The Ketchum-FedEx-Twitter Saga

 
About the Author: David is a veteran communications strategist … writer … blogger … online publisher … and Emmy Award winning former CBS Network News correspondent. He lives in the Washington, D. C., area, and works worldwide.   He is also a person I am honored to call a friend.

The purpose of this posting is to pull back the veil, and attempt to get added perspective on what may have developed as one of the first, if not the first, examples of crisis communications in today’s new and evolving online Web 2.0 social media world.

Last evening, there were so many visitors to this blog to read How Not to be a Key Online Influencer - approximately 118,000 at one time – that my VPS hosting service crashed for a short time. Reading the comments from visitors, I saw a recurring appreciation for hearing both sides of an online story. I viewed it as bringing journalism to blogging, and no big deal. By the way, I really appreciate people taking the time to post those comments.

It demonstrates, I believe, the enormous power of Twitter and social media. As Lyelle Petersen(@93octane) commented on this blog, “a perfect example of how dangerous social media can be if not taken seriously.”

First let me explain my personal perspective – I am a trained journalist as well as a veteran media strategist in Washington, D.C. I won an Emmy Award for investigative journalism. Call me old-fashioned, if you wish, but I want to get both sides of a story, even an online story. But, if you feel inclined to call me old-fashioned, consider that I today manage 18 blogs; have actively blogged since 2003; am the publisher of BoomerCafe.com since 1999, the Internet’s most popular online magazine for baby boomers with active lifestyles; run BlogStrategies.net; have just published a new book on communications in Web 2.0 – “The Media Savvy Leader;” have a new, free ebook for download on the subject, “Media Savvy in the Internet Era; and I consult globally with major organizations on how to communicate openly, transparently and effectively in today’s new online world.

I first learned about this story last Friday through an email from the CEO of a major organization. He learned of it from his PR company (not Ketchum). The email clearly was making the rounds. But I viewed it as nothing more than cyber-rumor, and I was not going to write about until hearing the full story. I should note that lack of confirmation didn’t stop New York publicist Peter Shankman from blogging about it last Friday. But, it was unsubstantiated, and just recycling rumor which, I personally believe, will eventually erode and detract from the credibility of blogging.

In the interim, until yesterday, I monitored how the story unfolded but it remained just rumor. So, I did what any reporter would do and picked up the telephone and sent emails. I first called James Andrews (right), the Ketchum PR account person in Atlanta who posted the unfortunate open opinion on Twitter. I left him a detailed voicemail. He has never bothered to return my call, which is incomprehensible behavior by any PR person, in my opinion … but I will get back to Andrews in a minute.

I then emailed Ray Kotcher, CEO of Ketchum (an Omnicom company), but never received a reply. I will return to that in a minute.  Then, I called the FedEx corporate communications department in Memphis and spoke for some time with a person who confirmed the whole story, provided names, details, and followed-up by immediately emailing a statement from FedEx that essentially pointed the finger of blame at Andrews. The only people who acted like professional communicators, in my opinion, were those at FedEx.

After writing the story and waiting a reasonable time, I posted it.

Then, at 5:03 p.m., I had a call from Marv Gellman, director in Ketchum’s technology practice. He said he could provide a statement, and I asked that it be emailed. I received this two-line statement which, like FedEx, pointed the finger of blame at Andrews. It arrived via email at 9:34 p.m.:

It was a lapse in judgment and we’ve apologized to our client. We greatly value this long standing client relationship. It is our privilege to work with them.

Gellman called afterwards to claim he had sent the email at 5:17 but then admitted, twice, that he used the wrong email address. He then wanted me to back-time the mention of it on my blog, but I told him I was not covering up his mistake.

What subsequently developed was enormous awareness and discussion on Twitter that has lasted into today – hundreds of thousands of people are online, discussing. But missing from the Twitter social media discussion have been the alleged social media experts at Ketchum. I personally find that lack of online savvy to be very revealing.

What I note, most glaringly, is the seeming lack of awareness about a possible brewing crisis. Ketchum and FedEx, instead, did the old-PR thing to point the finger of blame at the junior person. It’s not a characteristic of responsible leadership by a big PR firm, in my opinion, to blame staff. I don’t think anyone gets off that easy in today’s online world, of which Ketchum seems to be a novice.

