BulletProof » Featured

Latest Study: BPA May Spell Big Problems for Plastic Bottle Manufacturers

David Bartlett — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 18:47:08 +0000

Yesterday, the Yale School of Medicine released a study that once again raises questions about the safety of a chemical commonly found in everyday plastics.

The potential dangers associated with Bisphenol A, or BPA, have long been the subject of debate among regulators, scientists, consumer groups, and the manufacturers that produce nearly 7 billion pounds of BPA each year. But with the revelation that exposure to EPA-accepted levels of the chemical has caused brain function and mood disorders in monkeys, the widespread public anxiety that - until now - has been largely absent from the issue seems poised to become significant and worrisome to manufacturers.

BPA, which is used to make polycarbonate products such as clear plastic baby bottles, had recently been found to cause cancer and reproductive damage in some animals. But other than stating that the chemical "raises some concerns" in July of 2007, government agencies such as the NIH, the FDA and the EPA took no action - based largely on findings from industry-subsidized studies that deemed appropriate use of the chemical safe.

Now, however, with recent product safety embarrassments over toys and pet food still fresh in the public' s mind, regulators may have no choice but to reverse their position on BPA and join the already swelling ranks of plastic industry critics. The time is now for plastic manufacturers to begin the work of bulletproofing their brands for imminent attack.

Companies that have already begun to move away from the chemical need to highlight the measures they have taken to protect the public from BPA exposure. Whether they have decreased the amount of BPA in their products, developed new production formulas that diminish the risks, or stopped using the chemical altogether, these companies need to make their leadership position on the issue known.

Companies that have resisted change to date need to enlist their own third-party advocates as allies. Respected and credible doctors, chemists, and industry leaders need to be front and center in the public eye - downplaying the risks, refuting the danger hypothesis, and warning parents against the dangers of "headline parenting," even as they affirm their commitment to identify solutions that will one day put the issue to rest.

Most important - no matter how much action a particular plastic manufacturer has taken on BPA - it is absolutely imperative that the company' s commitment to the safety and well-being of its consumers is never in doubt. BPA is a subject that will increasingly generate emotional responses and instant impressions. As such, product safety and emotional concern must be the underlying theme of each and every message deployed throughout the lifecycle of the crisis.

Effective Communication can Dim the Effects of Cyber Terrorism

Richard Levick — Thu, 04 Sep 2008 15:03:51 +0000

It' s a sad but true reality of the 21st Century that companies and governments must make cyber-crime part of their crisis communications plans.

There has long been paranoia in the international business, information technology, and law enforcement communities surrounding hackers' ability to invade private enterprise databases - and as such, best practices for communicating during such an event are proliferating every aspect of the global economy.

But as a recent report from the British Government indicates, the potential of state-sponsored terrorists hacking into nuclear power plants and other utilities - not to mention pipelines, port security operations, air traffic control systems, or even traffic light networks - signals the need for government to follow the crisis communications template provided by business.

In order to diminish the chaos and fear that acts of cyber-terrorism are designed to incite, there must be a detailed internal and external communications function included in any cyber-terrorism plan developed for a government or quasi-public institution.

After all, if private companies are putting so much thought into how they' ll deal with nervous consumers, angry investors, and wary regulators should a few million credit card numbers be lost, the government overseers of power plants, air traffic control systems, and electricity grids ought to be doing the same to prepare for exponentially higher levels of public anxiety should any of those targets fall victim to cyber-attack.

Communications professionals must be ready to instantly and seamlessly work with law enforcement officials and investigators to prevent widespread panic in the event of cyber-terrorist attack. In addition to the local and regional communications needs that have to be addressed in virtual real time, there are also national and international ramifications that demand the careful planning and execution that only trained crisis communications professionals can bring to the table.

Failing to give communications enough weight in a cyber-terrorism crisis plan will only further enable terrorists to achieve the turmoil and pandemonium that is their stated goal. Whereas preparing to effectively engage the public in the event of an attack is one of the first steps towards dimming the threat that cyber-terrorists pose

Produce Irradiation May Wilt Without a PR Campaign

Gene Grabowski — Wed, 03 Sep 2008 17:42:02 +0000

Critics of the food industry, including the Center for Science in the Public Interest and The San Francisco Chronicle, are questioning the Food and Drug Administration' s recent decision to allow irradiation of lettuce and spinach following devastating outbreaks of food-borne illness connected with those raw foods. The naysayers are scoffing at the idea of using irradiation, saying that it' s a distraction from what they see as the real problem - a lack of adequate resources to police the nation' s food supply.

