News Corp’s PR Blunder – Rupert and Wendy Tweeting on a Tree…

Public relations folks who follow Twitter knew it was only a matter of time before a public figure had their identity stolen.

Such was the case when Rupert Murdoch supposedly entered the Twitterverse on New Year’s Day.   His wife, Wendy Deng, quickly followed with her own account and a communications sitcom was born.  After all, it wasn’t really Wendy, but an impersonator! Best yet, it probably wasn’t Rupert either.

For two days, News Corp. not only allowed the falseTwitter account from someone claiming to be Wendi Deng, the wife of its chairman and chief executive, to go unchallenged, Rupert and Wendy actually tweeted to one another.  Clearly, if Murdoch were at the Tweet helm, he may have suspected his wife wasn’t on the other end of the coffee can, but how would the person tweeting on his behalf know that?

Although the account was acknowledged by its author as a fake this week, it already had operated for days with Twitter’s signature blue check of authenticity – raising serious questions about the social media platform’s usually bulletproof verification process.

While the entire episode is somewhat comical, it does open the door for serious analysis in regard to the implications for companies like News Corp. when an employee or another third party impersonates company spokespeople, executives or family members.

The spoof maintained credibility because a News Corp. spokesperson told journalists that the Wendi Deng Twitter account was authentic. Those confirmations were subsequently withdrawn and a hapless PR grunt told reports that the confirmation was “unintentional and mistaken.” How embarrassing.

What this spoof teaches us is that when someone masquerades as someone else connected to, or from, a major corporation, it could get serious.

As we begin a new year, ask yourself “do I have my social media operations in order?” For corporate communicators, this means having clearly defined and written policies concerning the rules by which employees or third parties representing you participate in social media. It also means developing an “early warning system” for suspicious online behavior by someone else that might impact your business.

Different social media channels have proper and improper uses. So pay attention. Ensure your business integrity by stopping impostors from successfully impersonating you, your CEO or anyone associated with your company.  You can’t completely prevent stuff like this, but you can be faster than News Corp. in being aware of spotting bogus postings.

Misrepresentations can hurt a reputation as well as cost a business money.  Even worse, they can make your CEO look foolish.  Right, Rupert?

Lowe’s Idiotic Move Becomes a Public Relations Nightmare

It seems pretty clear to just about everyone that home improvement giant Lowe’s made a huge public relations gaff in its recent decision to pull advertising from the show “All-American Muslim” on TLC.The more interesting story may be how and why Lowe’s made such a dumb mistake.

Lowe’s came under pressure from a group called the Florida Family Association, which doesn’t like the show because, I guess, they think the show portrays Muslims (at least the ones on the show) as normal people and not as crazed jihadists out to destroy America.

It’s certainly not new that people with a political ax to grind might try to eradicate support for the people they’re out to get. So if that support comes in the form of advertising dollars, they try to pressure the advertisers to drop support. It doesn’t work very often, usually because advertisers rightly recognize that the investment of advertising dollars pays off, and a small, but vocal interest group that threatens a “boycott” or whatever will either be seen for what it is or be a blip on the media radar.

In this case, FFA won a battle by persuading Lowe’s to pull its ads from All-American Muslim, but I wonder if it hasn’t lost the war – not only for itself, but for all interest groups who attempt to use this tactic.

Before this happened, I doubt many people even thought about the fact that Lowe’s advertised on the show – at least to the extent that they may have considered the social or political implications. A few people in Florida may have been upset about it, but I doubt many other people cared one way or the other.

However,  once Lowe’s dropped the ads, everyone became aware of it, and not in a way that reflects positively on Lowe’s corporate reputation. Rather than just getting complaints from one group of cranks, Lowe’s is now catching heat from all over the place.

The lesson: You probably bring more trouble on yourself by pulling your ads from a show like this than if you just keep running them…especially when you claim you support diversity.

