FUMBLE: FOX MOCKS CANADIAN MILITARY

Veritas Team Huddle Compiled By Brenna Flynn

On March 17th, a segment on a Fox News show, “Red Eye,” aired with host Greg Gutfield mocking the Canadian military. After Canadian Lt.-Gen. Andrew Leslie commented that Canada’s troops would need a year to recover from their Afghan deployment in 2011, Gutfield claimed that our military would be taking a break to “do some yoga, paint landscapes or run on the beach in gorgeous white Capri pants.” The show’s panel members said they were unaware we were even in Afghanistan. What many may not have been aware of is the fact that the show aired at 3 a.m., however the segment only received a ton of negative publicity once it went live on YouTube a few days later. According to the Vancouver Sun, the YouTube clip had more than 170,000 hits and more than 12,000 comments at last count. Obviously, making asinine and offensive comments about your country’s allies is a Fumble (especially when Canada was mourning the loss of four more fallen soldiers). Shocking viewers to build your own personal brand, while offending an entire country, is simply unacceptable. The real question is how did Fox handle this uproar of negative publicity? Fox is known for its typically conservative views. However, in today’s online world, there are now a number of channels through which any broadcast information gets disseminated. Although this segment may not have offended Fox’s key target audience, the Internet has no boundaries. This clip has offended so many Canadians (and Americans) that there have been numerous anti-Fox Facebook groups, negative Twitter conversations and online petitions set up; consumers online are even threatening to avoid purchasing anything advertised on the network. Key communications lesson: be aware of the Internet and think about your audience on a broader level. Nothing stays contained to a single outlet anymore. Fox ultimately issued a formal apology, but the view among the Veritas team was that it was too little, too late for the network’s overall reputation. For this, Fox drops the ball in a disgraceful Fumble.

TOUCHDOWN: BOSH HANDLES LAWSUIT WITH CLASS

The Toronto Raptors’ Chris Bosh has been Touchdowned here before (remember his YouTube video spoof urging people to elect him to the NBA All-Star Game?) for being an effective communicator. But he demonstrated it again this week amid allegations by a woman he once dated in a lawsuit for child support. Some said Bosh’s image had been tarnished and that years of good will and giving back to the community have been washed away. I disagree. While that is certainly the risk, people tend to understand there are two sides to every lawsuit and that just because someone files doesn’t mean the allegations are proven. Bosh could have reacted angrily. He didn’t. He could have tried to duck the media. He didn’t. And he delivered a solid quote: “All I can say is that I’m going to take care of my responsibilities like I’ve been doing in the past and in the future and keep respecting everyone. I love my daughter, I love myself and I respect her mother and I’ll leave it at that.” Indeed Bosh was philosophical. “I know what I’ve done and you know, it’s all good things. Contrary to what some people say, I know that I have a positive outlook on everything, I respect everyone and things have always been good for me. People closest to me don’t call it into question. They know the situation, they know what it is. That’s all that really matters.” In other words, Bosh didn’t get flustered and he didn’t lash out. He didn’t make the story bigger than it already was, or give it legs by revealing details or counter-allegations that lawyers for the plaintiff could exploit during the next news cycle. It was a solid job in difficult circumstances.

