Monday, September 25, 2017

Pitching Your Story

One of the things that sets our firm apart in a world of canned spam is our ability to place good stories about our clients doing great things in third-party publications (digital publications, TV, newspapers, etc.).  These individual successes are usually driven by an effective “pitch” to a journalist, or an editor, like the one below, which produced a quality story about a local Boy Scout in charge of feeding thousands of people over the summer.


The elements of a successful pitch are all here, and we’ve annotated them.  Take a look and think about your good news – and the heroes in your organization - and how those stories would be best presented in order to grab the (increasingly limited) attention of a reporter or blogger.

Here’s the pitch:

Subj:  10,000 Hamburgers, 1,200 Meat Loaves

Hi Ethan -- – Hope you’re enjoying the summer.  I’ve got a good story idea, with a local (1) hero (2), for you down at Rhode Island’s own (1) Camp Yawgoog, the second oldest Scout camp in the country, now in its 102nd season (3).
As it has for over a century (3), Camp Yawgoog is hosting Boy Scouts from all over the Northeast, and as far away as Florida (1)(4), this summer. This year more than 6,400 Scouts (3) will stay at Yawgoog from late June through August.
While the Scouts are there, over 200 counselors (3) on staff will teach classes in 40 merit badges (3)(5) including robotics, medicine, camping, small boat sailing, fishing, lifesaving and first aid.  Courses are also offered to adult leaders who would like to improve their skills in technology, basic leadership, CPR and more (5).   More than 200 Scouts (3) learn how to swim in Yawgoog Pond and over 250 boys will earn the Mile Swim Award (5).

During those eight weeks, they will consume more than 200,000 meals, which include (among other ingredients) 10,000+ gallons of milk, 25,000+ slices of pizza, almost 70,000 eggs, 41,440 meatballs, 40,960 apples and over 1,200 meatloaves (3!!).

Amazingly, the leadership for all of this is provided by Jon DiLuglio, a 20 year-old URI student (2)(4) from Scituate (1).



Outside of meal times, Scouts work toward their cooking merit badge, learning about food safety, menu planning, and food shopping and preparation.  Camp Yawgoog’s three dining halls are central to the Scout’s week at Camp. (4)
It would be great to have one of your journalists visit and do a story about one of Rhode Island’s legendary places, and I know your readers would really enjoy it (6).
If you would be interested in visiting or learning more, please let me know.

Thanks,


The Notes:
  1. For a pitch to a geography-based media outlet (as opposed to interest-based, etc.), highlighting a town, a region or a state is important. It helps answer the question “Why would my readers/viewers be interested in this?” 
  2. An old publisher of mine used to say “Names make news!” So do heroes, and 20-year old college students doing very big jobs.
  3. Noteworthy numbers make news too – particularly big ones, or…
  4. …Facts that are surprising in a “man bites dog” kind of way.
  5. The Boy Scouts are a great organization, which teaches its members an awful lot of things. Letting the reporter know about all the activities at camp gave the pitch a “Plan B” – if for some reason the original story didn’t work out, there’s still plenty of other things to cover, and write about.
  6. It’s important to close by summarizing the pitch, and asking specifically what you would like them to do.

In today’s dynamic media climate developing a successful pitch can be challenging. That’s why incorporating all of the elements above is critical to securing quality stories, and more of them. Knowing our clients, the media landscape and how to mine the interesting news nugget is how we deliver the “good news.”


Thursday, September 29, 2016

The Best Defense…

When people ask what we do, I say “We do two things – offense and defense.”  On offense, we tell our clients’ stories consistently and effectively to the people who need to hear it.  On defense, we help to manage and overcome a crisis by… consistently and effectively telling our clients’ story to the people who need to hear it.

“The best defense is a good offense” is a well-worn phrase, and just as true in communications as it is in sports.  The longer, and more effectively, an organization has been delivering their message and defining itself on offense the better it will fare on defense.  That’s especially true when an unexpected crisis hits from out of nowhere.   However, there are other things that you can do – today – to be prepared to protect your business and your reputation.

Here’s a quick checklist of the obvious, and the not-so-obvious:

Put a Plan in Writing
  • It is true that “No plan survives the first encounter with the enemy”, but you can anticipate likely scenarios, and have a plan for what we call the ‘First 25%.’
  • Identify key leaders in the organization who should be on the Crisis Team.
  • Make sure the plan is updated regularly and you know where to find it if a crisis develops. 

Know Your Crisis Team – and Where To Find Them!
  • Plan and assign crisis roles ahead of time.   The Crisis Team doesn’t need to include everyone at the organization, but if it only includes the CEO and his/her assistant, you’re off to a bad start.
  • Get 24 hour phone numbers and e-mail addresses for all key people – and their key people, including admins and assistants, then conduct periodic tests.  You’ll be surprised what you find when you dial the numbers.  Note – a crisis isn’t the best time to learn that the cell phone for the guy with all the passwords doesn’t work at his cabin deep in the woods of Maine (true story).
Prepare a one-pager with key facts about your organization.  Be sure to include:
  • What you do and who you are (your elevator speech)
  • How long have you been in business?
  • How many people work with you?
  • Highlight community involvement, philanthropy, achievements, awards, recognition – these all provide important context and help answer the question “Who are you?” more fully.
  • Make certain the info matches the website
  • Make it available in print and PDF
Know What You’re Saying About Yourself
  • Keep your web site up to date, since it’s the first place people will go to learn about you.  Check and update the site on a regular schedule.   Make sure someone on the Crisis Team can update the site quickly and effectively.  
Stake out your on-line real estate
  • It’s a good idea to reserve your URLs, and a reasonable number of others that could be misspellings, typos close to your name and derogatory variations of your name.
  • If you haven’t done so already, establish a presence on social media. Post some content and cultivate “Followers” or “Friends”.  Social media can prove to be an extremely valuable unfiltered platform for you to reach key audiences when a crisis occurs.  The more robust and current you can make it ahead of time, the better off you’ll be.
What are other people saying about you?
  • Check your search engine results - It’s the second place people will go.
  • Compile recent media coverage, be ready to highlight the good news and have clear, credible context for the not-so-good.
Know what’s on the public record
  • Have you been sued?  Be ready to talk about the losses, but even opponents’ filings in cases that you won can be harmful if not addressed.
  • Are your regulatory filings up to date?  Have clear, candid answers for any questions that may be raised by any sanctions you may have faced.
Reminder: Sloppy paperwork can be damaging
  • Incomplete, inaccurate, contradictory or out of date paperwork, particularly those that are public can be a problem.
  • Also – always think twice before hitting send on that e-mail.   The most innocent message may be a problem out of context. 
And finally – play offense
The Key Elements of Offense:
The Goals
  • Define yourself on your own terms.
  • Tell your story to the people who need to hear it.
The Four Pillars of Offense … and Defense
  • Who is your audience?  
    • Who needs to hear your message?  Who do you want to influence?
  • What is your message?
    • If you can’t say it in 10-15 seconds it probably needs some work.  And remember – it’s not what you do, it’s who you are.
  • What information, or content, supports that message?
    • What stories or nuggets of information help tell your story? 
  • How do you distribute your content and deliver your message?
    • In this day in age, you need a multi-faceted approach.  Word of mouth or a random newspaper ad can’t get it done today.  
There’s a lot more to being prepared for a crisis – but this list is a good place to start.