Today, I heard from James Andrews, the Ketchum account person in Atlanta, who started this whole thing with his unfortunate Twitter posting to the world. He didn’t call so I could not interview him. But even he pointed the finger of blame at someone else when he posted:

My friend didn’t get your message although I’m locked away in a new biz pitch 1,000’s of mi away and not very accessible.

His excuse was sort of like, the dog ate my homework, even though the switchboard person at Ketchum Atlanta says Andrews checks his voicemail, “all the time.”

I asked him via Twitter direct for a telephone interview but he declined, referring me instead to his blog,TheKeyInfluencer.com.

I explained, that his blog was merely one-sided, and did not afford an interview. I then asked these questions, which all seemed reasonable:

• How long has he been in PR? With Ketchum?
• What social media, Web 2.0 training did he have?
• What was his major in college?
• How old was he?
• Has he ever worked in a newsroom?
• I explained these were legitimate questions, and asked why didn’t he want to be interviewed?
• Had he been told by Ketchum not to give interviews?

Andrews responded, “David I have a job to do and last week posted a response that I have moved on. I’m not sure what you are looking for.”

I asked him what part of those questions he didn’t understand.

Andrews responded, “WSJ-2000, and I too am an online journalist. Please allow me my space.”

That was the end of the Twitter direct exchange. I am not sure what “WSJ-2000″ means. Of course, an interview with Andrews by phone would have permited me to ask but that was not to be. A Google search suggests that some online work done by Andrews may have been reported by the Wall Street Journal some years ago but there is nothing to suggest that he worked for the Journal or any other media.

Early today, I also emailed Gellman, the technology practice director, with a list of questions:

• When was it (the tech practice) formed?
• What is the level of expertise in blogging, Web 2.0 (I know that is a broad question) and social media?
• What sort of training programs do you have for members of the Technology Practice?
• What is your background in social media, other than telling me you once worked for a small radio station?
• How long have you been director of the Technology Practice?
• Have you ever started a blog, and if so, what time and is it still online?
• Why didn’t Mr. Andrews, whom I assume is a member of your team, not return my telephone call yesterday?

After now seven hours, I have not heard from Gellman so I can only assume his agency has no plausible answers.

The scenario all this paints is how badly big PR is comprehending today’s interactive Web 2.0 world of openness, transparency and accuracy. It also demonstrates an astonishing level of hubris and/or lack of knowledge for how the media, Web 2.0 or otherwise, works, in my opinion. Ketchum clearly doesn’t get it, and I wonder how they manage media for their clients.

Big PR is locked in its decades-old bad habits of pushing stuff on behalf of clients out the door – pushing press releases, pushing one-sided promotion, pushing press kits. In other places, that would be called, propaganda. All one-sided push. Pushing stuff is what Andrews has been doing with his blog. That’s not where today’s world is.

Whatever it is labeled, it is the antithesis of communications in today’s interactive Web 2.0 world, and it is the opposite of journalism. Reporters … legitimate and trained journalists … need interviews, and a chance to write both sides, and that goes for blogging journalists, too, because blogging is the New Media. Clearly, that’s not where Ketchum PR is in today’s online world.  Incidentally, Ketchum is the agency responsible for producing several fake video news releases a few years ago that were nothing more than promotion of an education-related political agenda by the Bush White House at taxpayer expense that caused a scandal.

While researching “The Media Savvy Leader,” I found a trend developing among companies and organizations, large and small – in order to achieve a more effective footprint of awareness in the fast-evolving world of Web 2.0, companies are either hiring enhanced expertise in-house and/or hiring consultants who authentically have the credentials to help. Big PR is stumbling badly or fading online. With big PR generally stalled in past days of glory, such a trend may have a profound impact on the future of the public relations industry.

I call it the changing face of PR leadership.

Lastly, let me mention FedEx, the company that permitted the whole image crisis to happen by not having guidelines in place to restrict employees for writing messages to external audiences that appear to be on behalf of the company. FedEx dropped the ball on one of the rules of communications 101.