FUMBLE: ALL OBAMA, ALL THE TIME

I thought that maybe I was just being cranky in old age until I started to see more negative reaction this week to the latest 24-7 all-news trend – President Barack Obama nonstop. As CITY TV might say “Barack Obama Everywhere!” Obama’s “perpetual campaign” carries major risks. Think about it: the First Lady vegetable garden photo-ops, the ill-advised Jay Leno show appearance, the Oprah Winfrey “O” magazine cover, the town halls, the 60 Minutes appearances, the prime time press conferences, the YouTube postings; and on, and on, and on. As AdAge magazine pointed out: “the President, along with his wife, Michelle, have easily been on more magazine covers and done more TV and newspaper interviews than Brad Pitt, Angelina Jolie, Lindsay Lohan and Britney Spears combined.” There’s a communications lesson here for everyone. We all get our chance to communicate to the public. When that chance comes, we need to be prepared (media coached), well messaged and deliver with impact. But there’s a real danger out there for communicators who take advantage of their pulpit to be too “in your face” with the general public. People have their own lives and their own escapes. They need a break from you. Eventually. Otherwise your message becomes so muddled and oft-repeated that people begin to tune it out. Nothing stands out anymore. Obama seems to be missing this fact. The New York Times began an article on the President with: “Had enough yet?” Syndicated columnist Mike Lupica: “(He is) about to turn into President Twitter, telling all of us what he’s doing in real time, from pickup basketball to fixing the bonus mess at AIG.” Really, did the President have to do a photo opportunity making his NCAA March Madness picks? What’s next, a photo-op of Barack and the girls dialing their votes into the American Idol switchboard? Lupica nailed it when he said Obama “is about to become the first American President to suffer from overexposure before his first 100 days are up. He is trying way too hard…maybe his wife can be the one to tell him to dial it down a little, now that he got the gig.”

TOUCHDOWN: CSA COAT-TAILS ON HUGE STORY

I want to be clear right out of the gate on this one: I’m not suggesting that the Canadian Standards Association is trying to capitalize on the tragic death of actress Natasha Richardson following her fall on a Quebec ski hill. Rather, I’m complimenting the CSA for leveraging the resulting massive attention to the issue of skiing-related head injuries to announce that they are working up a certified standard for protective ski helmets. Even though they don’t actually have anything to announce yet, the CSA has gotten loads of earned media coverage for the work it is currently doing, and it’s all because they’ve been ready and able to slipstream their message onto the Richardson story, which created the interest in the bigger issue in the first place. It’s a delecate balance for any communicator to walk, between talking about a suddenly highlighted legitimate issue and capitalizing on tragedy, but I think CSA has clearly played this one right.

TOUCHDOWN: EARTH HOUR NETS SOLID ADVANCE MEDIA

I realize that a certain Toronto daily newspaper located at One Yonge Street is a key sponsor of the upcoming Earth Hour turn-your-lights-off awareness campaign, but I must admit I’m impressed with the overall media traction this thing generates. The Toronto Star has been profiling a series of organizations and their planned Earth Hour activities, and good for them. But it was on an unrelated website where I saw coverage of a variety of ways that various NHL teams are getting on board, given that Earth Hour is set for a Saturday evening and therefore prime hockey time. The Nashville Predators/L.A. Kings tilt has been moved up by two hours, so that the energy-sucking game and broadcast will be over before the main event. And most if not all other teams and arenas hosting NHL games that night will be cranking down their usual wattage in a variety of ways. It’s a great public awareness campaign which shows no sign of going dark anytime soon.

TOUCHDOWN: HARNESSING THE POWER OF THIRD PARTY ENDORSERS

As usual here at TD&F, this item is not about politics or policy, but about communications. The backdrop happens to be yesterday’s Ontario budget, but the focal point for our purposes revolves around use of third party endorsers to drive a communications message. In a back room at Queen’s Park, partisan worker bees in the Liberal Caucus Services Bureau were busy on budget day tracking the myriad of news releases and other on-the-record pronouncements made on the budget by various organizations. Said staffers kept issuing running updates via Canada News Wire, the most prominent vehicle for disseminating news releases to newsrooms everywhere, tracking supportive comments for measures in the budget from stakeholders, including the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, the Ontario Medical Association, the Council of Ontario Universities, BILD (Building Industry and Land Development Association), Toronto Mayor David Miller and even the Ontario Association of Food Banks. Third party endorsements – in other words, praise from organizations which are credible in their own realm – are worth their weight in gold in the world of spin, and the Liberal staffers managed to assemble a nice array of positive comments from a broad spectrum of voices. I can tell you how wonderful I am until the cows come home, but it’s way more meaningful if someone else does it.