Monday, May 2, 2016

The Day After The Big Story

“Content” is the big communications buzz word these days.  And while a lot of the “content” that’s out there is actually spam (more on that next month) in many ways, the best content is still third-party content – which in our case is news coverage of the great work our clients are doing.

News coverage is the best content because it has the benefit of someone else telling your story.  But not all third-party content is created equal.  While some coverage is almost always better than no coverage, the more widely viewed and more respected the outlet, the more valuable the content.  Another important factor – is the content/coverage in a publication being seen by the audience you’re trying to reach?

Recently, we hit the bull’s eye in The New York Times with a story about the success of our client the Quonset Business Park.  A former Navy base on Narragansett Bay, Quonset was widely perceived to be underperforming for years until hitting its stride in the last decade.  Today, it is the region’s premiere business park and the leading engine of job creation and economic growth in Rhode Island.

The Times story “Quonset Makes a Name for Itself in Business” captured Quonset’s success well.  Even better, the Business section of The Times is the ideal place to reach one of Quonset’s key audiences – business decision makers who are looking for a place to start or expand their business.

Once the sun rose on the day after The Times story, though, came the obvious question – what next?  At our firm, getting good media coverage for our clients is only the beginning of the process.  From there, we go on to amplify the story and work to get it in front of as many people as we can.  We do this by making it available on as many platforms as possible, some of which we publish ourselves on behalf of our clients.

Here are just a few examples:

  • Next – social media.  If you go to the Quonset Twitter feed you’ll see numerous tweets, starting on March 15, mentioning key points in The Times story, and linking back to the story for those who want to read it.  You’ll see Quonset re-tweeting other mentions of the story, as well. 
  • Check out the Quonset Facebook page.  You’ll see similar mentions.  Also – we took advantage of the heightened interest to invest in boosted posted posts on the platform – where we paid a few hundred dollars to reach a larger, targeted audience.  This, in turn, resulted in a jump in Facebook followers for Quonset.  (Nothing succeeds like success.)
  • We amplified the coverage of the coverage on Quonset social media.
https://twitter.com/QuonsetRI/status/711349021323833344

https://twitter.com/QuonsetRI/status/711206054613286912

Bottom line:  For us and our clients, what happens in the days after good media coverage is at least as important as what happens in the days before.

Tuesday, January 12, 2016

Can You Believe That Poll?

The most compelling action in the 2016 Presidential campaign (before any actual votes have been cast) is on the Republican side. Most polling seems to reflect the same trends – i.e., Donald Trump leads with a plurality of support among Republicans, followed by Texas Sen. Ted Cruz, with the “establishment” candidates flailing.

But on the key question of who will actually win, it’s anybody’s guess. Why? First, polls are only a “snap shot in time.” Pollsters say this all the time, partly out of self-preservation, but it’s also true. Things can change quickly in campaigns, and intervening events can make a poll completed on Monday largely outdated by Friday.

In Iowa, where Cruz and Trump are competitive in the February 1 contest, it’s proving difficult to predict a winner ahead of time. I’d bet on Cruz, because I suspect his Get Out the Vote (“GOTV”) effort, crucial in getting supporters to the polls in the state’s quirky caucus system, is better. Like Ben Carson, Trump is likely to learn that winning campaigns are a lot harder than they look, and that a presidential campaign is a tough place to start your political career.

The much more important consideration in determining the “accuracy” of a poll, however, is the methodology used to conduct it. This can largely be broken down into two big questions –
1) Who are you asking, and;
2) How are you collecting the data?

Here’s how that plays out in Iowa. The best way to answer the question “Who will win?” –which is really “Who would win if the election were today?” – is for a human being to ask a person likely to vote in the caucus who they plan to vote for. Both of these elements – a live interviewer and targeting a likely voter – are crucial. Anything less than this is the first step on a quickly descending staircase of credibility and value.

Unfortunately, polls conducted like this are hard to find because they are so expensive. Why?
• You need to have a thoughtful way to determine who, really, is likely to vote;
• It takes time and real expertise to draft a sound, useful questionnaire;
• In conducting the poll, you need good callers who understand the questions and ask them the right way;
• You need callers who can be trained to pronounce candidate names and place names correctly;
• Polls that dig deep seeking more information, usually conducted by candidates, are long, and it’s difficult to keep participants engaged all the way through to the end;
• It’s harder to find voters in the era of the cell phone, and to determine a valid mix of cell phone and landline numbers;
• It takes time and expertise to interpret the data, weighing it to reflect voter demographics in the area.

Since few public polls approach this standard, they all should be greeted with healthy skepticism. Media outlets used to do them with the necessary rigor, but few can afford it anymore, with some national exceptions (NY Times, CBS, etc.). Local media outlets are, for the most part, unwilling to spend the money it takes to get really good data, which is important to remember as we approach November. Instead, they usually settle for online polls or automated telephone polls. (I think my dog Buster responded to one of those the other day.) What you end up with is very cheap data that barely passes the accuracy laugh test – but is sometimes reported by the media with a straight face. Meanwhile, the best information is usually found in the hands of well-funded candidates, is jealously guarded like the precious commodity that it is.

All of this may help explain the post-Iowa GOP landscape in a few weeks if/when the results from the caucuses do not reflect the “results” of the “national polls” published over the last few months.

Friday, December 11, 2015

The Last Days of RISDIC

Friday, January 1, marks the 25th anniversary of the beginning of Rhode Island’s credit union crisis. I recently came across an article I wrote on the 10th anniversary of the closure, published in the December 2000 edition of Rhode Island Monthly magazine. It’s an interesting look back at a dramatic time in our state’s history, and it is posted below.

----------------------------------------

Where Were You When They Closed the Banks?

The memories may seem fresh, but the banking crisis exploded ten years ago next month. One insider reveals the surprising countdown to the worst financial crisis in the state’s recent history.