The next time a group like FFA tries to pressure some company to pull its ads in a similar situation, don’t you think that company will be aware of what happened to Lowe’s? Don’t you think they’ll realize they don’t need to invite the same kind of heat? It’s surprising that Lowe’s would make such a boneheaded public relations move, but it happens. Maybe the FFA got ahold of someone internally who was sympathetic to their agenda. Maybe they just caught someone on a bad day, and that person panicked without thinking through the big picture. Clearly, the company’s leadership needs a wake up call and a set of….good PR consultants.

It’s clear now that if Lowe’s had just ignored FFA, it would have bought itself much less trouble than it has now. I hope Lowe’s won’t cave into to pressure like that again, but in an era where news moves fast and companies often react instead of think, I wouldn’t be surprised if it happens again.

Utopia Helps UNO and Pizzas4Patriots With Publicity Effort

UTOPIA PLEASED TO HELP UNO^® and PIZZAS4PATRIOTS SEND 10,000 PIZZAS TO TROOPS FOR SUPER BOWL

AMERICANS CAN SUPPORT THE EFFORT WITH SPECIAL $50 FOR $5 FUNDRAISER

Many Americans may have grown weary of the lengthy conflicts overseas, but UNO^® (www.unos.com) and non-profit organization Pizzas 4 Patriots [P4P] hope to encourage people to continue to remember our troops still stationed in Afghanistan this holiday season with a unique “$5 for $50” fundraiser. The money raised will enable P4P to dish out 10,000 pizzas to U.S. service men and women in Afghanistan on America’s largest pizza eating day of the year – Super Bowl Sunday.  During the month of December, guests can purchase a coupon book for $5 and receive $50 in coupon savings, all for a great cause, but the opportunity will end on January 1^st. Utopia is pleased to offer our public relations support for this effort!

“With the passing of time, some Americans have shifted their attention from the conflicts thousands of miles away, but our troops are still there and we never, ever want to forget them,” said Frank Guidara, CEO, Uno Chicago Grill and veteran.  “Uno can show its appreciation by sending them a taste from home, namely a deep-dish pizza.  And we know it means a great deal to the troops – especially those that are in forward positions without the comforts of home available to them.”

UNO has supported Pizzas4Patriots in shipping over 50,000 pizzas to our troops at various times of the year since 2009. (That translates to over 400,000 slices served to more than 200,000 soldiers).  As in past years, the pizzas will be delivered by DHL (www.dhl-usa.com), the world’s leading international logistics company.

OPERATION PIZZA BOWL is an effort conceived by Retired Air Force Master Sergeant Mark Evans and his teenage son Kent (of Elk Grove, IL), and has provided pizza to thousands of service men and women at bases throughout the world.

“We’re thrilled to continue partnering with Uno to provide our troops in Afghanistan with delicious deep-dish pizza in time for the SuperBowl,” said Evans.  “For many of our troops, the winter can be long and hard over there, and they look forward to the best football game of the season.  Helping them to enjoy it with Uno’s deep dish pizza a great way for us to say ‘thank you,’  and  Uno customers  get a double win because they can treat themselves to their favorite Uno dishes at considerable savings.”

“Uno has made support of our troops – active or retired – and their families a consistent focus, whether donating pizzas to local VA Hospitals, offering  major discounts for Military Appreciation weeks or helping to raise funds for organizations that support our men and women in uniform,” noted Guidara.  “We want to reach every soldier down to ‘the last person’ and let them know how thankful we are.”

To receive updates on UNO’s military efforts, or to enjoy exclusive special offers and information about menu items and happenings at UNO, join UNO Insider’s Club by visiting www.unos.com. To obtain a coupon book, visit your local UNO location during the month of December. Coupons are valid as of January 2nd, 2012.

About Pizzas4Patriots:

Pizzas4Patriots is a non-profit organization with the mission of making a positive difference in the lives of our service men and women. We proudly support those patriots presently serving, as well as our wounded Veterans. It is our goal to provide our Armed Forces with these special gifts from home. We have been fortunate to receive donations, ranging from financial to products and services, from individuals, families, corporations, and other organizations, all wanting to show appreciation for the sacrifice of our brave troops. Our goal is to bring a little bit of home to the troops, and show them that they are supported by the country and residents who enjoy the freedoms that they provide for us. For more information on our programs, please visit:  www.Pizzas4Patriots.com.