FUMBLE: ROYAL CARRIBEAN CRUISING FOR TROUBLE

Veritas Team Huddle Compiled By Kathy Barnett

Cruise industry titan Royal Caribbean Cruise Lines (RCCL), admits to having solicited a group of “influencers” to talk up the cruise line in online forums. Separate from their loyalty program, RCCL flagged and proactively engaged these individuals, dubbed “Royal Champions”, solely for their online prowess. In a fitting twist, the existence of the Champions was made public by a blogger attending a recent marketing conference, where RCCL loyalty marketing manager Rachel Hannock boasted that "The key to success in viral marketing is to subtly influence the influencers without them overtly realizing they are being influenced." The blogger goes on to quote Hannock as saying that Champions "are regularly leveraged for ongoing marketing initiatives" and that their reviews "are carefully monitored during events and on a regular basis to ensure that posts remain positive and frequent." To make matters worse, RCCL AVP Bill Hayden came clean by admitting that the Champions have been getting perqs from the line, including free mini-cruises, but stressed that Hannock’s statements were "a poor choice of words” and insisted that RCCL has never in any way indicated what Champions should write, nor (despite the fact that they have never mentioned it publicly before) did they mean for the program to be secretive. Competitors have quickly distanced themselves from the PR disaster on the seas by emphatically stating that they do not engage in paid influencing, and important stakeholders like the CruiseMates forum have stated that Champions program violates their user agreement. Besides the obvious lack of transparency exhibited, RCCL committed a fatal error by attempting to bend the social media code of ethics to its advantage. There’s a term for it, in fact: It’s called “astro-turfing” – or fake word-of-mouth – and it can be wildly damaging to a brand. Building a brand is, first and foremost, about building trust. On where the RCCL brand stands after this incident, this quote from USA Today says it all: “Can you trust what you read about Royal Caribbean at online message boards?”

FUMBLE: YOU SAY IT, YOU OWN IT

A big lesson we always discuss in media training sessions is that when words pass your lips, you own them. Whether they were suggested to you or not is irrelevant. The Globe and Mail’s very talented science writer Anne McIlroy had a story this week that asked Canada’s Minister of State for Science and Technology Gary Goodyear if he believed in evolution. “I’m not going to answer that question. I am a Christian, and I don’t think anybody asking a question about my religion is appropriate,” Goodyear replied. But by doing so, the Minister helped make the story about his religious beliefs. It was too bad really, because Goodyear also delivered great key messages about commercializing research in order to save lives, improve the environment and elevate our lifestyle. But it got drowned out by the controversy. Sadly, he also added to the Globe: “I do believe that just because you can’t see it under a microscope doesn’t mean it doesn’t exist. It could mean we don’t have a powerful enough microscope yet. So I’m not fussy on this business that we already know everything.” The story then spread across the mainstream media, or as the Toronto Sun put it, “the primordial ooze hit the fan.” Said the National Post: Mr. Goodyear embraces the Bible’s literal translation of the Earth as a six-day infrastructure project for the Almighty. Scientists attacked the government for cutting research funding and demanded to know whether the message was it would be cheaper if we just read the Bible. Mr. Goodyear is a smart man and may well turn out to be an excellent Minister, but folks, when you say it, you own it.

FUMBLE: AIG CRITIC GONE WILD

It’s been great watching all the foaming at the mouth in Washington this week about the $165 million in bonuses (or as AIG’s boss tried to put it to a congressional committee “retention payments”) being paid to everyone’s favourite Wall Street bailout recipient, to the tune of some $170 billion with a “b.” And just when it seemed there was literally no limit to the rhetorical flourish applicable to this situation came a great communications lesson for us all – don’t go too far folks. The spotlight is on this new story, so anyone who said something stupid risked becoming collateral damage. Enter pig farmer-turned-Republican Senator Charles Grassley (Iowa) who made headlines by stating that if the AIG executives on the bonus list preferred, they could just kill themselves. “I suggest, you know, obviously, maybe they ought to be removed,” Grassley said. “But I would suggest the first thing that would make me feel a little bit better toward them is if they’d follow the Japanese example and come before the American people and take that deep bow and say, I’m sorry, and then either do one of two things: resign or go commit suicide. “And in the case of the Japanese, they usually commit suicide before they make any apology.” Very helpful indeed sir. Let us set aside the issue of the bonuses. It’s never a “free ride” in terms of communications piling-on. Even in a case this extreme. We all need to think about our messages before we blurt them out. We can help you with that.