By David Preston

By 2 a.m., most of the New Year’s Eve revelers were gone. First Night was over, Kennedy Plaza was empty, and the city was cold and quiet on the first morning of 1991. High above the Plaza, Sheldon Whitehouse and an associate at the big downtown law firm Hinckley, Allen, Snyder and Comen were well on their way to pulling an all-nighter, gathering reams of documents incoming Governor Bruce Sundlun would need later that day.

It hadn’t been much of a New Year’s Eve or for that matter much of a holiday season for any of the Sundlun team, least of all Whitehouse. Since leaving his job as assistant attorney general in early December to come work with us on the transition team, he’d had a front-row seat for the rapid disintegration of financial institutions insured by Rhode Island Share and Deposit Indemnity Corporation (RISDIC). Now, on the last day of the year, the dike had collapsed and a financial tidal wave that had been building for two months was about to come crashing ashore. On his first official day as governor, Sundlun was declaring a legal bank holiday. It’s a phrase that always seems ironic – there was certainly nothing festive about what was about to unfold. In less than twenty-four hours, we knew Sundlun would padlock shut forty-five banks and credit unions.

For the members of the Sundlun team, the autumn of 1990 had been euphoric, a sweet victory after four years of hard work and bitter disappointment. Some had endured the thrashing Governor Edward DiPrete inflicted on Sundlun in 1986, when DiPrete won the election with 65 percent of the vote. Two years later I joined the Sundlun Team as policy adviser for what started out as another sacrificial offering to the campaign gods. On the June day in 1988 that I signed on, a published poll showed Sundlun trailing DiPrete almost three to one. But after a string of bad news for DiPrete  it was suddenly a competitive race. In the end, though, despite $2 million of Sundlun’s personal money, we lost a heartbreaker, 51 percent of the vote to 49 percent. It was a tough loss, and I never saw Sundlun more disappointed than he was that election night.

In 1990, with DiPrete weakened, other Democrats smelled blood in the water and decided to run. A four-man race shrank to three when former Lieutenant Governor Richard Licht bailed out, leaving Providence Mayor Joseph R. Paolino, Jr., Warwick Mayor Frank Flaherty, and Sundlun.

As Sundlun’s deputy campaign manager, I sensed it was going to be a tough primary campaign and it was. Paolino jumped out to an early lead, while the Sundlun campaign floundered. Flaherty, less known statewide, was a distant third at the time. In late June, Paolino won the endorsement of the Democratic State Committee, which had been only too glad to have Sundlun carry their water in two previously hopeless efforts. But the same week, Brian Lunde and George Burger, two savvy Washington campaign operatives, arrived in town, and that changed everything. They redefined the direction of our campaign, enforced structure in our staff, crafted a clear and compelling message presenting Sundlun as the outsider – and then persuaded him to part with almost $2 million more than the $1 million he’d already committed to spend.

Having anted up, Sundlun became more focused. In September, the primary was ours: the general election in November, an anti-climax. The vaunted DiPrete campaign machine of the previous three elections was no more, and Sundlun racked up a 74-26 win, powered by another million dollars, and a corps of dedicated volunteers who took to heart the Sundlun message that he was an ‘independent businessman, not a professional politician.’

Sundlun liked meetings – but short ones – and as the campaign staff became the transition team, half a dozen of us would meet every day around 5:30 p.m. The meetings in the office at Sundlun’s Providence home at 320 South Main Street included the usual suspects: me, Whitehouse, key transition staffer Brian Gallogly, chief of staff-to-be Ed Wood, Patti Goldstein, and Cumberland State Senator David Cruise, one of a handful of elected officials who’d supported Sundlun in the primary, and a future chief of staff. Later, Barbara Cottam, who’d worked for Paolino at Providence City Hall and was Sundlun’s choice as press secretary, joined the group, and depending on who was in town that week, Lunde or Burger as well. It was a chance to catch up, make sure nothing fell through the cracks, and prep all of us for the next day.

The campaign mantra had been simple: a higher standard of political ethics and better fiscal management. From the beginning, we thought the biggest problem facing our new administration would be the budget deficit. Sundlun had promised to restore the sales tax to 6 percent after DiPrete had raised it to 7 percent six months earlier. To do that would require $34 million in cuts, not at all that much in a budget of $1.3 billion. But the deficit had ballooned over the course of the year, and ultimately as much as $260 million would have to be slashed just to bring the budget into balance, never mind keep Sundlun’s promise to cut taxes. By inauguration day, there was no disputing that Rhode Island faced an enormous deficit – percentage wise, the largest in the nation. The looming deficit colored every policy decision we made during the transition, and while we disputed its magnitude with the outgoing administration, RISDIC began to crumble.

The collapse of Heritage Loan and Investment Company, and subsequently RISDIC, is now part of Rhode Island legend. The Federal Hill institution was taken over by RISDIC in October 1990 when examiners found its book to be almost incomprehensible. A few weeks later, Joseph Mollicone, Jr., president and controlling shareholder of the bank, disappeared and ultimately turned into a fugitive as it became clear that more than $13 million in bank funds had also disappeared.

RISDIC made good on Heritage deposits. But depositors at other RISDIC institutions, led by insiders – members of the banks’ boards of directors and upper management – were worried that the agency would not be able to cover their deposits if the need arose. Thus began a series of what Whitehouse called “silent” runs, large-scale withdrawals by these insiders and others that gained momentum in early December and made the ultimate problem much worse.

Every afternoon now, Whitehouse arrived at our meetings at South Main Street from his vigil at the Department of Business Regulation (DBR). His updates of the banks’ dwindling liquidity grew increasingly alarming. Initially he told us, “I don’t know how they’re going to make it.”

Soon, though, that became, “They’re not going to make it.”

Shortly before Christmas, he was predicting that they might not even survive the next day. At first we figured that Whitehouse – the new kid on the team and not part of our original campaign group – was overreacting. Soon, we found out he was right. It was the morning of December 19, the Wednesday before Christmas. L. William Seidman, chairman of the Federal Deposit Insurance Corporation, and former Iowa Senator Roger Jepsen, then chairman of the National Credit Union Administration, arrived from Washington with a small army of regulators and examiners for a meeting at the State House. The DiPrete and Sundlun teams listened as Seidman delivered a two-part message: First, we’ve taken a look at these institutions and it’s really bad. Second, we can’t help you. Seidman suggested they seek what he called private capital to solve the problem. “There’s only one person in this town with that kind of money,” Sundlun said, and set up a meeting for that very day at 4 p.m. with Terry Murray, head of Fleet Bank.


The meeting that followed was cordial, but ultimately unsuccessful. Murray gave the same answer Seidman had given: sorry, we can’t help.

It was over for RISDIC.

