Physorg | A: The commercial
realm offers an interesting perspective. Businesses can act swiftly and
unilaterally, without the need for coalition building required by
legislative bodies. In crisis communication, one concept we look at when
determining strategy is "locus of control." If the organization itself
is at fault, then it bears more responsibility for righting the
perceived wrong than if the situation was caused by an external actor.
And of course, there's a big spectrum in between.
Rosanne Barr's highly successful television program was canceled just
a few hours after she posted a series of racist tweets. There was
nothing illegal about her statements, but the network made a business
decision that the continued revenue would not be worth the reputational
damage that might result from appearing to support her positions, even
tacitly. In this case, the locus of control for the crisis was clearly
Barr herself, and the network decided to sever ties immediately to
distance themselves.
Distancing is harder to accomplish when the locus of control clearly
rests within the organization itself, such as when a company creates an
ad campaign that many find objectionable. The cosmetics subscription box
service Ipsy recently came under fire when its online ad video,
intended to celebrate Pride Month, was instead seen by many as using
transphobic language. The company removed the ad and apologized, but not
before it had arguably worsened the situation by, allegedly, spending
the first couple of days deleting negative comments and responses from
trans customers. The marketplace of ideas moves very quickly these days,
but consequences tend to come more swiftly when the cause is an
employee or third party.
Q: Let's flip this. Can this scenario also be used as a powerful force?
A: I think the continued effects of the #MeToo movement remain an
excellent example of how powerful a force this kind of response can be
when it crosses over from online into offline domains, and develops
capacities as well as signaling. Actress Asia Argento, one of Harvey
Weinstein's accusers, made a formidable statement at this year's Cannes
(Film Festival) warning that powerful people will no longer be able to
get away with workplace sexual misconduct as they have in the past. And
Netflix canceled the U.K. press tour for the latest season of "Arrested
Development" after a cast interview with "The New York Times" went awry.
Actress Jessica Walter received massive social media encouragement for
describing, in tears, the verbal abuse she had suffered on set from
co-star Jeffrey Tambor—who had been fired from the Amazon series
"Transparent" for sexual harassment claims. Her male co-stars, on the
other hand, were excoriated for minimizing her pain and rushing to the
support of Tambor.
Nothing that happened in the interview crossed into the realm of
illegality, and Netflix operates on a subscription model that shields it
from the risks of advertising-driven network television. And yet, even
they took some steps to limit their exposure on this issue.
These incidents both happened months after the most recent wave of
the movement began last October. That suggests this is not an ephemeral
phenomenon that can be dismissed as mere online outrage, but a lasting
shift in our collective consciousness and expectations, even without any
kind of formal organization.
What's changing is who has power, and who is willing to use it. We
just need to try to thoughtfully adapt our structures and systems
alongside these changes, to reduce the risk of institutionalizing hasty
decisions.
0 comments:
Post a Comment