Exxon Still Reeling from '89 Oil Spill

It is hard not to dwell on the crisis management aspect of PR when it is at the forefront of publicity. Think about it, you know all about Enron but when's the last time you read a press release regarding the mayor of Oregon's plan to open a new general store on Main Street? Crisis management is important because instead of making the mistakes yourself, you can watch others and learn what NOT to do. We once discussed the Exxon Valdez oil spill of 1989 as an example of ineffective crisis management. Obviously, the crisis in question was detrimental to the environment of Cordova, Alaska but it seems that there are lasting effects on Exxon as well. Today the Associated Press issued a release citing that Exxon will go before the U.S. Supreme Court this Wednesday. Why, you may ask? Well, in 1994 a jury in Anchorage, Alaska awarded the victims of the incident $5 billon in punitive damages (recall the video the former Exxon CEO's response to how to fix the damages to the Alaskan fishing industry). Following the court ruling, Exxon Mobil Corp. made a series of court appeals and the amount to be paid in damages has since been cut in half. Now, it turns out that $2.5 billion is too much for a company which made a profit of $40.6 billion in 2007! Is it really so "unconstitutional" to ask Exxon to pay punitive damages which equates to a measly 6% of their annual profit? Is it cruel and unusual punishment to ask them to pay for an incident which is their fault?

33,000 plaintiffs including Alaskan commercial fisherman, natives, landowners, businesses, and local governments stand to lose the $2.5 billion judgment if the high court sides with Exxon. For the record, the oil spill ruined 1,200 miles of Alaskan shoreline and killed hundreds and thousands of animals which were indigenous to the region. In actually there is not amount of money that can make up for the loss of life to an ecosystem, but punitive damages meant to be paid out of moral responsibility apparently hurt big business far more.

In my opinion, Exxon seems to maintain a tone of insensitivity on the matter. Apparently Exxon should no longer be held accountable for the incident because of an estimated $3.5 billion paid in clean up costs (even though there is still an estimated 85 tons of lingering crude). Not to mention the fact that the skipper of the Exxon Valdez was the true culprit. Last time I checked, in a corporation the liability in a crisis does not rest on individuals.

Largest Meat Recall in History

PR STORY: The U.S. Department of Agriculture recently announced the recall of approx. 143 million pounds of raw and frozen beef from a Chino meat-packing company, proclaiming that it was unfit for human consumption because of repeated failures and lapses in required inspections. According to the department, this has been the largest beef recall that the United States has ever suffered. They also claimed that the there could be serious health consequences if the meat was in fact consumed, but officials say some of the recalled meat has already been distributed and consumed. (obviously a scary situation needing immediate attention) According to a news release issued by the USDA Food Safety and Inspection Service in Washington, D.C., the cattle did not undergo proper inspection. There has been information and evidence received by the agency shows that Hallmark/Westland Meat Packing Co. "did not consistently contact the FSIS public health veterinarian" as required when cattle became nonambulatory after being inspected, the release said. Department spokesman Keith Williams noted that today's beef recall was not based on the same levels of concern for public health as in some prior recalls. "There is a remote probability of any serious health concern . . . but we are taking this action because of our regulations" and in abundance of caution, Williams said of the recall. The first problems at the plant began when there was a release of a video showing inhumane treatment towards animals at the plant which occurred sometime between October 11th and November 9th of 2007. The video was captured by the Humane Society and prompted schools all over the nation to pull the beef from their cafeteria menus. This video shows a plant manager abusing and paddling a nonamulatory cow in order to get it to get up so they can take it to be slaughtered. According to the United States laws, cattle that aren’t able to walk, are not allowed to be slaughtered and processed for human consumption because they are more likely to carry mad cow disease. (Now the issue is not just the recalled meat, but animal cruelty, which fuels the crisis) Last week, the U.S Department of Agriculture suspended inspections at Hallmark, which immediately closed the plant (A first step in handingling the crisis). Earlier this month, several California lawmakers, including Rep. George Miller, called for an independent investigation (2nd step of action) into the National School Lunch Program, for which Hallmark was a top supplier. San Bernardino County prosecutors last week filed felony charges of animal cruelty and illegal movement of nonambulatory animals against the manager (Third Step of action). The agency placed a Jan. 30 hold on all Westland products in federal outlets, including the National School Lunch Program, the Emergency Food Assistance Program and the Food Assistance Program on Indian Reservations, USDA officials said Sunday (Another step of taking action). The USDA now has a recall list that they issued which includes several beef products with many of its vendors.