Next day, Whitehouse began camping out in a conference room at the DBR, the agency responsible for examining and supervising the RISDIC-insured institutions. Federal officials joined them as well. The Treasury Department, even the White House, was involved now, concerned that a bank failure in Rhode Island could spread a panic that might topple other institutions weakened by the Northeast’s faltering economy. For Whitehouse, the immediate task was to determine just how bad it was. Meanwhile, RISDIC officials tried desperately to limp to January 1, so Sundlun  could provide the necessary leadership.

We continued to hope for the best, that the feds would show some flexibility. On one hand, they were urging us not to do anything to incite a panic. On the other hand, they steadfastly refused to consider insuring three institutions we believed were healthy: Union Deposit Loan and Investment Bank, Chariho-Exeter Credit Union, and East Providence Credit Union. That refusal made it clear that whatever happened with RISDIC, we were on our own. Not only was there no federal money in the offing, but regulators were also completely unwilling to assume any risk.

Shortly after noon on December 31, the phone rang in the DBR conference room. Whitehouse picked it up. “A RISDIC attorney was on the other end,” he remembers. “He said, ‘I’m calling to let you know that the board is meeting and we have voted to put RISDIC into conservatorship. We’re sending documents to you and the governor (Sundlun) reflecting what we’ve done.’”

Now we knew how the end would come.

Whitehouse hung up and redialed. “RISDIC just pulled the plug,” he told Sundlun, “and voted to put themselves into conservatorship.”

“What the hell does that mean?” Sundlun asked.

“It means we own them now.”

Around four that afternoon, I was at the transition office at One State Street finishing up the writing of the next day’s inaugural address when I got a call from State Senator David Cruise. “The governor wants you to come down to the meeting a little early today,” he said.

I headed down the hill toward South Main Street. When I arrived, Whitehouse, who’d been huddled with Sundlun, showed me the RISDIC letter. “Conservatorship” looked an awful lot like “receivership,” legal-speak for what happens when bankrupt companies are taken over by the government.

“So this is how it happens,” I remember thinking. But how to deal with the mess in the short term? Eventually, we expected that the state government would establish something like the Resolution Trust Corporation (RTC) to sort through the rubble of the former credit unions. The RTC had been the feds’ creation in the aftermath of the meltdown of the country’s savings and loan industry. It had taken over and managed the assets of the S&Ls and paid off depositors, with the government making up the difference. To try to close the gap, it sold the assets of the old institutions for the best possible price. Ultimately, the successful Depositors Economic Protection Corporation (DEPCO), conceived and announced the following weekend, would become Rhode Island’s own version of the RTC.

But that was days – or weeks – away, or so we thought. The question now, as the sun set on 1990, was what to do with these credit unions that no longer had deposit insurance, as the law required. Many of them were in pitiful financial shape, tapped out on their lines of credit, some with only pennies per depositor left on-hand.

We had three options to thrash out, none of them appealing. First, assume responsibility for all the credit unions with the full faith and credit of the state. This would allow business to continue as usual on January 2. But no one knew how big that hole was that taxpayers would have to fill. (Ultimately, it would turn out to be $333 million of the $1.7 billion in total deposits that were paid back). And no one, least of all Sundlun, was ready to take such a big leap off a cliff in the dark. With the budget deficit as a backdrop, full faith and credit was out.

A second option was receivership, which meant that a court-appointed receiver would take over the assets of the institutions. Depositors would file claims against the receiver, and as the assets of the credit unions were sold, they would get some money. Given the depressed state of the economy, though, this was an awful option. I cringed, thinking of my parents nearing their sixties and forced to extract what remained of their life savings from the receivership that was once Columbian Credit Union. The obvious flaws in the receivership approach led us to kill that idea, which was probably the second worst possible choice.

The only one that was even worse was to allow several dozen virtually bankrupt banks and credit unions to open for business on January 2 without insurance. Any available money would be gone in minutes – maybe seconds. The resulting runs would have been a clear danger to public safety, particularly for the desperate thousands waiting outside in lines, watching their breath evaporate in the cold air, just as their savings had done.

We all knew that without full faith and credit, opening the day after New Year’s was not an option. So with surprising speed, the group decided to close the banks. Sundlun, quiet until now, nodded grimly. Everyone else, surprised at the quick consensus in favor of such a drastic action, fell silent. “Then that’s it,” Sundlun said. It was not a question. More silence. Then, the 5:30 p.m. fireworks from First Night exploded with a roar that reverberated down South Main Street and rattled the windows. It seemed to signal both the end and a beginning.

Whitehouse got on the phone and started making calls, tending to millions of details that needed to be handled before heading over to Hinckley, Allen, Snyder, and Comen. I trudged back to the transition office and wrote a brief new paragraph for the inaugural address alluding to the “problem.” Then I looked up a copy of Franklin Roosevelt’s speech to the nation after he declared a bank holiday in 1933 following panicky wide-scale bank runs. From that, I drafted a statement for the governor to give the following day. Toward the end of the draft remarks, seeking to strike an FDR-like tone, I wrote for Sundlun the line, “I am confident” that the crisis will be resolved quickly, and handed the pages to the governor.

In the entire three-page, double-spaced text, Sundlun made only one change. He crossed out the words “I am confident” and penciled in the more tentative “I hope.”

Monday, March 30, 2015

Interns

Back in the mists of time, when I was the director of one of the state’s political parties, I used to joke that with ten good interns, you could probably run many of the smaller countries out there (San Marino, Andorra, Liechtenstein, etc.). I’m a big believer in internships here at New Harbor, and we regularly provide these kinds of opportunities – both paid and for college credit.

For any organization, the main thing to know about internships is this: If you take just a few minutes a day to plan an intern’s work, the benefits for the intern can be enormous. I usually tell interns that while they may have to go on the occasional coffee run or make copies now and then, my goal is for them to be able to walk away with something tangible for their portfolio – something they can point to at a future interview and say, “I did this.”
This summary of legislative campaign finances and a survey of the Rhode Island business community’s campaign contributions are two good examples of New Harbor intern projects.  The interns who worked on them even got some ink in one of Rhode Island’s most widely read political and policy blogs  - see #7.

On the intern’s end, here’s the short list of what I need: a professional demeanor (including wardrobe), can-do/I-can-figure-it-out approach (tempered by good judgment), and a minimum of ten regularly scheduled hours per week. A regular schedule is the key to the whole package, because it helps us plan the work, which allows the interns to put together their portfolio piece. And finally, we generally get many more inquiries than we can accommodate, so misspellings or mistakes on the resume or cover letter result in automatic disqualification.

Oh, and there’s a happy ending. Timing is crucial, but from time to time over the years, we’ve hired interns here at New Harbor and made them full-time members of our team. I expect we’ll be doing more of that in the future.

