disgusting” things to food that, in the video, they claimed was going out to customers, and then posted the video on YouTube. (Read the New York Times summary here. The original YouTube video has been removed due to copyright claims by the female employee who filmed it, but as of this posting you can view it on this site.)
The video spread like wildfire, the two employees were identified, fired and arrested, and Domino’s has had to respond to the maelstrom.
Domino’s USA President, Patrick Doyle, issued an apology and response on YouTube on Wednesday, April 15, including a detailed outline of steps the company was and will be taking to make sure such a situation never happens again. The company has also been using a new Twitter account to listen, respond to concerns and thank people for their support (when appropriate). (As of 4/20, the company response video had been viewed 538,000+ times on YouTube.)
To review the timeline:
- Monday, 4/13: Original YouTube video posted. Company spokesman notified in the evening.
- Tuesday, 4/14: Employees fired. Rest of company learns about the video. Store closed and health officials visit.
- Wednesday, 4/15: President posts apology on YouTube. Company launches @dpzinfo Twitter account. Original video viewed more than 1 million times on YouTube. Employees charged with felony crimes.
I’ve read a number of sides to this issue, both supporting and critizing the company’s response. Many have criticized the company for not responding soon enough, and in the New York Times article the spokesperson says that executives hoped “the controversy would die down” and so didn’t respond immediately. Some have criticized the president’s apology video as not effective enough, saying that he looks like he’s reading a script and that he doesn’t look into the camera.
But there’s the crux, isn’t it? On the one hand people get upset when a company doesn’t respond quickly, but on the other hand, they criticize the performance of the response when it does come.
In the choice between perfect performance and getting the response out relatively quickly, I think Domino’s made the right decision.
All in all, I think that Domino’s has done a pretty good job responding to this crisis. I give them kudos for:
- The apology. The Domino’s video apology does all of the things that my colleague Oxana Trush said makes an effective apology in her post last month: acknowledgement of wrongdoing, expression of genuine remorse, promise to not do it again, and restitution. To me it comes across as genuine, direct and personal, regardless of the performance.
- Going to the source. By posting the video on YouTube and (not just on their corporate website, for example), they respond in the channel where the conversation is happening. Ditto for Twitter. And they seem to be listening. Also, on a more technical note, they use the title of the original video in their response video, “Disgusting Dominos People - Domino’s Responds,” so that when people search for the original video the company’s official response will also appear in the search results. Very smart. I know this may be obvious to most social media folks, but for other people I think this is very counter-intuitive.
- Matching actions to words. The best apology in the world can’t rectify an underlying problem. The company appears to be acting in ways that demonstrate their recognition of the severity of the problem and what they can do to try to change it.
What could Domino’s have done better?
- Maybe they could have been a little faster in their first public communications response, but I think that, all in all, they did as best they could given the circumstances. They also were taking action behind the scenes to deal with the problem directly. From my experience working with large and sometimes decentralized companies (Domino’s is a franchise organization), large organizations are often simply not equipped to respond as quickly as the online world might want. That’s changing with time, but it doesn’t change overnight. Domino’s is not the only company learning from the past weeks’ events.
- Had a crisis plan in place. This is just supposition, of course, because perhaps they did have a plan in place. Also, there are always going to be situations that no plan could anticipate. However, from the outside, at least, it seems like this type of thing might have been something Domino’s could have anticipated. This exact thing? Probably not. But something like, “Employee malfeasance at a franchise location” would be a category I’d include in planning.
(And then it’s not just having the plan. It’s educating employees, coaching senior staff on how to deal with the media [even if the media is talking into a camera for a web video], establishing a presence on online communities and engaging with people before a crisis hits, etc.)
But just as we’re all figuring this social media stuff out, so are large corporations too. And best efforts - not just perfect efforts - should be recognized, especially during crisis situations.
I Went to SXSW and All I Got Was…
SXSWi 2009-Sketchnotes-Final Badge by Mike Rohde
This year was my first trip to the SXSW Interactive Festival, and I’m finally getting a chance to cull my impressions and thoughts about everything I experienced.