FUMBLE: POPE NEEDS A GOOD SPIN DOCTOR

So, am I playing with fire and/or brimstone for calling a Fumble on the Pope? I suppose I’ll find out … eventually. But here and now, I submit it’s a worthy call, not just for this week’s firestorm over his Holiness’ comments about condoms and AIDS in Africa, but for what seems to be an emerging bigger picture of systemic communications problems, if the article in the London Daily Telegraph headlined “Vatican insiders declare the Pope ‘a disaster’”) is any indication. Let’s set aside the church and the Pontiff, and look at this as any sizeable operation with a communications problem. It’s a global organization headed by a prominent figure whose every word is subject to tremendous media scrutiny. The boss is reportedly the type who doesn’t take advice well and, the record will show, has generated some negative publicity on several occasions for things he has said. Further, his official media office closes at mid-afternoon, and has little if any active involvement on the internet and in other quick-response arenas. "I think there's a good story to be told about this pope but it just doesn't get out because of the colossal ineptitude of the Vatican in terms of communications," said John Allen, a veteran Vatican analyst with National Catholic Reporter. And Francis X. Rocca, Vatican correspondent for Religion News Service, told the Telegraph "The problem now is that the internet and the blogosphere won't wait for the Vatican, so its message gets swamped." All of this speaks clearly to the major communications problems facing Pope Benedict & company. Like any organization with important messages to deliver to a wide variety of audiences and stakeholders, the Vatican seems in need an overhaul in its media and communications operations – and starting by bringing in some younger, fresher faces who clearly grasp the realities of communication in the 21st century would be an excellent place to start.

FUMBLE: OBAMA'S SPECIAL OLYMPICS JOKE

It was a quick one-liner, but when you’re a public figure, sometimes that’s all it takes to get in trouble. During the President Obama’s aforementioned appearance on NBC’s Tonight Show, the subject of the White House bowling alley came up. Obama talked about how he has used it – poorly – proclaiming that he recently “bowled 129.” But then he capped the ensuing laughter by saying “It was like Special Olympics or something.” Ouch. Special Olympics, which works to enrich the lives of people with intellectual disabilities through sport, has often been part of punch-lines in inappropriate attempts at humour, and has consistently fought against such references and the stereotypes they reinforce. Obama should have known better, and it seems that he realized quite quickly that he had made a giant mis-step. Before the taped broadcast had even aired, he called Special Olympics Chairman Tim Shriver from Air Force One to apologize. Deputy Press Secretary Bill Burton spoke to the press pool flying home to Washington with Obama, saying "He thinks that the Special Olympics are a wonderful program that gives an opportunity to shine to people with disabilities from around the world." I suspect we’ll hear a lot more about this one today. Obama needs to address it himself, admit his error and, if he’s smart, use his gaffe as an opportunity to help support Special Olympics in its efforts to combat these kinds of inappropriate comments. As Shriver said this morning, he hopes the gaffe is “a teachable moment for the country.” What do you think? Post your comments on our blog at www.touchdownsblog.ca

TOUCHDOWN: OBAMA;S AIR(WAVES) WAR

He gets no shortage of praise in this space, and for good reason. U.S. President Barack Obama was on a roll again this week in the communications department, first with his unabashed expression of outrage over the $165 million in bonuses handed out by AIG to its senior brass, in the wake of the company receiving billions in bail-out funding from American taxpayers. Obama even apologized to reporters at the time for getting “choked up with anger” over the whole idea, and then vowing to take action to prevent any such repeat in the future by a taxpayer-bailed-out corporation. It was a brilliant articulation of what Joe American was thinking and feeling at that moment. Then he switched from protector-of-the-public-interest mode to I-wanna-have-a-beer-with-that-dude mode, further bonding with Joe American Sports Fan when he gave ESPN an exclusive interview about his picks for the March Madness NCAA college basketball championships. Obama’s comfort before a camera, coupled with his obviously thorough understanding of – and personal passion for – basketball, made for some extremely cool television. And finally, in yet another first for this President, he took a spot on Jay Leno’s Tonight Show sofa, to talk about his agenda in everyday language to the everyday folks who tune in to Jay’s show every night. Obama’s on a mission: to rally public support for his economic agenda in general, and to put pressure on Congress to get his first budget passed. (He also sits down with 60 Minutes this Sunday). By playing to his personal communications strengths, and by “fishing where his fish are,” Obama has used the right media opportunities to further engage his top target audiences and reinforce his brand with them, par excellence.