They note that even though irradiation kills dangerous bacteria like E. coli, U.S. consumers have largely rejected the idea of irradiated meat, which was approved in 2000 after E. coli outbreaks threatened the safety of ground beef. In the spirit of full disclosure, I served as Vice President of Communications and Marketing at the Grocery Manufacturers Association and was a national spokesman in favor of ground beef irradiation when it was first introduced.

While irradiation isn' t the silver bullet to stop outbreaks of food-borne illness, most scientists agree that using this technological weapon in the war for food safety makes sense. But the FDA and the food industry may have made a critical mistake in announcing approval of produce irradiation without a vigorous nationwide communications effort to inform people about its benefits.

As a first step, where are the YouTube videos showing how the produce would be irradiated? Where are the Internet and newspaper photos showing how produce is unaffected by irradiation? Where are the renowned scientists and food-safety experts who should be speaking in print and broadcast interviews to reassure consumers about the effectiveness of irradiating produce?

Before announcing anything this controversial and important to the lives of American families, a comprehensive campaign to educate people is imperative. Otherwise, the investment in irradiation may amount to another wilted opportunity.

These Days, Politicians Get Away With Everything

David Bartlett — Wed, 27 Aug 2008 14:33:25 +0000

With the Democratic Convention in full swing, I' m reminded of a New York Times op-ed published by Michael Kinsley a few weeks back that gently pokes fun at the empty words and doublespeak found in political party platforms. Kinsley' s criticism is aimed at politicians, but it should be taken seriously by anyone facing a high stakes communications challenge.

We let politicians get away with this kind of "spin" in part because we no longer hold them to a particularly high standard. We pretty much expect politicians to take liberties with truth and common sense. For the most part we let them get away with it.

But the public expects non-politicians to say what they mean, mean what they say, and say it in a way we can easily understand and relate to. In the real world - the world beyond politics - empty words and cleverly ambiguous phrases send a negative message that you don' t respect the intelligence of your audience.

It is tempting to think that because politicians routinely get away with clever spin, we can too. But it is far better to follow Aristotle' s sage advice and ensure that any message we deliver will ring true to the audience we are trying to reach.

When the chips are down and the stakes are high, flip flops, half-truths, and empty words don' t work. In crisis situations, effective messages must do more than show concern and commitment. As Kinsley' s review of the 2008 Democratic Party platform illustrates, politicians are very good at expressing concern and commitment. But for non-political messages to be effective they must also demonstrate truth and action.

In this skeptical age, the public won' t let you get away with anything less.

A â€œProgressiveâ€ Call for a â€œRegressiveâ€ Tax

Richard Levick — Tue, 26 Aug 2008 14:33:28 +0000

In an opinion piece published in yesterday' s Washington Post, environmental lawyer Dusty Horwitt proposed the idea of a "progressive" tax by which energy prices would be "kept at a consistently high level" in order to "make the technologies that overproduce information more expensive and less widespread."

Why is an environmental lawyer making a tangential case for new energy taxes by targeting information technologies? Because, as Horwitt opines, an information overload created by blogs and other online media is strangling American democracy.

Maybe it' s just me, but reversing a trend by which millions of Americans are now able to make educated decisions about what they buy, how they behave, and what they believe doesn' t sound like democracy. In fact, it sounds like just the opposite.

There' s a reason that Johannes Gutenberg, who invented the world' s first printing press in 1450, was ranked first on Time Magazine' s list of the Most Important People of the Millennium. It' s because there is nothing more important to personal freedom, liberty, and the expansion of democratic values than access to information.

In this author' s humble opinion, blogs and other online media are the printing presses of the 21st Century. And rather than limit the use of, and access to, vital information technologies - either by regulation or economic means - we should be working to identify ways to bring more Americans into the fold.

The Internet isn' t just a source of information; it is hyper-democratic in and of itself. It' s a virtual world where each of us has an equal voice and an equal say - where citizen journalists, rather than those who control the editorial desk, are increasingly enabling people the world over to make their own decisions about what is worthy of our attention and what is not.

As such, the best course of action for those that are concerned about the growing power of blogs and overabundance of information they provide is to engage the online community with their own messages; not to tax the newly-inspired free speech of the Internet.

