Remember Dave Carroll?  Or more importantly – remember “United Breaks Guitars?” I bet United Airlines does – they lost hundreds of millions of dollars in market capitalization after this song became a huge viral hit on Youtube:

‘United Breaks Guitars’ became a veritable anthem for all that is wrong with big, corporate North America, ignoring the ‘normal, everyman.’  It became a microcosm of incredibly poor customer service and corporate arrogance.

Which is why this is just so… awkward?  Tragic?  Funny?  You can’t make up what I’m about to tell you folks:  “On a recent trip to Denver to speak to customer service executives, “this Everyman symbol of the aggrieved traveler was treated, well, like just another customer,” Christine Negroni wrote for The New York Times. “United lost his bag.”

Let me emphasize a point here.  United Airlines LOST the one bag they can’t afford to lose.

Seriously – if I was United Airlines, I’d treat Dave Carroll’s bags with slightly more care than the nuclear football. 

Wow.  Just… wow.  Stand by – I sense a third version of his song in the making.

An Ontario turkey grower, Hybrid Turkeys, has reported the first case of turkey-born H1N1 influenza in North America.

Releasing bad news always comes with a hearty case of the “Oh, Crud!’s” for the communicators.  As someone who’s had to face a hostile or alarmed media audience more than once, my heart goes out to the person responsible for breaking the news.

This is a classic case of a company which hasn’t done anything wrong, but is now instantly thrown into the spotlight.  Not only are their products being questioned, so are their practices, procedures and policies.  It gets even worse if you are one of the ‘afflicted competitors’ – your products get questioned despite the fact you clearly haven’t done anything.

There’s just no getting around it – people are having a few bad days in the turkey industry.  But what can the different players do differently, in order to keep their pain to a minimum?

—–

Ontario Turkey Farmers – Don’t ignore the problem
Given the timing of the announcement (just as we head into the seasonal ‘turkey rush), this is a great time for OTF to welcome the spotlight, and reassure customers that “turkeys are absolutely safe to eat.”  But unfortunately, 18 hours after the initial news release hit the media, their website is silent.  Ignoring aproblem isn’t going to make it go away.   If nothing else, even a link to the news releases prepared by the Ontario Ministry of Agriculture or the grower, Hybrid Turkeys, would help, and is a quick, easy fix.

(UPDATE – as of 11am, TFO has updated their website.  And in a fantastic piece of messaging (see below for the alternative,) the key message is a great one: Turkey meat is safe.) Kudos to the Turkey Farmers of Canada.)

Ontario Government – Don’t deny a negative with a negative
The Ontario Ministry of Agriculture, Food and Rural Affairs (OMAFRA) has a link on their main page to a news release.  And they come close to solving a critical consumer question – but they fail in delivery.  The easiest, deadliest trap for any communicator is denying a negative allegation with a negative answer.  (Remember “I am not a crook,” or “I did not have sex with that woman, Miss Lewinsky?” )

What they said: “Food safety is not at risk. No birds or eggs from this facility have entered the food chain.”

What they should have said: “Eating turkeys continues to be safe.  The turkeys from this facility will remain on this farm, and out of the food chain, in order to guarantee consumer safety.”

Why are negatives so deadly?  Negatives confirm the original allegation in the mind of the questioner.  A negative statement is far more memorable than apositive – and that’s exactly what you don’t want when you’re dealing with a crisis of confidence.

Hybrid Turkeys – Playing too close to the chest
I understand why Hybrid doesn’t want the media poking around their barns.  But not disclosing the location of the barn in question does two things, and neither of them are particularly good… a) it gives the media something to ‘whack’ the company with, and b) it casts every facility in their operation under the same cloud.

Here’s a harsh reality:  Nothing upsets a reporter quicker than discovering a news source is withholding information.  Understandably, Hybrid doesn’t want ‘unclean’ tv crews poking around their facilities.

Rather than just not disclosing, Hybrid can create their own “B-Roll” footage – broadcast quality background material showing the facility in question.  Show rows of neat, orderly, happy turkeys.  Show some of the biosecurity measures in place.  A two minute video clip can be made available to reporters, along with the following caveat: “We understand you would like to show the facility in question.  Strict biosecurity measures are in place to protect both the health of the animals, as well as the health of ordinary people.  We respectfully request that non-authorized visitors refrain from visiting the operation in question.  In lieu of your visit, we are pleased to offer background footage of the facility, and are more than happy to answer any of your questions.

Being proactive like that gives the appearance of openness, without the hassle of unauthorized visitors.  It also lets Hybrid release information under THEIR control.

—–

All in all – not a bad job at all.  But implementing a few simple ideas improves a volatile situation, and makes the tough pill just a bit easier to swallow.

I am one of the only crisis communication experts I know who does not like ‘emergency plans.’

I’ve seen countless blog posts and industry articles lamenting the lack of good emergency plans. Here in Canada, one of the Provincial Governments is considering forcing non-government businesses to prepare emergency plans. I have helped organizations large and small prepare emergency plans… but I always say the same thing: “Chances are good that when you need it, this won’t do you any good.”