Touchdown: Vendor vents frustration with Niagara Parks Commission

Veritas Team Huddle Compiled By Jessica Howe

A few weeks ago, it was revealed that the Niagara Parks Commission extended the lease of the Maid of the Mist to navigate the waters of Niagara Falls without opening the process to other bidders. Though many have an affinity for this more than 100-year-old tradition, Bill Windsor of Alcatraz Media filed an application seeking an order that would force the park Commission to conduct an open bidding process for the contract. The Veritas team agrees that it’s a Touchdown for Windsor, as he has been active in leveraging the media to be portrayed as the underdog against an allegedly dysfunctional Niagara Parks Commission, successfully communicating that his purpose is not self-serving, but about following a procurement policy that is in place so the process is fair and transparent. In addition, Windsor has also received special teams support for his case from Patricia Salci Mangoff, a local resident and head of the citizens' group Preserve Our Parks who remarked, “We want the Ontario government to get into the 21st century and update the process by making the Niagara Parks Commission open, transparent and accountable.” That quote is a great example of how to build stakeholder support for your cause, something Veritas can assist you with. Our team is also in agreement that it’s a Fumble for the Niagara Parks Commission as they have allowed others to come out in front of the issue. Regardless of the details of the story, the headlines have already doomed them. Their message out of the gate should have been about what they’re doing to fix the problem to ensure that it’s competitive and taxpayers get the best value for their money. It’s still a message better delivered late than never.

Fumble: Bruni ignores economic realities

We’ve talked a lot so far in 2009 about the new economic reality and the twist that puts on communicating through words or deeds. Almost every day you see a communications play of some sort, from car company CEOs flying in private jets to ask for bailout money to Wall Street financial firms taking lavish retreats in Arizona on the heels of a taxpayer bailout. Any public figure or company that acts without some sensitivity to the very real economic pain people are feeling risks their wrath. So it has come to pass in France that first lady Carla Bruni, the model and singer, has come to be referred to as “Marie Antoinette.” France is amidst a crippling recession. Yet Bruni and her husband, President Nicolas Sarkozy, are vacationing at El Tamarindo Beach and Golf Resort on Mexico’s Pacific Coast, in what media describe as “a lavish beachfront villa that costs $5,500 a night” and comes complete with a private pool, outdoor Jacuzzi and the service of a butler, personal chef and maid. Further, media report that “the former model showed up at a Mexican state dinner on Monday night clad in a dazzling array of diamonds. The irony? Her husband was in Mexico City to discuss the world recession with his Mexican counterpart, Felipe Calderon.” As one media outlet noted, Sarkozy has an “affinity for wearing a Rolex Oyster watch, Ray-Bans and gold jewelry. Marie Antoinette - we mean Carla - typically wears both Dior and John Galliano.” Meanwhile, more than 2 million people are unemployed in France and 15 per cent of the workforce is making minimum wage. “Sarko and Carla are back to acting like Louis XVI and Marie Antoinette again,” a reader wrote to a French newspaper. “They have no appreciation of what ordinary people are going through.” Yet another example of the communications pitfalls of certain types of behavior in this economy.