Thomas Jefferson once said that "Information is the currency of democracy." Dusty Horwitt - whose own environmental movement has been one of the biggest beneficaries of the proliferation of Information Age technologies - would be wise to reflect upon those words.

Your New Creative Department â€“ Your Customers

Gene Grabowski — Thu, 14 Aug 2008 15:20:52 +0000

In another sign that companies are increasingly using the Web to solicit their customers for creative ideas, Crest toothpaste is asking YouTube fans to develop the slogan for its new wintergreen ice flavor.

From September 15 through October 17, consumers are invited to submit videos featuring their take on the brand in 10 words or less. The winning phrase will be used in late fall and winter television spots advertising the new flavor. And to pique interest in the online contest, Proctor and Gamble has enlisted its pitchman TV Chef Emeril Lagasse to lead a panel of judges evaluating contestants as they perform their catch phrase American Idol style.

Just about every branding and marketing campaign now includes an essential online element that is sometimes the centerpiece of the entire effort. Why? Because with the availability of technology that allows for two-way communication with your customers - who are increasingly well-informed and active on blogs and sites like Facebook and YouTube - it' s easy to reach them for instantaneous feedback.

Furthermore, the totality of your consumers are cumulatively often much more creative than your in-house ad people and the creative types at your advertising agency. Add to the mix the fact that these kinds of innovative communications techniques create their own traditional media and you have an irresistible business case.

Companies that ignore or downplay this form of communicating directly with their customers and critics risk being forgotten in an age when brand loyalty lasts about as long as it takes to view a viral video.

More is Expected if Whole Foods Is to Protect the Promise of Its Brand

Gene Grabowski — Tue, 12 Aug 2008 21:57:06 +0000

Say it ain' t so! Whole Foods Market, the top U.S. organic foods retailer, has announced a recall of all the fresh ground beef it sold between June 2 and August 6 due to potential E. coli contamination. This significant event threatens to undermine the promise of the Whole Foods brand - that is, consumers may pay more for its products but can expect food that is fresher, healthier, and safer in return.

Whole Foods said the ground beef in question came from Coleman Natural Beef, whose Nebraska Beef processing plant was previously subject to a nationwide recall for E. coli 0157:H7. The problem here isn' t just the contamination, but the fact that Coleman is the same source of ground beef for "ordinary" supermarkets that don' t present the same implied promise as the Whole Foods brand.

To protect its brand and preserve its differentiation in the marketplace, Whole Foods must act quickly and transparently, reassuring its customers that the quality of its food remains a cut above other supermarkets. So far, Whole Foods has stated that it has begun an internal investigation after receiving "assurances from Coleman Natural Beef that no product delivered to Whole Foods Market was linked to the (previous) recall of Nebraska Beef products." But much more must be done to meet the expectations of Whole Foods customers.

1. First, Whole Foods needs to quickly acknowledge responsibility for the mishap and outline on its Website and in media statements the specific steps it is taking to ensure that such a recall doesn' t reoccur. It should assign responsibility for that effort to an individual from within the company - or bring in an outside expert for the job - and make that person known to its customers.

2. Second, Whole Foods needs to launch an aggressive blog campaign to counter the attacks that have surfaced in blog posts that note the alleged hypocrisy of Whole Foods by commenting on "how the mighty have fallen" and referring to the high prices at the supermarket known in some circles as "Whole Paycheck."

3. And third, Whole Foods needs to identify and recruit third-party allies from among food-safety experts, suppliers, and public officials to defend the retailer in the news media and on the Internet. Right now, the terse public statements issued from its headquarters in Austin, Texas, aren' t reassuring to consumers who expect more from their favorite organic food retailer.

With so many food recalls occurring so often nowadays, these basic communications steps should be part of any crisis communications plan. But first, companies must recognize when they are in crisis. Erosion of your brand is the greatest business crisis of all.

More than Just the Facts

David Bartlett — Wed, 06 Aug 2008 21:29:53 +0000

They say that three' s the charm. Not for Australia' s Qantas Airways. Three widely reported safety incidents in as many weeks have passengers and Qantas employees concerned and Australian safety authorities on alert.

Qantas is actually among the world' s safest air carriers, with not a single fatal accident in almost 90 years of commercial operation. But that was yesterday. Now, with three emergency landings one after another putting Qantas in the news, outgoing CEO Geoff Dixon admits the airline has some work to do restoring its reputation.