Monday, February 9, 2015

Delete Me

In the New Harbor playbook, the e-mail newsletter is the indispensable tool for reaching a targeted audience in a meaningful, effective way. We’re on the receiving end of a lot of e-newsletters, too - some good, some not. But it’s amazing to us how often the most important element of the total e-news package is overlooked and misused. 

 That piece? The subject line.



Check out some of the subject lines (with the senders’ names changed to “Acme” or “Jones” to protect the guilty) in e-mail newsletters we’ve received, just in the last week: 

 • Acme Newsletter for February 4, 2015 
 • Your February Acme Newsletter 
 • Acme Newsletter February 2015 
 • News from Acme 
 • Acme February Newsletter 
 • Acme News 
 • News from the Office of Politician Jones 

We’re not making this up. So here’s the point: It’s a shame for someone to go through the effort of creating and distributing an e-newsletter, only to have a subject line that basically screams “Delete Me: I’m another boring, cookie-cutter e-mail newsletter. ”



The subject line (working in tandem with the sender field) is the most important piece of the package, because if it gets lost and recipients don’t open it, what have you gained? The sender field can really help here. For example, if the sender is “Acme” or “Politician Mary Jones,” say it there. That will free up the subject line to tell your readers what it’s about, not who it’s from – since the sender line already tells us that.



So give your subject lines some serious thought, because they’ll make or break your e-news. And experiment a little. Sometimes, we’ll do two or three different subject lines when sending out the New Harbor e-news, just to see what works as an opener, and what doesn’t.



One tactic that can work well is to use a quotation from the newsletter that might be especially relevant or interesting to your audience. Feel free to hint at the content inside, without giving everything away, so that readers are likely to click on the email to find out more.



Ask yourself: What would make you want to read this email? Chances are “Acme Newsletter February” would not be as compelling as, well, almost anything else.



Bottom line: don’t let the time and effort involved in putting together an e-mail newsletter campaign be wasted by a saddling it with a boring, generic subject line.

Monday, December 29, 2014

What is Your Message?

We are all barraged with thousands of bits of information every day. Attention spans are notoriously short and everyone’s brain is working hard to sift through the noise. This reality makes a clear, effective message essential if your organization wants to be heard – and understood.

A clear message does two important things:
  • An effective message gives your audiences an overall structure, or framework, to understand what your organization does and/or its goals;
  • An effective message gives your messengers (employees, board, etc.) a structure to tell people what you do, and to be heard and understood.
With the structure of a clear message in place, the facts and figures and stories you tell about your organization will serve to support and reinforce that message, helping people to understand who you are and what you do.

The lack of a clear, understandable message can be dangerous for your organization. Without a message, it is nearly impossible to describe your organization effectively, or to be understood. And without this fundamental understanding you will likely miss countless opportunities. Even worse, others - including competitors - can take the disjointed parts and define you on their terms, instead of on your own. Reporters, too, may be left to piece together the parts of your story on their own, defining you to fit their needs or confirm their preconceived notions.

Here’s an example of a bad, unfocused message, and a good, strong one. You’ll know who the company is after you read the good message. You’ll also realize how awful the first message is after you recognize the company - and probably have a rueful smile when you think about how often people describe their organization using something like Message #1.

Message #1
  • We were founded by a visionary who started a movie company, then we got into television and amusement parks – which we still do – but now we own a TV network with three channels - one for kids, one for sports and one for general audiences. We also sell books and toys based on the characters from our movies and we even run a cruise line.
Message #2
  • We use stories and characters – like Mickey Mouse - to entertain, to teach lessons and to give people and families fun things to do.

Clearly explaining your organization in a sentence or two is crucial to being known and understood on your terms. Your key message is what you want your audience to “take away” from their interaction with your organization. A clear understanding of your organization comes through the prism of a good, strong message.

Effective messaging also provides you and your team with a structure, or framework, to communicate with all your audiences: customers, potential customers, the press, investors, donors, partners and employees. It provides a framework for all of your communications: marketing materials, speeches and presentations, web site and social media content, news releases and op eds, and just about everything else.

Finally, it’s important to realize that your message and your mission statement are not the same thing. Most mission statements are vague, laden with jargon and buzzwords glued together and watered down by a committee. These statements avoid doing what a message needs to do – prioritize what is important for people to know about your organization.

With a strong message in place, an organization is well-positioned to tell their story, and have it understood. From there, the work of creating a 21st Century communications distribution network to effectively deliver your message to your key audiences can begin.

Wednesday, November 19, 2014

The 2014 Elections

The gap between the electorate in a presidential year election and a non-presidential year continues to widen.  This year, in both Rhode Island and the country, the electorate was significantly older, whiter and more affluent than the voting population as a whole.  This is a reality that benefits Republicans.  In addition to the fact that this was the lowest turnout in 72 years, here are two more numbers that jumped out at me: Only 13% (or one out of eight) 18-29 year-olds voted this year.  Meanwhile, 68% of voters were 45 or older.  Contrast that with 2012, when 53% of voters were 45 or older.

This new reality creates wide two-year swings in what the electorate says it “wants,” since the electorate in Presidential years is so much different than in the “off-years.”  

At first glance, the fact that Democrats swept all the statewide and federal races in Rhode Island would seem to indicate that the state was immune to the national trend.  But in suburban and rural General Assembly “swing districts,” Republicans enjoyed some success, defeating an incumbent state senator and knocking off six House incumbents, a rarity.  Outside the urban core, Rhode Island bore a much closer resemblance to the country as a whole.  The trick for R.I. Republicans now will be to prepare when the pendulum swings back to a much less friendly “Presidential” electorate, which is coming their way in two years.

----------------------------------

They know who you are – and they are going to ring your doorbell, call your phone and even stalk you on the Internet (particularly Facebook) until you give them a reason to stop.  This was the year that the marriage between the “Big Data” tools of the two Obama presidential campaigns and plain old-fashioned door knocking by volunteers was consummated at the local level.  

Voters would be amazed (and maybe a little concerned) to learn what campaigns, even at a town council and school committee level, know about them, and how that information can now be sliced and diced in an effort to persuade them as individuals.  Why did that ad for so-and-so seem to appear for weeks on every web page you went to?  Because when you visited the campaign website, they dropped a cookie in your browser that “followed” you around the Internet, and showed you the ad everywhere you went.  The ad was probably targeted at you based on the pile of other information they had about you.  

In local campaigns it used to be enough to ring doorbells and send a few well-done pieces of direct mail.  By 2016 that will no longer be true – the candidate without a robust, smart, data-based on-line effort will be at a distinct disadvantage.  The good news for candidates is that it’s much more affordable than newspaper advertising, the now fading staple of local campaigns from the past.  The hard part - especially for local campaigns - will be to find someone who can manage the on-line effort, knows what they’re doing, and can do it consistently.  And even in this new age of technology, it still won’t work without those committed volunteers!