Touchdown: A KISS of a clip

Rock band KISS frontman Gene Simmons’ interview on Canada AM demonstrated why he’s one of the most savvy businessmen in the entertainment world. In Toronto to be the keynote speaker at the Canadian Music Week festival, Simmons was talking up his newfound interest in Canada and Canadian music. His record label, Simmons Records, has joined forces with Universal Music Canada to launch “a multi-platform vehicle to seek out, develop and promote Canadian talent.” What was really great about Simmons’ Canada AM interview was his grand vision for Canadian music. “Look at Ireland,” he said. “They gave the world U2. There is absolutely no reason why Canada cannot give the world that kind of a musical talent. No reason.” It was not only exactly the right analogy, it demonstrated the power of using an analogy to illustrate your idea. Simmons has big plans for Canada. And who’s to say he won’t succeed? Consider this: KISS licenses more than 3,000 products, from KISS Visa cards to KISS condoms. Simmons’ current businesses include starring and producing in Gene Simmons Family Jewels, a reality series; My Dad the Rock Star, his own cartoon show; his current best selling book Ladies of the Night (released through his own Simmons Books); publisher Simmons Comic Group; Simmons Abramson Marketing (which handles all branding and marketing for the Indy Car Series); an aptly-named clothing line called Moneybag; and NO GOOD TV (NGTV.com), an online network that has earned 300 million site visitors. No reason to think he can’t lick the Canadian music business.

Touchdown: Councillor says what it is, not what it isn’t

OK, let’s set aside positions on whether we agree about this or not from a policy standpoint, because TD&F is all about communications, not policy. And, let’s also set aside my obvious conflict as one who makes his living as a paid consultant (though one not involved in any way, shape or form on this particular story). In responding to criticism that the City of Toronto spent some 50 grand on consultants as part of the process of trying to come up with a better way to recycle disposable coffee cups, Councillor Glenn De Baeremaeker said “this is $50,000 of due diligence and proper research to make sure we have the best public policy possible. It’s money spent to make sure the city does the best thing for the environment and the taxpayer.” Too often, people being presented with a contrary, negative view of something they actually are championing will make the mistake of repeating the negative characterization being suggested by their critics or the media while they’re trying to refute the suggestion. But De Baeremaeker resisted any temptation to do so, instead focusing his comments on how he wants the issue to be positioned. End result: ideal quotes in print, and a Touchdown.

Fumble: Tim Hortons’ absence makes the story grow worse

Sometimes – VERY rarely – there may be a time to let the media enquiry go unanswered. Reporters hate it, and the story usually won’t be kind as a result, but sometimes the cost-benefit analysis that any communicator must make in these “do I return the call?” situations determines that it’s best to take the knock for remaining silent. We don’t know the specifics behind Tim Hortons’ silence amid this week’s story suggesting that Ontarians are proportionally disadvantaged in their chances to win by rolling up the rim. But whatever the case, the Toronto Star did note that “repeated calls to Tim Hortons’ head office in Oakville” went unreturned. That left the Star clear to crunch numbers about probabilities of winning in other provinces versus here in Ontario without any input from the company itself. And the end result was, their silence didn’t do them any favours.

Touchdown: E-cigarette story gets smokin’ coverage

They are still high-fiving around the office at the SmokeStik company, I’m sure. The company makes – believe it or not – “electronic cigarettes.” They look like smokes, they light up on the end like smokes, they taste like smokes, they give you a nicotine fix like smokes … except there’s no, uh, smoke. Instead, the little battery-powered devices generate puffs of mist, the same stuff they use to simulate fog at rock concerts and theatrical productions. It’s an interesting concept and, judging by the front-page treatment (plus a sidebar feature inside) given by the Toronto Star yesterday, it’s one which has all the elements of a great story. There is controversy: advocates say the SmokeStik is an innovative new tool to help people quit smoking, while anti-smoking activists say they’re aimed at getting kids to pick up the habit. But I tip my hat to the SmokeStik folks, for demonstrating a couple of excellent communications tactics. First, anecdotes: president Bill Marangos tells some great stories, including how he “fired one up” in front of a nurses’ station at Princess Margaret Hospital (Toronto’s renowned cancer centre), to add colour and drama to his messages. And distributor William Taskas came out with a line so colourful that the Star blew it up into one of those quote boxes, when he said “It’s like smoking with a condom on.” Safe? You bet. Touchdown? Ditto.