Watch News Report

NEWS REPORT TWO

APPLIED CONCEPT: The PR concept was crisis response/management. Although the response was not necessarily directed at the media, although there were several news reports, it is apparent the USDA officials took the situation in to control and did what they thought was necessary. After the problem became apparent, they immediately acknowledged it, researched/investigated, and handled it. The publics they talked to were clients and vendors of their meat product and also the department spokesperson, in this case Keith Williams, and the manager. After conclusive research, they recalled the 143 million pounds of raw meat and the San Bernardino Country prosecutors got involved with the animal cruelty aspect and took matters into their hands to charge this as a felony. Also another form of written PR they used as part of the crisis response is that the USDA sent out a news release discussing the situation and inspection process that was being undergone.

Golfweek Goofs on Network Scoop

Whether or not you watch the Golf Channel or subscribe to Golfweek Magazine, chances are that you're familiar with the name Tiger Woods. After all he is arguably the greatest golfer alive today; the Michael Jordan of golf if you will. In contrast, it seemed that until recently no one was familiar with the Golf Channel's now infamous correspondent Kelly Tilghman. That is, until she committed a highly controversial on-air faux pas on January 4th. The incident which led to Tilghman's media notoriety and a two-week suspension from broadcasting involved her attempt to offer what she viewed as a comical suggestion as to how up and coming professional golfers could beat Woods. Without any sign of noticeable consideration, she chuckled while saying, "lynch him in a back alley" just before making what seemed like an awkward pause. Nevertheless, Tiger who is of multi-racial Asian, Caucasian and African American descent made a statement that the comment made by Tilghman was unfortunate, but that he had spoken with her and that there was no ill intent on her part.

After Tiger spoke on the matter the story seemingly should have come to an end, however, Golfweek Magazine had other plans. When the January 19th issue of Golfweek hit newsstands many readers were shocked to find the stark image of a noose plastered across the cover of the publication. Can you say PR disaster? I cannot even begin to understand how anyone could think that this would be a good idea for the cover of any magazine of which Don Imus is not the editor. I mean, surely no editor who wished to keep their job would approve such a thing, right? The "higher ups" at Turnstile Publishing Company which owns Golfweek were not too pleased with former editor and vice president Dave Seanor's poor decision to approve the distasteful cover either as they released him on January 22.

Following Seanor's termination, Turnstile Publishing Co. president William J. Kupper released a statement citing, "We apologize for creating this graphic cover that received extreme negative reaction from consumers, subscribers and advertisers across the country." Kelly Tilghman returned to the Golf Channel today and began her initial post-suspension telecast by issuing what appeared to be sincere apology. "For the last two weeks I've taken the time to reflect and truly understand the impact of what I said. While I need not intend to offend anyone, I understand why those words were hurtful. I am terribly sorry for any hurt that I have caused. I would like to express my deepest apologies." Nice recovery Kelly! It is nice to see that in the wake of Don Imus' notorious comments about the Rutgers Women's basketball team that some media outlets took notes. Despite the fact that this three-week long ordeal resulted in both a job suspension and termination, I believe that all parties involved handled the situation in a timely and effective manner.

The discussion of the importance of an organization's key publics from the class lecture on January 10th should make more sense if you follow the progression of this story. Although, technically, one party was to blame for the whole incident it snowballed into a much bigger problem. Once this snowballing effect occurred, one person's mistake became the responsibility of multiple parties within each organization in order for them to maintain good standings with their respective internal and external publics. This scandal was about much more than losing potential viewers or readers as both the Golf Channel and Golfweek Magazine stood to lose money from advertisers had they failed to resolve this PR nightmare.