----------------------------

Those annoying robo-calls you got on your phone throughout the course of the campaign were not what you probably thought they were.  While they may sound like a cheap poll, they’re really not, since a poll conducted in that way has little value to a campaign as a measure of voter sentiment.  In reality, the calls are a cheap (pennies per call) way to get even more information out of you.  In this case, the sponsor of the call is trying to find out if you’re willing to identify yourself as a supporter, an opponent or still undecided.  If you want to the calls to stop, say you are “opposed” – the campaign will stop calling, since they don’t want to do anything that will encourage you to go to the polls.  The worst thing you can do?  Say you are undecided, or hang up.  They’ll just keep calling.

--------------------------

Speaking of polling - continuing a trend I first noted in 2010, for all practical purposes, it is now prohibitively expensive to get accurate polling data.  Campaigns do what they can because they have to, but any other poll, even from credible news sources, must be taken not with a grain, but with a mountain of salt.  It’s simply too hard and too expensive to get enough people to spend the 10-20 minutes per voter it takes to get a reasonably accurate gauge of voter sentiment.  Soon, only the best funded campaigns (or their related “Independent Expenditure” allies) will be able to afford truly accurate data.  The pollster who can figure out how to get accurate data in a world increasingly populated by cell-phone owners with limited attention spans will be much in demand.

-------------------------------

Thanks in large measure to the Citizens United decision, arguably the worst Supreme Court decision of my lifetime, campaign finance is now officially a sewer.  You can’t blame candidates and interests for doing what they must under the new rules to win, but the public is poorly served by a system that practically requires a candidate to have at least one (largely unregulated, often secretive) SuperPAC in their corner to make “Independent” Expenditures.  Meanwhile, however, expect this behavior to continue until voters impose some kind of penalty on candidates.  Although maybe there’s a connection between the low turnout and obscene amounts of money flying around.

---------------------------------------

That said, a ton of money does not necessarily buy success.  Further, you don’t need to have the “most” money, you just need to have “enough.”

----------------------------------------------------

A few years ago, I noted that competent, professional campaign staff had become essential for candidates (#5), a trend that has accelerated.  Two interesting things have happened since: 
First, relative to the resources available for down ballot statewide candidates (Lt. Governor, Secretary of State, Attorney General and Treasurer) in Rhode Island, these campaign professionals have become more expensive, and in many cases, prohibitively so.  There are few bargains to be had.  Meanwhile, and more important, as party primaries have increasingly become an exercise in appealing to a party’s base, partisan campaign professionals (there are no other kind) who win primaries have become less adept at pivoting towards general election voters who are persuaded by a more centrist message, and more likely to be turned off by partisan code words and talking points.  Candidates, beware.

-------------------------------

Only eight more years before Rhode Island is likely down to one statewide U.S. House seat.

------------------------------

The 2016 Presidential campaign will start before the snow melts.

Thursday, June 12, 2014

Father's Day

A few years ago my cousin Kevin published this piece about his father, who was my father’s oldest brother. It is a fitting tribute. 

Father’s generation created better world
By Kevin D. Preston

He was the eldest son of seven children of an immigrant family. Born to a sickly father and a mother who lived a long life and worked every day of it, he inherited his father’s health, and his mother’s determination.

He began working at the age of 9 and quit school at the age of 15 to help put bread on the table of his family during the depression. A soldier at 21, across the beach at Omaha at 24, married at 26, the father of three by age 30.

He was a high school dropout who was determined not only to support his family, but to ensure that his children would have a better start than he did. He had only two things going for him, an unlimited determination to work, and an uncanny ability to fix things.

For more than half a century he worked in mills and factories at home and overseas, fixing warplanes, machinery, jewelry and antiques as well as the toys of his children and grandchildren.

But he has always been far more than just a workhorse. He knew that beyond the everyday struggle for survival there were larger issues which affected the quality of the world he and his family would live in.

By reasoning more simple yet more powerful than that of his college educated children, he knew that his country must support programs to reduce poverty, because he knew what it was to be poor. He knew that discrimination was wrong because as a French-Canadian, and as a Catholic, he knew of the crippling effects of bigotry on both the victim, and the bigot.

And despite the fact that out of devotion to his church he sent his children to parochial schools, he always supported the proper funding of public schools, because having been deprived of a proper education, he knew its value.

Out of the Depression 

Although special to me, my father’s story is typical of that of many of his contemporaries. His was the generation that as children saw and felt the devastation wrought by the Great Depression. His was the generation that as young adults fought and beat Hitler and all he represented. His was the generation that built the greatest economic power the world had ever seen. His was the first generation in history to choose to share their newfound material success with the poor and their long cherished political rights with minority groups which had long been excluded from their enjoyment.

It has become the fashion among my generation to denigrate the condition of the world which we are inheriting; to focus on problems which remain rather than on progress already made.

True Test 

But the final measure of any generation is whether they leave the world better than they found it. And by that measure my father’s generation has been exceptional.

The simple fact is that the sons of my father’s generation are, on average, richer, healthier, better educated and will live longer than their fathers.

They eat better foods and work shorter hours.

More of them have the right to vote and to stand for public office. Unlike many of their fathers when at similar age, the sons can, for the most part, travel across this country, eat in restaurants, sleep in hotels, rent apartments, marry, play golf and do pretty much what they want regardless of their race or religion.

Inspiration 

It is by any standard an impressive list of accomplishments.

As a 10-year old boy in 1961, I watched on television the handing over of the reins of power from my grandfather’s generation to my father’s.

In his inaugural address 30 years ago President Kennedy said that “… the torch has been passed to a new generation of Americans, born in this century, tempered by war and disciplined by a hard and bitter peace.”

I knew even then that he was talking about millions of fathers, but in the eyes of this 10-year-old boy, my own father became my measure of what that generation was, and was to become.

Thanks Dad, and happy Father’s Day.


Kevin D. Preston of Attleboro is an attorney.

Monday, June 2, 2014

The On-Line E-Newsletter: You Can’t Live Without It

A respected non-profit recently sent out an RFP for a firm to create a newsletter for the organization. Although we rarely respond to RFPs at New Harbor Group, we strongly believe that having a newsletter is a good thing. Every organization should have some way to tell its story and update its key audience on a regular basis.

