Chapter 16: Corporate Communication

What you’ve read in the textbook up to this point has been about how organizations think about and use the principles, strategies and tactics of public relations to accomplish specified objectives and generate positive relationships with opinion leaders and stakeholders. Many, if  not most, of those organizations are for-profit corporations: organizations in business to produce a profit for their owners or, if the corporation is public, for the shareholders.

The central question of this chapter, if not of the entire text, is this: How does corporate communications differ from other kinds of public relations – nonprofit PR, marketing PR, crisis communication, investor relations, consumer relations, media relations, advocacy PR, lobbying, international/global PR and any other kind of public  relations?

Understanding the difference between corporate communications and other kinds of public relations is no simple matter, but it’s even more difficult to understand for anyone without real-world corporate experience. And it’s really more than a matter of understanding what a famous manufacturing or service corporation – MicroSoft, Google, Procter & Gamble, General Motors, AIG, Bank of America, Exxon/Mobil – does for its PR activities. It’s critical to understand corporate communications at a deeper, more fundamental level— the level at which we understand what value a corporation like Google or Ford or General Mills offers for sale, of course, not only to consumers but to society itself – to stakeholders including government, to philanthropies (charities), to healthcare, education, to sports and entertainment, to media, and across the board of the economic, productive sectors of society.

What would this country – any country – be without the products and services generated by  the corporations in the paragraph above? You couldn’t listen to your iPod, fill your gas tank or even have a car in the first place. Governments depend on the payment of taxes by corporations, but also largely from consumers like you and me who are taxed on the iPhones, Big Macs and Sox tickets we buy. Yes, some of the revenue isn’t in the form of direct taxes – some of it comes indirectly. But you and I would not enjoy the quality of life we do without corporations  — yes, profit-seeking corporations – producing the X-boxes and Wii’s and putting winning Sox, Celtics, Bruins and Patriots teams on the field to attract our patronage, our dollars.

Just as “It’s a Wonderful Life” demonstrates each  Christmas that what’s bad isn’t banks or bankers – it’s liars and cheaters and thieves and heartlessness. The savings and loan association operated by the Jimmy Stewart character is the heart and soul of the community itself – the money the depositors trust the bank with is repaid to the community in terms of affordable mortgages and affordable loans that are  the  seedbed of new businesses which without money would remain only dreams.

But of course corporations are rarely adored. We may love the Whopper but hardly think about the corporation that cooks it up. Yes, we may think Apple and BMW and Zappos are cool. But how do we feel about Texaco, CitiBank and Dow Chemical? Yet we don’t want to  live – at least most of us don’t – without iPhones, Beemers and affordable shoes.

Does this seem obvious to you? Perhaps. But then ask yourself why so many, if not most corporations are loathed when the breach the surface of our consciousness via the media – newspapers, films, TV. How are corporations and CEOs portrayed on “The Simpsons,” or in feature films like “Up in the Air,” just released starring George Clooney?

So why is that? What does it say about you and me that we can love the product but despise the producer? Are we hypocrites? Self-righteous phonies? Or are we coolly able to compartmentalize our feelings and actions, thumbing our nose at Wal-Mart while benefiting from Wal-Mart’s low-priced items?

So what does this have to do with corporate communications? Why do corporations engage in “reputation management,” stage big, fancy events to demo new products, send out news releases about their contributions to the Jimmy Fund, hold press conferences when they hire a new CEO, prepare for terrible things like assassins and arsonists, require employees to attend sexual harassment training, create glitzy web sites with advertainment geared to appeal to young consumers of snack food?

Also ask yourselves whether nonprofit corporations are not also business organizations not so very different from famous brand-name companies? What kind of competition and pressure is part of the lives of the employees of Oxfam, MassPirg and other issue-advocacy nonprofits? Are these nonprofits not competing for a share of mind, a share of dollars? Are not the fundraisers at our College courting wealthy donors such as Jack Welch to pony up $1 million for a new dorm, a new dining common, a new library to replace the collapsing one?

Ask yourself whether you could live without the service provided by Visa or Master Charge or Discover Ask yourself what you want for yourself in this life – and to what extent your getting it will require you to enter into relationships with for-profit corporations.

You already know that it’s not hard to call out the deceptive mortgage company, the oil company  charging $4 for a gallon of gasoline, the  electric utility that is raising its rates – or the  College that sends you a letter informing you your fees will increase by a $100 next semester, the textbook company that charges $150 for a book you hardly crack all semester and which you are dying to sell back – to the bookstore that will  only give  you $30 for it.

It’s easy to call out thieves and frauds like Bernie Madoff.  But do you really suppose that Bernie Madoff and Countrywide Financial and AIG are representative of for-profit corporations? And if you do, ask yourself why you think so – all the while looking forward to one day owning a home, driving a spiffy car and watching your monster Mac load huge web sites in a flash.

Yes, we’re a little schizo when it comes to our perceptions and behavior in the marketplace. But is that so odd, when we look closely, look in the  mirror and examine our choices coolly and honestly?

Unless and until you really think through  these questions, you won’t be ready to  begin to understand corporate communications. And even then, I doubt you  will be able to grasp it until you have some real-world experience not merely as a consumer of corporate products but as an employee of one of those famous but faceless, stereotyped and media-washed corporations.

