3 Ghosts of Crises Past — and Lessons Left Behind

[By Thom Fladung, Hennes Communications]

Communications crises don’t take a holiday.

We can’t predict what crises will break in the short time left in 2015, but is anyone willing to bet that there won’t be at least a few? And someone’s crisis probably will arrive at a profoundly inopportune time – say, the night of Dec. 24.

The answer, as always, is to be prepared. Determine now who is going to be on-call and ready to respond to a crisis over the holidays. Take a few minutes now to pull out that crisis communications plan (you do have one, right?) and refresh yourself. And consider learning from others.

So, in that vein, in the spirit of the season and with apologies to Charles Dickens, we’ll revisit three communications crises connected to the holidays and consider what lessons these ghosts still have for us.

Failure to Deliver

In 2013, FedEx and UPS found themselves cast as the Grinches that stole Christmas when people who had paid for express shipping, with delivery “guaranteed” by Dec. 24, were left hanging.

Bad weather, a shorter holiday shopping season that year and, according to some reports, retailers extending order cutoffs to make up for mediocre sales all contributed to the delivery carriers’ woes. Of course, to the folks who didn’t have their loved ones’ gifts in time for Christmas, those explanations sounded like excuses.

Consumers blasted away on social media, with FedEx and UPS the main targets.

The postmortems, like this well-done example from David E. Johnson, CEO of Strategic Vision, cited a couple of missteps, which you can avoid:

• When the crisis broke on social media, reporters couldn’t reach anyone at the delivery carriers. It was Christmas Day but, again, crises can’t be depended on to take a holiday. Know who’s handling a crisis for your organization – every day.
• The companies’ apologies issued in the immediate wake of the crisis felt lukewarm and didn’t include specific steps to make matters right, such as refunding customers their shipping fees. When you say you’re sorry, make it real and be prepared to explain how you’re going to make it right.
• The companies were not active on social media, making for a deafening silence in the venue where the story was loudest. Meet your stakeholders where they are – and a lot of them are going to be on Facebook, Twitter, Instagram and other social media outlets.

Starbucks’ Cup of Controversy

Just a few weeks ago, amid all the other stories swirling around us, millions of people were talking and reading about the new Starbucks holiday coffee cup.

The crisis played out – where else – on social media after a critic accused Starbucks of firing a shot in the war on Christmas by featuring a plain red cup with no symbol of the holidays – a change from previous years.

As Fortune.com reported, Starbucks released the cups on Nov. 1. On Nov. 5, social media personality Joshua Feurstein posted a video declaring the cup design an attack on Christ. Within a few days, millions of people had watched the video and the Starbucks holiday cup was one of the top stories in the country.

In this case, though, the consensus has been that Starbucks sustained little or no lasting damage from the crisis. Three days after the video went live, Starbucks issued a statement – which Fortune and others praised for its speed and effectiveness – on the cup.

In that statement, the company explained the thinking behind the cup design: “Creating a culture of belonging, inclusion and diversity is one of the core values of Starbucks, and each year during the holidays the company aims to bring customers an experience that inspires the spirit of the season. Starbucks will continue to embrace and welcome customers from all backgrounds and religions in our stores around the world.”

The flurry of criticism aimed at Starbucks on social media then was followed by a wave of posts defending the company and calling into question how this came to be an issue in the first place. (The hashtag on Twitter: #ItsJustACup.)

Said Forbes: “…ultimately, the cup kerfuffle isn’t bad publicity for Starbucks. It’s actually a testament to the power of its brand. Consumers care deeply about the red cups, and the controversy shows that they’ve become an iconic marker of the most wonderful time of the year. Starbucks stock prices didn’t change much, and the protesters still bought Starbucks products.”

The Starbucks cup story provides yet another illustration of the dizzyingly fast cycle of news and reaction in social media. We’d also offer that Starbucks waiting three days to get involved isn’t necessarily effectively rapid reaction – even though all seemed to end well for the coffee giant.

So, here’s another reminder to make sure that you’re familiar now with social media, how it works and what social media channels you’re most likely to be dealing with amid your crisis.

The Walmart Food Drive: Caring or Callousness?

Much closer to home for many of our readers, a story broke in Northeast Ohio and then quickly went national around Thanksgiving of 2013.

And I am intimately familiar with this one as I was the story’s editor.

Writing in The Plain Dealer and on cleveland.com, Plain Dealer reporter Olivera Perkins reported on a food drive among Walmart employees at a store in Canton. The twist: The drive was to collect food for fellow employees who couldn’t afford Thanksgiving dinner.

It didn’t take a genius editor to see the reader interest in this one.

Walmart didn’t immediately respond to requests for interviews, and Perkins pushed to talk to someone. We thought it was crucial to get a Walmart official confirming that the food drive was being conducted and speaking directly to it. And Perkins worked to get a verified photo of the collection bins, with the sign that read: “Please donate food items here so Associates in Need can enjoy Thanksgiving Dinner.” (Walmart was not exactly open to inviting the newspaper in to take a photo of the bins in an employee-only area.)

We wanted Walmart on the record and we wanted the photo because we anticipated at least some readers simply wouldn’t believe the story without those elements, writing it off to the biased media again attacking a corporation that had become a frequent target.

We held the story a day or two – risking someone else might find out and write it – and Perkins came through with the exclusive, also putting it in the national context of the debate over low-wage workers: “The food drive tables are tucked away in an employees-only area. They are another element in the backdrop of the public debate about salaries for cashiers, stock clerks and other low-wage positions at Walmart, as workers in Cincinnati and Dayton are scheduled to go on strike Monday.”

Walmart in its response said the food drive spoke to a culture where employees care for one another. “It is for associates who have had some hardships come up,” the Walmart spokesman said. “Maybe their spouse lost a job. This is part of the company’s culture to rally around associates and take care of them when they face extreme hardships.”

The initial story on cleveland.com became one of the most-read on the website for the year – including the always high-traffic sports stories. It attracted more than 1,000 comments. An online poll posted with the story drew almost 20,000 votes.

The story went viral and then went national, with media heavyweights like USA Today, the Boston Globe, Forbes and Bill Moyers doing their own stories or citing The Plain Dealer story.

Two days after the original story, Walmart posted a video with workers at the Canton store talking about the food drive, and Perkins did a story about that video. “It’s unfortunate that an act of human kindness has been taken so out of context,” Walmart’s vice president of communication said in that story. “As we enter the holiday season, I think it’s important for everyone to ask themselves, why do we criticize behavior like this instead of praising it?”

Outside observers later criticized Walmart for the PR hit that accompanied the food collection coverage. Bridge Global Strategies included it in a list of “worst PR crisis situations of 2013” and NBC News called it one of 2013’s “biggest corporate goofs.”

I’m far from one of those outside, dispassionate observers in this case and would continue to argue that, in fact, The Plain Dealer’s coverage of the situation was loaded with context – and prominently featured Walmart’s take on the matter. Indeed, the online comments on the original story and follow-ups featured more than a few people defending Walmart amid a spirited debate about what it all meant.

So, at least by that measure, Walmart’s voice on the matter was heard.

Thom Fladung joined Hennes Communications in July of 2015 after 33 years working for daily newspapers, most recently as managing editor of The Plain Dealer.