Event:
- It’s all about the people. Yes, I saw some inspiring and informative sessions, but I also came away having met a lot of amazing people, some for the first time and some who I’ve known or worked with but never met in person. The sheer quality of most everyone I met was pretty incredible. I was a bit nervous attending by myself, but I quickly learned that you’re only alone if you want to be at SXSW.
- It’s ok to check out. Wonderful people aside, I reached a point around the 4th day where I kind of maxed out – on lack of sleep, on energy of making new introductions, on mental capacity to focus on one more session. So, I unplugged. I rented a bike, and spent a couple of hours outside in the sunshine. Biked the path around the river, ate Tex-Mex at Chuy’s & blackberry ice cream at Amy’s, perused the rows of boots at Allen’s Boots. It was probably the single best decision I made the entire time I was there, and gave me the energy to finish out strong. (I also had to learn at SXSW that it’s ok to walk out of a session if it’s not doing it for you. I got stuck in one that I really should have left, and didn’t make that mistake again.)
- You can’t be everywhere. I had to come to terms with not being able to attend everything I had hoped to. (There were a couple days in particular where a number of really strong sessions overlapped.) I’m sure I missed some great things, but know I will be able to catch most everything online. (Some videos are already up on YouTube, podcasts on SXSW and more video promised to come.)
- Preparing is good. I spent some time before leaving for SXSW planning out a schedule (with built-in overlaps) using both the my.SXSW site and the SCHED*SXSW site. (The SCHED site ended up being the better performing of the two and included more unofficial events.) I imported both to iCal and my iPhone, and it made decisions and getting around much easier (especially if I was ditching one session and heading to another).
Themes:
From the various keynotes, presentations and panels I attended, seven themes emerged for me. (I tried to sample across a range of corporate, non-profit and education sessions – areas where I’m involved professionally – and also a few purely inspirational sessions that weren’t necessarily business-related.) (more…)
Facebook vs. Control: Smackdown of the Week
smackdown stage by linxbas
There’s a big brouhaha going on about Facebook’s new(ish) Terms of Service, updated earlier this month but called into the spotlight this past weekend on Consumerist and a number of other sites, including the MSM.
The biggest part of the debate hinges on who controls a user’s content, and what happens to that content even when users have removed themselves from the site.
Protest groups have formed on Facebook. Bloggers like Perez Hilton are calling for a boycott. People are deleting their accounts (but, with about 175 million members, I wonder if that has even a symbolic effect?).
The outcry prompted a response from response from Mark Zuckerburg on the Facebook blog yesterday, and says, among other things: (more…)
My Year in Review Comes Down to One
Into the fog by raindog
This time of year is ripe for reflection about the year past and prognostication about the year to come. Best-of lists, predictions for the new year, goals – many good & inspiring thoughts and ideas, but they’re so numerous it can become hard to digest even one more.
But I hope you will take just a little time to digest this one.
As I thought about the year past, all of the power of social media came down to one thing.
It wasn’t new in 2008, but it was new to me.
The most truly powerful communication and social media tool I used last year was CaringBridge. It’s a free, non-profit service for individuals or families during times of illness or treatment. It allows you to create a personalized website (either public or private) with a journal/blog-like feature, a section for photographs, a welcome or background page, and a guestbook for people to sign and leave messages.
It’s a service I hope most of you will never need, but it’s important, and it’s important to know it exists should you, or anyone you know, find yourself in need.
I was referred to this service during a time of intense family crisis last spring. During family crises, just like business crises, it can become difficult and burdensome to communicate. Have we communicated with everyone we need to? Have we forgotten anyone? Does everyone have the same information or the information they need? These questions are pretty universal, during any crisis. But all the updates, all the repetition – it can be crushing during a personal crisis.
CaringBridge was a lifeline for my family. The founder of CaringBridge describes it as a kind of “compassion technology,” combining “the human elements of care and concern with the Internet’s ability to connect people.” The private site we created gave us one central place to keep far-flung family and friends informed, and we drew strength from the messages of support from around the world.
Often with social media, we focus on what the tool or service is, versus what it does.
This is a powerful example of the doing. And something I will try to take with me into the new year.