Everyday PR

UPDATE – May 5, 2009:  Suspension over – Phelps competitively races again.  Good luck with the competition and all other future decisions.

Feb. 15, 2009 – Michael Phelps’s split second decision cost him a lot. That decision forced executives of a century-old company to evaluate their relationship that began only months ago. Some critics point to other sports figures, even presidents, in an effort for people to lighten up on the Olympic champion. But there’s a big difference when gobs of money and branding are involved.

The cost of partying to Michael Phelps was millions.

The 42nd president acknowledged his past experience with alcohol, the 43rd with marijuana, and the 44th with cocaine. The biggest difference is that when these men made the decision to partake, they weren’t under contracts that involved money, branding and sales. They didn’t sign something that likely had a morality clause in it to protect said money, branding and sales.

According to Mark Conrad, law professor at New York’s Fordam University, a moral clause is “an essential component of endorsement contracts in professional sports because the athlete is under constant scrutiny from the public and the media. Transgressions that may occur could cause embarrassment for the firm employing the services of the athlete.”

Phelps embarrassed Kellogg, so the food giant took the timely opportunity not to renew its sponsorship with the swimmer. The company didn’t say much except that Phelps’s “most recent behavior is not consistent with the image of Kellogg.” Of course it’s not. Using drugs doesn’t make branding sense at all for that sponsor.

As long as you’re in the public eye, you can’t be too careful. Every day is a new opportunity to positively or negatively contribute to your reputation.

I feel his pain.  That’s exactly what I thought when I heard Robert Gibbs, President Obama’s press secretary, address a group of reporters the day that Senator Tom Daschle withdrew his nomination as Secretary of Health and Human Services.  The poor guy – Gibbs, not Daschle.  Having been on the firing line of reporters many times, I wouldn’t wish that pain on anybody.  The experience reflects poorly on the spokesperson and the one for whom she’s speaking.

If you don’t have the facts, spokespeople often have nothing to say.

Being a spokesperson of any organization is a lot easier said than done. And when the spokesperson and his boss aren’t in sync on facts and key points – even in non-controversial situations – it can be a free fall of credibility for everyone involved. The BFFs of those in the spotlight suddenly vanish.

Former President Ronald Reagan understood this. He included his spokesmen during briefings and meetings – anything in which the media could ask a question. The president’s relationship with spokesman Marlin Fitzwater was so close that Fitzwater could speak with confidence to the press on just about anything, including facts, figures and feelings. The same relationship existed between President George W. Bush and Ari Fleisher in the early 2000s. That’s the ideal.

If companies want consistency in their credibility, top executives must work with their spokespeople BEFORE the media ask questions. A five-minute conversation in the hallway between the CEO and the PR person can go a long way toward ensuring that key messages are accurately and confidently communicated. Considering today’s multiple means of communications, it’s a conversation that can and should take place every day.