ABOUT UNO:

Based in Boston, Massachusetts, Uno Restaurant Holdings Corporation includes 156 company-owned and franchised restaurants located in 24 states, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, South Korea, the United Arab Emirates, Honduras, Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The Company also operates a fast casual concept called Uno Dué Go, a quick service concept called Uno Express and Uno Foods, a consumer packaged foods business which supplies airlines, movie theaters, hotels, airports, travel plazas, schools and supermarkets with both frozen and refrigerated private-label foods and Uno branded products. For more information, visit www.unos.com.

###

Pure Hershey’s. Pure Happiness. Or Not?

The Hershey chocolate company does not run the Milton Hershey School, although the same man founded both more than a century ago. So when the school recently made the surprising decision to deny entry to an HIV-positive honor student – a move quite out of character for a school founded to serve marginalized youth – it had nothing to do with the people who make Hershey Bars, Kisses and Drops.

But in the court of public opinion, you have to wonder if that factual distinction will matter. And I bet Hershey executives are wondering the same thing. If they’re not, they should be.

The school’s decision seems a throwback to late-1980s thinking about HIV, when it was commonly believed that you could be at risk of infection merely by brushing up against someone, or by using the same shower. We know better now, and you’d think that a school whose mission is to accept those that others in society have rejected would be among the first to practice acceptance and make accommodations.

The Hershey School is not changing its position, however, insisting that its action is out of concern for the safety of its other students. It may sincerely believe that, but that thinking is certainly not where the general public is with respect to HIV.

So far the coverage of this story has been limited. If it gains legs, it might present a tricky conundrum for the chocolate company. I’m sure Hershey executives would prefer to say nothing, lest they be seen to publicly dissociate themselves from the school that bears their founder’s name. But if consumers conclude on a large scale that Hershey is engaging in discrimination – if the company starts to face consequences such as a boycott – it might feel pressure to set the record straight.

If they do, my advice would be that they shouldn’t say much. A simple statement that the two organizations are separate, and that questions should be directed to the Milton Hershey School, would probably suffice.

The company might also want to make clear that it doesn’t engage in discrimination, although by saying that, it might create a media inference that the chocolate company is accusing the school of doing so. That could become a bigger media story than the act of discrimination itself: “Two Hersheys in public war!”

Hershey sells a lot of chocolate, and would surely do so even during a brief and misdirected boycott. A short statement of dissociation would set the record straight if it becomes necessary. Otherwise Hershey should let the Milton Hershey School do the heavy lifting in dealing with the problem it created.

When Foxes Rule the Henhouse – NJ Judges Rule to Keep Their Perks

Okay, I had to do a double take when reading my local paper recently.  Apparently, two NJ judges ruled that NJ’s pension and benefits reforms don’t apply to…yeah, you guessed it…the state’s judges!

Seriously, are these folks living under a rock? Do they not get schooled on ethics? Moreover, do they not read their local newspapers? The rest of the world…both public and private…are starting to see their benefits either reduced or are required to contribute more to keep them.

What was laughable was the comment by Judge Paul Depascale of Hudson County.  According to the article that ran in the 10/25 edition of the Asbury Park Press, he argued that:

The increased costs for benefits he would have to bear under the reforms would be an unconstitutional lowering of his pay.  DePascale based his argument on a sentence in the constitution which declares that a judge’s salary cannot be diminished during his or her term.

Here is where the thinking is fundamentally flawed…benefits are part of your salary.  In fact, as the owner of a subchapter S corporation in the state of NJ, I cannot deduct my healthcare premiums because they are considered “income.”  I wonder if, as a state employee, the good Judge has to include his overall healthcare benefits as income…probably not.

The bottom line here is that the foxes are ruling the henhouse.  Other state employees don’t have the option of ruling in their own favor when it comes to salary and benefit cuts, so why should judges?  Ethically speaking, this smells rotten.