But here’s the problem: This particular group asked for proposals for putting together a print newsletter. Bad idea. If you don’t have a newsletter, and you’re thinking about starting one, here’s why an on-line edition is absolutely the only way to go:
  • Why pay for printing and postage? Who does that anymore? It’s simply a waste of money.
  • Keep it fresh. The on-line version won’t get stale waiting for that “one last story” to be submitted, then getting printed and then sitting around in the bulk mail trays at the post office.
  • Get (really valuable) information. An on-line version will give you data about your audiences – who opened the e-mail announcing the latest edition, and who hit “delete”; what stories are popular, and which ones aren’t. With a print newsletter, recipients may read it, or they may toss it – you’ll never know.
  • And speaking of data, your advertisers will be thrilled to know how many people visited their website – and perhaps even hired them or bought their product because someone clicked on their ad in your e-newsletter.
  • Keep the conversation going with social media. With your on-line newsletter you can actually engage with your audiences, either in the comment section, or even better – with social media. Your on-line e-newsletter is a great way to drive your readers to your social media pages (and your website itself), communicating with your audiences and finding out what they’re really thinking about you.
  • Also - it’s “green”.
Amazingly, the main objection to an on-line newsletter is usually this: Somewhere out there exists a mythical, 90-year old person who doesn’t have e-mail or use the Internet. Needless to say, I’m dubious.  After all, we live in a world where 84% of Baby Boomers – who are now well into their 60s – say that the Internet is an essential, like bread and milk in a Rhode Island snowstorm. I’ve never met this person who isn’t on-line, or learned their name, but this person is the reason why people tell me they can’t possibly put their newsletter on-line.

Nevertheless, if you’re in print and thinking about the transition to an on-line e-news, I have a solution for the “90-Year-Old Person Who Doesn’t Use the Internet” problem which works like a charm. I’d be glad to share it.

Our client the Rhode Island Society of CPAs has a very successful on-line newsletter called “What Counts.”  Not only does the Society enjoy all the benefits of an on-line newsletter I described above, they also defray nearly the complete cost of the publication with advertising, which you can see at the bottom of this – and every - page when you click here.

And yes, we are prepared for that “person who is not on-line.”  If that person calls the Society they will print this version, and mail it to him or her. First class.

If you have an existing print newsletter, you need to be thinking about how to transition to an on-line edition as soon as possible. If you don’t already have a newsletter, and are preparing to start one, the only place you should be publishing is on-line.

Friday, May 16, 2014

A Silver Lining to the Sterling Saga...


New Harbor Group is often asked to help a new client “deal with a potential problem.”   Many times, that “potential problem” is actually a significant problem and it’s time for some crisis management.   For those who haven’t been through one, managing a crisis isn’t just about how you react, but it’s also about how prepared you are for when one strikes.    

Hopefully, the next crises you or your company faces won’t be as potentially devastating as the one encountered by Adam Silver just a few months into his new job.   When Silver took over as the NBA Commissioner earlier this year, he probably never imagined that a member of his Board of Governors would be caught on tape delivering a racist diatribe (apparently a regular occurrence by some accounts).  Perhaps Silver knew beforehand that the LA Clippers owner, Donald Sterling, may have been a racist, but once Sterling’s rant hit the airwaves Mr. Silver was thrust into one of the League’s most serious and potentially damaging public relations incidents of all time.   

How Silver responded to the crisis would not only define his legacy as the League commissioner, but also impact the reputation of the League for years to come.

As most know by now, Mr. Silver responded swiftly, decisively, and effectively.  Not only did he decide to dole out the harshest possible penalty possible, but he was quick to offer a sincere apology, delivered a home run of a press conference, and even found himself looking like, something of a hero.   

What are some of the most important take ways you can learn from the Commish?
  1. Get the Facts:  Or as many of them as possible, as quickly as you can.   Silver’s first move was to authenticate the tape.  Once he knew it was in fact Sterling’s voice, he knew he had to act.

  2. Talk to Your Partners:  No one likes surprises, most importantly your key stakeholders.  One of Silver’s best moments in his press conference was deflecting a question asking if Mr. Sterling could remain an absentee owner if the Board of Governors didn’t force a sale.   Silver’s response: “I fully expect to get the support I need from the other NBA owners to remove him.”  Also to his credit, Silver was also in communication with several players, coaches and former players throughout his decision making process, likely gauging their reaction to different scenarios.

  3. Take Bold Action:  Mr. Silver weighed the pros and cons of taking big or little action, and perhaps even against some legal advice, he went big.  Whether Sterling can be forced to sell the team or not doesn’t really matter at this point.  Mr. Silver put his personal stamp of his new office on it by taking authoritative action.

  4. Get Out There:  Just three days after TMZ released its tape of Mr. Sterling, the Commissioner was holding a press conference in Manhattan to announce his decision.   It was pertinent as more and more stories were already percolating about Mr. Sterling’s racist history, more celebrities and athletes were urging protests, and the focus on the NBA playoffs was being seriously diluted.    (Candidly, 72 hours is a bit longer than we recommend waiting to respond, but Mr. Silver benefited from the story breaking on a Saturday.  Opting for a Tuesday presser gave his decision more attention than doing it on Sunday or first thing Monday.  The extra 24 hours was a gamble, but it paid off for him because he took the right action against Mr. Sterling.)

  5. Apologize:  After only being on the job for three months, Mr. Silver could have legitimately claimed non-culpability.  Fortunately, he did not.  He apologized for the comments made by Donald Sterling, expressed a deep sense of sympathy for those hurt by his comments, and displayed a genuine recognition of the time it will take to rectify this issue with the fanbase, sponsors and larger basketball community. 

  6. Hire the Experts Ahead of Time:  Probably the most important point of all - don’t wait until the emergency is upon you to have your crisis communications team in place.    One of Mr. Silver’s first calls upon hearing about the release of the Sterling tape, was to his crisis communications consultant who had been counseling the NBA for years.   
When a catastrophe hits, you want a person in place that knows you and you trust.   You don’t have time to look for one or second-guess their advice.   You need someone that can help you navigate the storm and help you defuse the situation.  

Tuesday, November 19, 2013

If today’s media covered the Gettysburg Address…

President Lincoln’s Remarks at Cemetery Dedication Disappointing
---
President’s address, only 3 Minutes Long, Lacked Substance

It was the greatest battle ever fought to date on the continent - over 50,000 casualties were suffered.  So many of those in attendance at the dedication of the Gettysburg Nations Cemetery yesterday were somewhat taken aback by President Lincoln’s address to the crowd in this small southern Pennsylvania town.

In a three minute speech that contained only ten sentences, Lincoln offered nothing new in the way of strategy or a plan for winning the war, now approaching its fourth year.

‘There was no plan offered here today,” said one pundit. “It was just another speech from another politician.”

“Somehow, I expected more from him,” he added.

