media relations can save an organization’s reputation and commercial viability when something goes tragically wrong, as in the Tylenol poisoning case (Fall of 1982), the Coors appearance on 60 Minutes during a reputation management issue (April 1982), and Lee Iacocca’s forthright dealing with an odometer spinning controversy at Chrysler (July 1987). Despite serious and often true charges against him, President Bill Clinton seemed to be able to repeatedly use the media to salvage his reputation.
Poor media relations can have the opposite effect as in the nuclear accident at Three Mile Island, Pennsylvania which irrevocably tarnished the nuclear industry’s safety image; the chemical release in Bhopal, India (December 1984) and the Exxon Valdez oil spill (March 1989). More recently, the negative news stories about accounting procedures and their effect on stock prices seem to get worse as a result of poor communication.
Although all of the above examples cite large organizations with large professional public affairs and media relations departments, size isn’t a factor. Attitude is.
Some organizations feel they can be silent when information is sought by reporters and will attempt to “tough it out.” Experience shows this is not advisable since it merely creates an information vacuum into which others will step, and those others usually have their own agendas. Thus, it is important for an organization to attempt to be the most accurate and reliable source of information about its own activities. Spokespeople must be available and the organization must be seen to be cooperative and active.
The power of the news media is often misunderstood. While the news media has its failings, there’s no doubt that it helps shape and direct public opinion. Much of its power depends on its ability to disseminate information extremely quickly. It takes very few key people to decide that an event is big enough to be broadcast live around the world, where it will be watched by billions of people. That’s power.
At the same time we know the media can be ineffective in separating fact from perception and correcting misconceptions or inaccuracies. George Bernard Shaw once dismissed the media for being “unable, seemingly, to discriminate between a bicycle accident and the collapse of civilization.”
While reporters, line up editors and producers may often overreact or have misplaced priorities, you dismiss or ignore the media at your peril. Organizations must actively participate in the information flow.
This is particularly true when reporters are interested in a potentially negative story. If there is a problem, acknowledge it — then enumerate the actions being taken to correct the situation. This same information should be provided to stakeholders. All communications and actions should be taken with the focus on the long term interests of the stakeholders. Each direct contact with the stakeholders or contact with the media should be viewed as an opportunity to transmit the organization’s message and build rapport. The questions and needs of all stakeholders including the media should be anticipated and met in a timely fashion.
During these times, the news media will ask for, consume, collate and disseminate more information at a higher rate of speed and more widely than public affairs managers can anticipate. It is important that the company address this insatiable appetite with the attitude that the media and the public they serve have proper reasons for inquiring about the status of an event.
No purpose will be served by questioning why the media require as much information as they do as quickly as they do.
It will be important to use charts, graphs, status boards, cork boards or other means in media briefing or news conference rooms to keep reporters uptodate on as many facts as possible. Assemble those facts by asking the traditional journalistic questions WHO, WHEN, WHAT, WHERE, WHY and HOW.
Some of these questions present special legal predicaments. There should be no speculation on the exact cause of an event or incident unless it is completely obvious. The same is true of liability and responsibility. In most cases these issues should not be addressed by anyone other than senior management. But senior management should also protect the organization’s credibility in cases where the answers to these questions are completely obvious. Beware of being too optimistic too early. You may not get back to normal or clean up the mess as quickly as you predict.
Formal media monitoring is available from several companies and is the only effective way to know exactly what news reports said about you. Coverage of your statements and those by politicians and others about you should be monitored and analyzed by an independent team on a regular basis to allow for a proper response strategy. This monitoring and/or analysis should include communication from other significant stakeholders including telephone calls from customers, the public, suppliers and bankers.
Irrespective of the level and frequency of contact with the news media, organizations and individuals need to be clear in their own minds of what they want to say before they start talking to reporters.
They need SOCKOS.
Chapter 2: Arm Yourself
SOCKO: A Definition
(so kó) n. acronym for Strategic Overriding Communications and Knowledge Objective. 1. A short, positive, sharp, memorable, honed, polished, true, unassailable statement. 2. A “mediagenic” clip or quotation on radio, TV, or in newspaper stories. 3. A 20second or less, quotable quote, with impact, often showing caring, knowledge and/or action. 4. A rough equivalent to a headline, cutline or lead, best delivered after full rehearsal at least 3 times, e.g. “I have nothing to offer but blood, toil, tears and sweat,” “. . . ask not what your country can do for you; ask what you can do for your country . . . .” “just watch me . . . .”
The Power of SOCKOs
You probably have considerable knowledge about your chosen field. Unfortunately that does not ensure you’ll be able to describe your work and beliefs clearly and succinctly to the media.
We’ve found that most people take their daily life and activity so much for granted they just assume that others will have no difficulty in understanding their explanations. When asked by an interviewer “What do you do, why do you do it and is it important?” they look and sound uncomfortable as they struggle to put their thoughts into words. It doesn’t have to be like that.
The SOCKO system has helped people in many parts of the world to be better communicators. It has proved its value in highprofile situations with politicians, diplomats, military leaders, trade negotiators and other public officials. It’s also worked with business executives, police officers, lawyers and social institutions.
The SOCKO system helps you speak more effectively because SOCKOs help you identify your objectives and then stay focused on them.
You may already have encountered, or heard of, “key messages,” “aces,” “ press lines” or some other term used to describe a sentence or phrase containing the information you would like to be able to deliver to an audience.
While similar to SOCKOs, there is one vital difference: SOCKOs are designed to have an impact—just as the acronym suggests.
The acronym stands for Strategic Overriding Communications and Knowledge Objectives.
The SOCKO system starts with strategic thinking.
Strategic
Imagine a knock on your office door and a senior vicepresident asks you to step outside and give a status report on Project X , Issue Y or File Z to a