I have actually heard people gasp, out loud, when I say that. For a crisis communications consultant, crapping on an emergency plan is considered sacrilegious, equivalent to a Catholic Priest skipping his tour of the Vatican and going to the amusement park instead.

Remember, I make my money teaching businesses how to communicate more effectively in the event of a crisis.  So why on earth would I NOT like emergency plans?  The answer, to be blunt?  They are, with few exceptions, a complete waste of time.

What is far more useful is creating a crisis communications mindset. And a crisis communications mindset is nowhere near the same thing as an emergency plan.

If an ‘emergency plan’ causes an organization to sit up, adopt a wholesale rethink of the way they do things and determine how they can do better, that’s fantastic.  I’ll happily eat my words.  Unfortunately, far too often, an emergency plan does exactly the opposite… they fool the company into thinking their bases are covered.

One is a constant, perpetual state of mind. The other is a piece of paper.  One is a way of doing things.  The other is a way that things could, in theory, be done.

Let me help break it down:

- Discovering your building is on fire, you call your managers at 3am since you have their home numbers programmed into your personal cell phone:  crisis mindset.

- Discovering your building is on fire, you drive to the scene, only to recognize that your emergency plan is now ashes:  emergency plan.

—–

- Gathering your top people around to simulate emergencies on a regular basis, in order to best determine next steps: crisis mindset.

- Hiring a PR consultant to help you write a book, which gets put in a filing cabinet: emergency plan.

—–

- Routinely having team meetings so other members of the team know what all the arms of an organization are up to, or simply letting your tool and die workers learn how to operate a different type of machine so they can fill in “just in case:” crisis mindset.

- Not having any real idea what the person in the next cubicle does, or how he or she does it: emergency plan.

—

A crisis mindset means your employees have a fire drill on a regular basis. An emergency plan means you discussed what a fire drill would look like.

An emergency plan poorly thought out is more dangerous than simply not having one. It’s rather akin to hanging empty fire extinguishers on the wall.  All they do is act as wall decorations, while providing a false sense of security.

When Johnson and Johnson decided to institute a nationwide recall of tylenol, that wasn’t drawn up in an emergency plan.  Same with Maple Leaf deciding to recall packaged meats. These are decisions resulting from a crisis mindset – and a steadfast determination to do ‘what is right.’

Formal plans are a great tool. They can spark an intellectual discussion.  They can act as a crutch when you need something to lean on.  Unfortunately, in the event of a true crisis, it’s very hard to run with crutches.

High speed rail between Toronto’s Union Station and Pearson Airport has been on everyone’s wish list for decades.

And I truly mean everyone – all three levels of government have promised to ‘explore the issue.’ Several studies have spent several millions of dollars exploring possible routes, timetables, scheduling and logistics.

Why hasn’t it happened yet?  Well, there’s the obvious issue, money.  But I have to wonder if it’s also in no small part to idiotic decisions like this.

Forgive me, but you’ve got the money lined up.  The link could remove 5 million people from the roads each and every year… but “18 conditions stipulated by the Ministry of the Environment could set the plan back.”

One of those conditions?  “The trains must use clean technology that is still in development.”

So to clarify – the Ministry of the Provincial Government responsible for cleaning up the environment says in order to take advantage of new, environmentally friendly transportation, you have to use a non-existent engine.

“John Gerretsen, Minister of the Environment, says he believes the technology SHOULD be complete by 2015.”  Pardon me if I don’t hold my breath.

Does anyone want to take odds on whether or not our grandchildren will be complaining about the lack of high-speed rail between Union and Pearson?

It started as a simple solution to a simple problem:  14 year old William Kamkwamba wanted to read at night.

Unfortunately, William lived in Malawi, and had no access to electricity to power a light bulb.  So what did he do?  He built a windmill.

That’s impressive enough for any 14 year old… but he did it using old pvc pipe, a collection of beer bottle caps, some rusty car parts and pieces of tree.  And it worked.

One windmill became three, and William not only was able to read at night, but he was able to pump water out of the ground, saving he and his family from starving to death.  He began to carve for himself a better life, using ingenuity and technology.

That was until his neighbours came by and demanded that he take the windmill down.  It was in the midst of a nasty drought, and his neighbours, heavily superstitious at the best of times, had a very good reason for wanting the windmills taken down… they blamed his windmill witchcraft for blowing away the rain clouds.

It makes us shake our head.  This was clearly a case of technology being used to better peoples lives, being scared away for no rational reason other than “this might be the reason and so therefore, in the interest of being prudent, we’ll remove the technology.”  What we mock as being ridiculous is legitimate logic, according to William’s neighbours.

Thankfully, William persevered.  His windmill has survived, his family has diversified their crops, and William can read at night.  He has expanded his windmill network, and as a result, his little village of 60 houses now has clean drinking water and a better life.

Mull this over the next time someone says the precautionary principal is simply “being prudent.”