Chapter 17: Technological, Global and Organizational Issues in PR

Technology — what is commonly called Web 1.0 (web sites), Web 2.0 (interactive web sites) and Web 3.0 (Second Life and other highly advanced, game-oriented computing and cloud computing) — has transformed (but not killed) public  relations. If public relations is concerned with relationships, conversations, negotiation, listening, research, engagement, crisis management, influence and reputation, then we only have to turn to Facebook to note that that site has more than 350 million users, and that Twitter is now valued at $1 billion.

Technology thus has implications for media relations, investor relations, marketing communication  — you get the picture.

This chapter covers the impact of technology on public relations. The chapter also turns the light on the emergence of the globalized economy — Toyota makes some of its vehicles in locations around the globe, with local materials and labor; Starbucks baristas serve up latte in Beijing and Berlin. In fact, a Case Study is about Starbucks opening stores all over the globe and seeking to become a global brand — like Coke and Chevy and Madonna and Obama.

If the Internet hasn’t obliterated PR, it has certainly changed PR’s “two-way” communication to a multiple-perspective, 360 degree approach to communication.

Check out Laura Fiton’s Pistachio  consulting, C.C. Chapman’s podcasting business, Brian Solis’ PR 2.0 and read Clay Shirkey’s Here Comes Everybody. Visit Guy Kawasaki’s  blog. These are among the new rock stars of public  relations, as it has converged with marketing, advertising and interpersonal conversation.

For this reason, these brilliant folks — in their 20s and 30s for  the most part  — have had a huge impact of the very nature and practice of public  relations. And while some provocative bloggers have pronounced the death of PR, the reality is probably just the opposite: They’ve expanded and multiplied the power and importance of public relations in the early years of  the twenty-first century.

For more about public relations, check out my blog, www.gatheringthelight.wordpress.com

Chapter 14: Public Affairs

It must be after prime time: We’ve gotten into Public Affairs. No, not Bill Clinton and Monica — although, come to think of it, former President Clinton’s affair with White House intern Monica Lewinsky was a silver-plated sex scandal that was most certainly both a very public affair and a matter of public affairs in the PR sense.  Bad Boy Bill’s sorry escapade got him impeached by his outraged and opportunistic political enemies, but not convicted.

But enough of that PG-13 story. What you public relations students need to know about public affairs is that, like investor relations and crisis communication, it’s a specialty of public relations — one of PR’s specialized applications. And  like the other PR special applications, the essence of public affairs is all about the special public on whom the practice of public affairs is focused. Where for investor relations the special public is called the investment community (small and institutional investors, business and financial media, stock brokers and buy-and sell-side analyst, government regulators), for public affairs the  special public is government at all levels. Or more precisely, public affairs is an organization’s practice of relationship-creation, maintenance and repair with local, state and federal government.

Public Affairs is all about  politics and power, as opposed to  plain-vanilla marketing and sales. So when your electric utility wants to raise the  rate you pay for  your power, it must persuade the state regulatory agency of the pressing need to do so. And when your state college seeks to change its name from “college” to “university,”  it must allay the concerns of the Board of Higher Education, as well as the state legislative committee on higher education, not to mention the  editorial page editors of the local newspaper.

Twenty years ago, I was asked to write a speech for the CEO of a local insurance company. The company was seeking to influence opinion leaders in congress that the company ought to be able to compete on a level playing field with banks by being allowed to issue credit cards, just as banks do. Such permission would require congress to alter or reform a collection of financial regulatory legislation passed during the Great Depression of the 1930s. The speech, which the CEO delivered at a general meeting of the Brookings Institute, a Washington, D.C. organization concerned with public policy matters, was delivered to an audience that included congresspersons, their staffs, the media, and individuals of influence in the business community.

The opposite side of the coin of public affairs is called government relations — that is, government’s attempt to communicate effectively with us, the citizens of the American democracy. So when President Obama delivers his televised speech on his decision to send (or not to send) troops to Afghanistan, he will be engaging in government relations — the public affairs practiced by government when it seeks to enter in a conversation with, and influence, the public.

The molecular structure of public affairs and government relations, so to speak, comprises issues — those debatable, often hotly contested matters in the public interest. Should Social Security be privatized? Should the US health care system be “reformed,” and if so, should public funds be available for abortions (also called women’s reproductive health). Of course, words matter a great deal for the framing of these issues, these debates, these arguments. So do symbolic activities such as protest marches and boycotts.

Here is the Lattimore chapter’s segmented outline:

Preview. What is Public Affairs? Public Affairs for not-for-profit organizations. Public  Affairs in Business. Public Affairs Tasks. Understanding the political system (electoral activities, legislative activities, politicking from the grass rooms, state and local public affairs, internal political communication). “
Governmental Public Affairs (background of public relations in American government, importance and scope of governmental public relations, function of governmental public relations, practice of governmental public relations, using the Internet, Public Relations and political campaigns).

Case Study: “Education Department Paid Commentator to Promote Law”

 

Lobbying. Yes, it has a bad name. But that’s not because it’s unethical or illegal. It’s actually very much in keeping with the proper business of a democratic society — interested groups seeking to influence public opinion in their favor. Lobbyists are required to register with governmental regulators who monitor their activities. From the left to the right of the political spectrum — National Rifle Association to Emily’s List — much money (some say far too much) flows into the political system through political action committees (PACs). Money can corrupt the system, of course. But lobbying itself is consistent with what PR scholar Robert Heath has called “the wrangle in the marketplace.”