Touchdown: City of Toronto acts swiftly

Veritas Team Huddle Compiled By Lisa An

Earlier this week, nine City of Toronto employees were fired for submitting fraudulent insurance benefit claims. The scams were discovered two weeks ago as a result of an audit conducted by Manulife Financial, the city’s insurance benefit provider. Personally, I was pleased by the city’s response on two fronts: first, as a taxpayer, for getting rid of individuals who abuse the system and second, as a communications professional, for acknowledging the problem and quickly acting upon it. No matter how you look at it, this is not a good news story, so the city will automatically be on the defensive, especially since the situation affects public funds. The problem is also compounded by the fact that Mayor David Miller and city councillors can’t reveal many details about the scam due to the ongoing police investigation, nor can they reveal information on how they hold other city employees accountable due to privacy rules. But it was the view of the Veritas team that, as a communications play, the city did a number of things right despite the challenges they face in public opinion. The city controlled initial messages by promptly issuing press releases after key events: one, immediately after the findings came to light and the second following the terminations. Mayor Miller reiterated key messages saying the city has “no tolerance” for wrongdoing and Councillor Doug Holyday, who chairs the city’s audit committee, put the situation into perspective by stating that nine dishonest employees isn’t many when compared to the 51,000 individuals who work for the city. The city’s fraud and waste hotline, which receives tips on employee abuse, revealed 42 substantiated claims but Mayor Miller focused on the positive by saying the revelations prove the systems that monitor employee abuse work and that “99.9%” of city staff work in “the public interest, not self-interest.” The city handled this challenge well but for extra bonus points we think the city should communicate in the near future what steps they are taking to ensure a similar circumstance won’t happen again. This will close the loop on a difficult issues management situation.

Touchdown: Bank of Canada’s straight talk

We’re also hearing a lot these days about economic turmoil – and we don’t for a moment minimize what many folks are going through, especially in places like Hamilton, Oshawa and Windsor – there were some strong comments delivered to the House of Commons Finance Committee by Bank of Canada deputy governor Pierre Duguay, who says Canadians shouldn’t be spooked over “irrational fear” about our economy. “When there is a string of bad news, risk can be overstated. People hear bad news and that affects confidence, and that can amplify (economic problems)… We are going through a recession and because of fear, consumers are spending less, companies are spending less and that is antithetical to stabilizing the situation. It is very important to cut it off at the pass, so people can see recovery is coming.” It was a great message, effectively delivered, that Canadians need to hear. And it was timely. We count on Bank of Canada officials to tell it like it is. Even in the face of auto sector layoffs and the steel plant shutdown in Hamilton, when some people might take offence to Duguay’s suggestion that this is somehow a psychological problem, his point is well taken. Bravo.

Fumble: Usher on Chris Brown

Anyone who follows celebrity news these days has witnessed wall-to-wall coverage of the Chris Brown-Rihanna situation. This week Brown, 19, has been charged with assault and making criminal threats against a woman identified as “Robyn F.” Rihanna’s real name is Robyn Rihanna Fenty. Enter fellow pop singer Usher, who decided, apparently of his own volition, to express the view that Brown was dumb to be photographed frolicking on his jet-ski near Miami while the controversial case was being sorted out. “I'm a little disappointed in this photo ... C’mon, Chris. Have a little bit of remorse, man. The man’s on jet-skis? Like, just relaxing in Miami?” Ahem, lesson to all communicators, if you weigh in on a controversy, you jump right in where the water is warm. Usher may not be selling albums and concert tours like he once was, but did he think this would enhance his “brand” with female buyers? Perhaps. So why (oh, why) did he suddenly then issue an apology to Brown, no less. “The comments… were taken out of context and blown out of proportion. I apologize on behalf of myself and my friends if anyone was offended. The intentions were not to pass judgment and we meant no harm. I respect and wish the best for all parties involved.” That left many women – by any objective measure of blog reaction – extremely angry with Mr. Usher. Folks, be careful with highly charged issues and situations. Do you need to be in them? Are you ready to stand by your comments if you do venture in? Usher made an absolute mess of this.