Australian regulators have now begun an emergency review of Qantas safety procedures. Qantas employees are expressing concern. The head of the Australian flight attendants union has asked for a meeting with Qantas officials to discuss the situation. And consumers are obviously wary.

Thus far, however, Qantas is taking the right approach to easing its stakeholders' minds. Company officials responded to the first incident by ordering an immediate inspection of the oxygen canisters in all its 747 airliners. Qantas would have been perfectly justified to wait until it had more information before undertaking such a sweeping inspection, but executives resisted that temptation.

Following one of the most basic principles of crisis communication, Qantas moved quickly to reassure nervous passengers with expressions of concern, commitment, and above all, fast action.

If Qantas were making its case on its record alone, as unassailable as that record may be, the company would be failing to offer the necessary emotional reassurances that an audience concerned about its safety needs to hear. Simply telling customers that they are worried about all the wrong things (air travel is still, by far, the safest mode of transportation on the planet and Qantas' safety record is the envy of the industry) is never much help to a company that is dealing with an unexpected flood of scary headlines and graphic YouTube videos. In such a situation, you have to take action and be seen doing it - and that is precisely what the embattled airline has done.

Qantas may be a rookie in the crisis game; but, thus far, the company is handling newfound safety concerns like an old pro.

Apple’s Mobile Mess

Gene Grabowski — Mon, 04 Aug 2008 21:25:18 +0000

The latest wave of disappointment in Apple' s iPhone 3G saga came with the launch of MobileMe a few weeks back. As users reported server outages and lost e-mails, Apple remained quiet - issuing a terse, one-sentence statement online and eventually sending an apology e-mail to subscribers a few days later.

To date, the company still has not answered the increasingly angry demands for information from its loyal customers and has stiff-armed inquiring news media. As a result, the mainstream media is telling Apple' s story on its own and hordes of bloggers are posting customer war stories about battling MobileMe support.

Apple' s initial reaction highlights a hole in its otherwise seamless marketing. Great firms like Apple can market when products work without a hitch. But when problems arise, the best companies know how to respond in ways that not only satisfy customers, but actually help the brand grow as a result of crisis.

It' s time for Apple to tune into the discourse. Keeping a pulse on public opinion enables a company to take necessary steps in real time and provides an opportunity to shape, if not change, the conversation. Being proactive and transparent earns points with customers and demonstrates concern.

The MobileMe Blog that Apple has finally established is a great start - especially considering the tech savvy that Apple customers are famous for. Recent data from EMM Group showing that 13% of dissatisfied customers tell at least 20 other people about the problems they experience makes online social network interaction - where most of these conversations take place in the Information Age - a must for such a company.

There' s no doubt that the iPhone 3G will survive this current crisis and most likely thrive in the months to come. But the issue is larger than just one product. Apple has the chance to transform a product crisis into an opportunity to further brand itself as responsive to customers' needs. It' s a chance the company shouldn' t let slip by.

More Bad News

Gene Grabowski — Mon, 28 Jul 2008 13:09:56 +0000

As newspapers struggle to remain relevant and profitable in the midst of the new media revolution, their reforms are driving veteran reporters and editors to another line of work.

Last year, when real estate mogul Sam Zell stepped in to buy the debt-ridden Tribune Company newspaper empire, few thought it would lead to the departure of industry pinnacles like The Los Angeles Times' David Hiller and The Chicago Tribune' s Ann Marie Lipinski.

But that is precisely what happened on Monday - and as a result, stakeholders in an industry already reeling from steep declines in readership and revenue now have yet another reason to be dreading what the future likely holds in store.

When leaders like Hiller or Lipinski resign from high-profile posts without any concerns as to personal performance or ability, it sends shockwaves throughout entire industries that are felt by investors, employees, and customers alike.

In response, it is imperative that companies engage these crucial audiences by directly addressing their anxiety with messages that communicate strength, stability and the prospect of continued success.

Any internal relations strategy must first and foremost assure key stakeholder groups that significant changes are merely part of a larger plan to enhance competitiveness in the long term. In the case of Lipinski, The Tribune was absolutely right to act quickly in naming her replacement. This shifted a story about what was lost to a conversation about what was gained.

With new media breathing down their necks, newspapers are certainly facing an uphill battle. But if they fail to keep key stakeholders on board during this time of unprecedented transition, what used to look like a gradual incline will take on Everest or K-2-sized dimensions.