subject: Three Lessons in Crisis Communications: Taking the Bullet – and Firing Back! [print this page] Three Lessons in Crisis Communications: Taking the Bullet and Firing Back!
At our firm we have a basic rule of thumb when it comes to public relations and the media. If it's "good news" we want to read our client's name. If it's "bad news" it's all on us.
Even though crisis media communications is a specialty of our firm, sometimes things can get a little ugly.
A recent case we handled for a public housing authority put our experience and savvy to the test and helped us relearn some valuable lessons too.
We got a phone call from our client one day telling us that a TV crew wanted an on camera interview about an eviction matter the housing authority was pursuing. A lawyer representing the tenants was apparently making media calls.
This set off our radar right away because most lawyers don't do that unless the facts of the case are overwhelmingly against them. But that's not how it appeared initially.
Soon, I found myself explaining why our client was trying to evict a "disabled Iraqi War veteran" who was also a quadriplegic from the public housing apartment he and his wife live in. The reason was that a "caregiver" who helped carry the vet from his bedroom to the bathroom was spending too many nights sleeping in the apartment.
Our client said the frequent overnight stays were a clear violation of federal law and the HUD approved lease. Neighbors were complaining and the vet and his wife had ignored three certified letters. But why were neighbors complaining? It's a question we should have asked right away.
The first day was pretty tough. TV and newspaper coverage was solidly pro-vet and we looked like heartless bureaucrats. One NY television station did a long interview with the wife and lawyer (in front of a US Marine banner) and gave us a very short reply. The stations two news anchors were visibly upset, shaking their heads and looking disgusted. Meanwhile a talk radio station was savaging us and urging listeners to call our client and demand justice for the vet.
Friends and associates who saw me on TV called to ask if we were crazy. Jokes were made about our client hiring "the right man for the job" of spinning this one because I am supposedly so heartless too.
But then the next day everything changed because we got the "full story" from our client. Information that we wished we had known but never pressed the client for on the first day.
The "caregiver" had spent time in prison for dealing drugs and had two other drug arrests. And he had this curious habit of spending the night at the apartment while the vet was hospitalized for several days in another state. So you have to wonder exactly what kind of care was being given to whom. This is why neighbors were complaining.
So we decide to go on the offensive. We got a private investigator to get the documentation on the prison record immediately instead of waiting for law enforcement to process an OPRAH request. That's Lesson Number One: Don't wait. Get the info you need ASAP.
We did a full blown media advisory and follow-up to every television, radio and print outlet in the region and held a press conference outside the apartment building the next day. Facing a battery of cameras and recorders, I held up the ex-con's mug shot and prison record, looked right into the camera and speaking to the wife said, "Mrs. X , get rid of the drug dealer and your eviction problems will disappear too."
It was powerful stuff. I also made the point that we didn't want to evict or harm this veteran in any way but that there was much more to the story than had been reported.
This intriguing case re-taught us Lesson Number Two press your client for all of the facts and get those facts out to the media in the initial coverage. And when the facts are on your side, present them with power and authority. Don't pussyfoot around worrying about stepping on any toes.
Here's Lesson Number Three: pick your battles. Turns out the "disabled vet" had been discharged from the army in 2002 and became disabled as the result of a car accident five years later. We decide to let that one go. He had still served his country and he's still a sympathetic figure. Pressing the media to clarify that he wasn't really a "disabled vet" (but a veteran who later became disabled) wasn't a battle worth fighting.