The President’s uninspired performance was judged by some to be a reflection of the Union effort in the battle at Gettysburg earlier this summer, and the Northern campaign as a whole.  Despite a major loss of life suffered by Union forces, the battle did not end in a decisive Federal victory.  In fact, many experts have severely criticized the Union Commander, Gen. George Meade, for his decision allowing Gen. Robert E. Lee’s crippled Army of Northern Virginia to escape across the Potomac River in the two week period following the battle. Lincoln did not address this issue in his speech.

The battle, culminating the second major Confederate invasion of Northern territory in as many years, was within minutes of becoming a catastrophic Federal defeat at several points.

Some military consultants say Lee’s defeat was due only to the absence of Gen. Thomas E. “Stonewall” Jackson, who died two months before Gettysburg at the Battle of Chancellorsville. 

The irony of the circumstances surrounding Jackson’s death was not lost on one expert at yesterday’s ceremony.

“It wasn’t even Union troops who killed Jackson,” chuckled the observer. “He was accidentally killed by his own men.”

This fact only reinforces the widespread belief that Northern forces, who have consistently outnumbered Confederate units throughout the war, can only win when Southern troops present them with a “can’t miss” opportunity to do so.

“Even then, it’s an iffy proposition,” the consultant added.

With Election Day less than a year away, most political experts saw today’s speech as a way for Lincoln, who only received 39% of the vote in 1860, to galvanize support. Most polls show the President trailing badly, and many Northerners have grown weary of the fight, as this summer’s draft riots in New York City showed.

“Lincoln’s political prospects are dim, and his lackluster performance today didn’t help him any,” said one Washington-based consultant. “He missed a golden opportunity to crystallize the case for the Union, outline a strategic plan for victory and help his re-election bid.”

Observers noted yesterday that even after the Federal victory at Vicksburg, touted by Lincoln as “cutting the Confederacy in two,” the South fights on ably and effectively.

Instead, the President offered a speech laden with platitudes about the battle and its fallen heroes. Short on facts and substance, Lincoln made no reference even to the number of Union dead felled at the battle. His awkward gimmick of “four score and seven years ago,” a device he used to note the 87 years which have passed since the signing of the Declaration of Independence, fell flat.

“The world will little note nor long remember what we say here,” Lincoln said. From the reaction to his speech, the President was right on both counts.

Nov. 20, 1863

Wednesday, September 25, 2013

The Patriots Were Ready in a Crisis

Loyalty is a two way street.  For instance, when a football team signs a player to a 7-year, $40 million contract, with $26.5 million of that guaranteed to the player, the team has a reasonable expectation that the player will not be indicted for first degree murder.

Aaron Hernandez didn’t keep up his end of the bargain this summer. As a result, the Patriots moved quickly and effectively to sever their relationship with him. Here’s how they got it right:

They Were Decisive

It’s rare for pro athletes to pay a price on the field, and in their wallets, for brushes with the law – particularly in the NFL.  What usually transpires is an elaborate rationalization of “errors in judgment” “regret", faux-“responsibility”, “let the process play itself out” - or just plain gibberish. 

The Patriots did none of that (although there was an initial stumble by owner Bob Kraft.)  Certainly the severity of the charge against Hernandez helped clarify their thinking, but the team didn’t indulge in the usual language of equivocation. They just cut him.

What makes this even more impressive is that according to media reports, had Hernandez been under contract and unable to play because he was in jail or suspended by the league, the Patriots might have been able to save up to $37 million.

They Understood that a Crisis is not the Right Time to Save Money

The Patriots calculated that the damage to the team’s brand was greater than the millions of dollars that it would cost them to cut Hernandez, plus the cost of some free uniform jerseys (see below).  Similar to US Airways brilliant handling of its passengers after one of their planes landed in the Hudson a few years ago, the Pats understood the costs and made the (correct) decision to pay them. 

They Were Prepared

The biggest enemy of preparedness is indecision.  Since the Patriots had taken the time to think things through and arrive at a decision, they were ready to act without delay when Hernandez was arrested.

It’s a Rule: The Media Needs Someone to “Take Responsibility”

The Patriots realized that, and Bill Belichick got the job.  "I'm primarily responsible for the people that we bring into the football operation.” Belichick had characteristically left you wondering about the depth of his sincerity, but he had checked the “responsibility” box, and defused the line of questioning.  (Conversation for another day:  You have to wonder how effective this would be if the Coach didn’t have three Super Bowl rings and a .729 winning percentage in New England.)

They Didn’t Add Fuel to the Fire

In this case, the Patriots got a “Twofer”, because nobody can remove fuel from a fire like Bill Belichick (see above).  Belichick’s unique ability to stick to his message worked well here.

Nobody Said “No Comment”

No comment – the worst possible thing you can say, at least explicitly.  In this case, particularly in the immediate aftermath, Belichick effectively delivered the “no comment” message, but in the most effective way –
  • “I think we already addressed that.”
  • “I don’t have anything further on that.”  
  • “I’m not going to dwell on that.”  
  • “I’ve got to focus on winning for our football team.”
  • Etc.

The media knew they weren’t going to get anything more out of him, so they stopped asking.  And the fire goes out.

They Got a Little Lucky

Fortune favors the prepared they say, and in this case, the Patriots preparation yielded a little bit of luck: on the same day Hernandez was arrested and the Patriots cut him, the U.S. Supreme Court issued its long awaited ruling regarding the Defense of Marriage Act (DOMA).  This helped reduce the intensity of the media spotlight on Hernandez, at least for that crucial day. If the Patriots had been indecisive and not prepared to act in the immediate aftermath of Hernadez’ arrest they would not have benefited from the dilution of the media attention created by the DOMA ruling.

They Thought of Practically Everything

Giving yourself enough time to think clearly in a crisis can pay enormous dividends.  In this case, the Hernandez arrest was actually more about the Patriot’s brand than anything else – including winning on the field.  The Patriots realized quickly that in a region where almost everyone owns a player game jersey it would be damaging to have thousands of people walking around wearing the team jersey of an accused murderer who was no longer on the team.

They acted quickly to get the Hernandez jerseys off the street by offering a free replacement at the Gillette Stadium gift shop.  (At the same time they also no doubt collected an enormous amount of very valuable consumer data about fans passionate enough about the team to drive to Foxboro to get new jerseys.)

“We know that children love wearing their Patriots jerseys, but may not understand why parents don’t want them wearing their Hernandez jerseys anymore,” Patriots spokesperson Stacey James told the media. “We hope this opportunity to exchange those jerseys at the Patriots ProShop for another player’s jersey will be well-received by parents.”

Post Game

In the aftermath of the team’s success in countering the crisis communications challenges raised by the Hernandez case, Coach Belichick would be justified in offering his standard analysis after a Pats win:  “I think we executed some things well today.  Anything else?  Thank you.”