The Big Three Needs Political Strategy, Not PR Strategy

A reporter and I just traded emails about the Big 3’s PR efforts around the auto industry bail out. It’s for a follow-up article to the polarizing story on how the Big 3 CEO’s took private jets to Washington D.C. to “pleads for public money.”

Dan Lally weighs in with a post that notes

“If your best argument is that gas-guzzling luxury jets ‘send the wrong message,’ I suggest that you have run out of arguments.”

Lally is correct. Unfortunately that story has taxied down the runway already. This segues into the quick Q&A I did.

Do the PR offices of these companies bear some of the blame for the corporate jet story/black eye?

The Big 3 CEOs flew in corporate jets because it's seen as a productivity/security issue. CEOs can't work on life or death company business sitting on a commercial plane.

Did this story undermine the Big 3 campaign to change public opinion about the bail out? Definitely. Just type GM corporate jet into Google. More than 375K search results come up. It's been defining the coverage of this story.

Big 3 PR have a campaign underway to change public opinion. The GM Facts and Fiction website looks more like a political candidate's website. It has specific ways for consumers, retirees and employees to get the word out. E-mail marketing and YouTube are also being relied on to spread the word.

But when you search for GM on YouTube, this corporate jet story is the first result that pops up. Search results are reality unfortunately. The Big 3 should be buying ads here and for defensive search terms like corporate jet so their side of the story gets equal time in the search results.

What do you think companies like GM, Ford and Chrysler should do to manage their images during this crisis? On the one hand, they need to make it clear that they are in very bad shape but at the same time they don’t want to completely diminish their brands. Mostly, do you think their CEOs need to make more of an effort to appear contrite?

Worrying about diminishing their brands is a moot point now. This is about survival. The Big 3 should be running this like a political campaign (just like their Facts and Fiction Web site).

Campaign strategists edit the story being told every day based on their competitor’s, current events and voter feedback. The return of 2 jets is an “act of contrition.” But what if the Big 3 CEOs arrived on their next visit to D.C. in a convoy of their companies' hybrid cars? It would change the story faster than you can say Joe the Plumber.

What we really need is more media coverage over the pros and cons of a bailout so people can make an informed decision. Pollyanna? Perhaps. But focusing on the private jet story right now feels a lot like arranging furniture on a sinking ship...feng shui of course.

UPDATE: It looks like my idea was an obvious one. Forbes reports: "The Big Three CEOs--Rick Wagoner of GM, Alan Mulally of Ford and Robert Nardelli from Chrysler--have made sure they at least will not be chastised again for their choice of transportation to Washington. After taking flak for traveling to their last round of congressional hearings by private jets, Wagoner and Mulally drove from Detroit in hybrid vehicles, and Nardelli flew commercial."

Spooky, huh?! You heard it here first.

Oil Reserves in Doubt uploaded by Michael P. Whelan
tags | public relations | PR | media relations | media

Comments

[Adam Singer]

This is lose-lose. PR can't save the fact that bailouts are against capitalism and what America is. They will not win no matter what.

...and they shouldn't.

[Amanda]

The right strategy can go a long way for the Big 3 at this point (especially since things can't get much worse...).

It's already happening -- trying to get the facts out about how many Americans are involved in at least some way with the American auto industry, working on an emotional yet reasoned appeal. I completely agree that the Big 3 should be running their strategy like a political campaign, and I think they really have a shot at bolstering appeal if done correctly.

[KellyS]

The fact that they are taking separate planes to the meeting seems irrelevant. I agree, focus on what the bailout is really about, that is going to be what effects the public. They are corporate officials and they needed to do business and that is the way they chose to travel. Now as PR it is time to talk about what the bailout can do for all of the Americans that work for the auto industry.

[Lauren M]

I feel like the PR people for the Big 3 had to do more damage control for them taking their separate private planes there, than this actual situation. Thousands of people could be out of a job. Society needs to focus more on what efforts are being made to get these companies back in gear. I was actually more accepting of them taking their own planes when you mentioned that it could be a security issue. I never thought about that!

[Kyle]

The planes are really irrelevant. Of course from a PR perspective it doesn't matter. They CEO's should have responded by asking congress if they were going to start carpooling to work.

[Amanda]

...and look who decided to roll out the Hybrids arriving in D.C.!

"Big 3 Pull Up To Capitol" changes the tone -- and, in combination with a change in rhetoric -- their strategies might just work.

[Bobby McDonald]

The real problem isn't the planes, the real problem is the perception that they are asking for a handout (whether it's the case or not). The bad press they received for the planes was a symptom of the problem: the majority of the American people believe that the American auto-industry has been poorly managed for years. Good post!! It certainly is more of a political problem (that's not to say that their PR departments/firms aren't working overtime).

[AD PR]

We compiled at list of resources tracking the history of Public Relations and modern Advertising.

It is intriguing to see GM's PR tactics from the turn of the century in what was then a new strategy

http://galaxyspectrum.com/advertising_history.aspx