The PR Studio

I’m going to state the obvious – Penn State has a long road ahead of them. Recently the Associated Press put out a story based on the content of internal memos distributed to board members and staff immediately after Sandusky’s arrest. The reporter received the information as a result of a public records request to the Department of Education.

I am intrigued by a number of aspects of this story. First of all, I’m always fascinated when the PR strategy becomes the story. Unless this story was giving accolades to Penn State for their transparency and thorough communication efforts to students, faculty and beyond, the PR people in this situation should do everything in their power to not be an element of this scandal. This is one of those unique moments when the PR strategy needs a PR strategy.

If you can see past the critical nature of this story, it appears that the executive administration of Penn State was genuinely aiming to provide structured and effective communication to board members and stakeholders. I would say shame on Penn State if they weren’t communicating with board members after the scandal broke, so they should not be faulted for that smart and very necessary decision. Penn State will need to keep their internal audience and stakeholders up to speed and also continue to have their communications strategists present in their innermost circle as they navigate through this scandal for many years to come. In this particular circumstance, an old adage applies, which is “it’s not what you say, but how you say it.”

It’s problematic for the university that the immediate conversations released publicly (via widespread memo) seem to focus on concern for finances, the number of Youtube hits and whether or not social media mentions were declining. I have no doubt that an $88 million endowment is of great concern to the university, but considering the scandal was not about an ‘out of control frat party’, the gravity of the scandal needed to outweigh putting that donation discussion on paper so quickly. The conversation about the social media presence and the strategy to address it is a necessary one in the appropriate setting and circumstance and with the appropriate people. It should hardly be on a widespread priority list for any audience beyond the innermost circle of Penn State decision-makers.

Talking points don’t need to be distributed as ‘talking points’, but in a document presented in a more appropriate and subtle way. They could have accomplished the same goal by issuing a document that included the facts and circumstances for the purposes of clarifying misconceptions and narrowing down the extensive and possibly confusing press coverage. In other words, Penn State with full knowledge that their memos are likely to go public must write internal memos with a public audience in mind. What is really interesting is the fact that they lament about ‘leaks’ as problematic and then distribute inside information to a list of potential suspects.

One particularly troubling mention in this story recounts that in an update to deans and chancellors, they were told to highlight “remorse, humility and resolve.”  It is very important to set the tone and they were wise to choose one of remorse and resilience. The problem wasn’t the sentiment, but the presentation. To a cynical public and media, it would suggest ‘remember everyone, be remorseful.’ The nature of the scandal is too serious and traumatizing for that type of blatant PR instruction.

With the benefit of hindsight, I am one of the many armchair quarterbacks in this scenario and I realize that. I have no doubt that their strategy was genuine, well-intended, scrutinized and also had some success. Now knowing, however, the resulting story from the reporter who received the internal memos, PR professionals can keep this example in mind when navigating their next crisis with a client and make decisions about communicating the issues to the internal audience.

I commend their spokeswoman Annemarie Mountz for giving an appropriate response to the AP reporter about the university’s intentions and ongoing efforts. The story mentions a town hall-style meeting coming up soon to discuss the university’s next steps with members of the Penn State community. That is a wise decision and I look forward to reading about it.

I think the ‘take away’ from this is that it is critical in the wake of a scandal to always draft internal memos as if they are most definitely and with great speed going to land on the desk of a nearby and anxiously awaiting reporter.