Touchdown: Fallen soldier’s wife embodies dedication of military families

We’ve written several times here at TD&F about the delicate notion of communication amid public grief. Sometimes, when people who normally are never in a public role suddenly find themselves there as a result of some kind of tragedy, they opt not to grieve purely in private, but to seize the opportunity to send a message. There’s no right or wrong to this – it’s purely a matter of personal choice. This week, Mischelle Brown of St. Catharines decided to stand in front of the cameras and microphones shortly after learning of the death of her husband, Canadian Forces Warrant Officer Dennis Brown, who was among the three soldiers killed this week in Afghanistan by a roadside bomb. She was powerfully eloquent through her tears, telling how she and Dennis had actually discussed his possible death in action, and how she and their children would deal with it and carry on, should it come to pass. She spoke of how he wasn’t asked to go to Afghanistan, but that he went voluntarily because he believed so strongly in the mission’s goals. And then she responded to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s CNN comment about how the west will likely never be able to completely put an end to insurgency in Afghanistan: “We may not be able to beat the Taliban. There's lots of things in our life we can't beat. ... But do you give up? Do you stop? Absolutely not," she said. "One person can't make a difference. But if we band together, we can." Powerful, from the heart, and a testament to the dedication of military families, even when mourning their loss.

Touchdown: Flaherty pushes language button

In our Veritas Media Coaching sessions, we often talk about the potential power – and pitfalls – of particularly strident language. Just how that is defined varies, depending on the communicator and the circumstances at hand, but I submit that federal Finance Minister Jim Flaherty was being pretty provocative when he used the word “wasted” in describing what he absolutely didn’t want to see happen to the money Ottawa is providing to General Motors to help keep the foundering auto giant afloat. There are billions of taxpayer dollars in the offing, and Flaherty knows that by injecting such a hot-button word into his comments on the federal lifeline, it would not go unnoticed nor unreported. It’s a classic example of deliberately harnessing the power of strong language for a strategic communications gain. Inadvertantly blurt out a hot-button word in the heat of a moment and the consequences can often be disastrous, but deliberately and strategically use one to amplify an important message, and it can be a communications Touchdown.

Touchdown: Obama scores with comment that hobbled Harper

Two politicians, both leaders of their respective nations, say the same thing, albeit at different times. One is largely pilloried for his comment on sharply lower stock values being a potential buying opportunity; the other takes precious little flack and, from some corners, wins praise for trying to rekindle the flames of optimism in the market. Poor Stephen Harper. Our Prime Minister must have choked on his lunch this week, when he heard U.S. President Barack Obama talk of potential buying opportunities among equities with a much saner profit-to-earnings ratios amid the current market turmoil. That was precisely the same thing Harper told the CBC’s Peter Mansbridge last fall, a comment for which the PM was promptly savaged by his political opponents for being “elistist” and “out of touch” with what the average Canadian was feeling. So why does Obama skate while Harper stumbled? Three key reasons: timing, context and credibility. Regardless of the accuracy of his comment, Harper made his in the midst of an election campaign, when rhetoric and reaction are torqued to the highest of heights. Second, Harper’s comment came at a time when he was being criticized for downplaying what was then a gathering economic storm, indeed predicting at the time that Canada should end up largely unaffected by what was happening elsewhere. Obama, on the other hand, has several things going for him, which let him escape similar criticism for saying exactly the same thing: he’s not in the midst of a campaign, indeed, he’s still in the flush of his political honeymoon; and, he has spent so much time up until now warning of the dire extent of the economic morass, and reflecting on how it impacts on the average American family, that he has built up sufficient credibility and political capital on this front to the point that he can go exactly where Harper went, but without being attacked for it. As the ancient Vulcan saying goes, “Only Nixon could go to China.” Only Obama can offer investment advice without getting labeled an out-of-touch elitist. I raise all of this not to knock Harper, nor to praise Obama, but simply to note the differing dynamics at play which translated into a Fumble for one, and a Touchdown for the other, despite running virtually the same communications play.