soulati.com

Digital Marketing Strategy, PR and Messaging

Soulati-'TUDE!

Greenpeace’s Social Media Win Has Losers

By

Rainforest

If you were paying attention to social and traditional media, you will recall the Greenpeace/Nestle global crisis communications situation primarily in March and April this year. I wrote about it here; it was a fascinating study in public relations. (I would’ve liked to have been teaching a PR class when this was unfolding.)   

The issue became quite ugly quite fast when Greenpeace launched a crusade with a viral video accusing Nestle of killing orangutans in the rainforest due to its purchase of palm oil from a company in Indonesia that harvested palm oil from the rainforest and sold it to the likes of Nestle.

Nestle went on the defensive on Facebook, Twitter, and other social media hot spots and garnered thousands of hits to its page. Social media erupted against Nestle, as well, and Greenpeace watched their fireworks for weeks. In spite of Greenpeace’s social media win, the losers are still trying to uncover.

The accused Indonesian company from which Nestle and Unilever had been purchasing palm oil, PT Sinar Mas Agro Resources & Technology (SMART), ceased doing business with the two global giants as a result of the allegations. Unilever had been purchasing 47,000 tons of palm oil from SMART annually.

On August 11, 2010, this headline in the Wall Street Journal grabbed my attention, “Palm Oil Firm Rebuts Greenpeace Claim.” STAR paid to conduct a third-party audit of its estates to determine research “shows the company wasn’t responsible for cutting down forest and destroying orangutan habitat for palm cultivation.”

While I can’t corroborate the research report (Greenpeace is rebutting it), I can give you the skinny:

DAMAGE DONE, GREENPEACE “WINS.”

The public relations and social media strategy behind the Greenpeace maneuvers are amazing; and, they’ve been doing this for years.  These campaigns are the most well-orchestrated on a global scale; why? Because we live in an interconnected world where videos go viral within hours, and instantaneous, real- time, in-bound communication on social networks heightens the crisis to unmanageable proportion.

The tools are available to all the players except STAR. I have not done my research on this company’s mission, values or business philosophy (here’s a link to Business.com with some info). What I can assume is that people in Indonesia lost money and jobs because of this campaign and monkeys perhaps lost homes, too. World-wide, real-time refute via social media of the allegations by STAR were not possible, but the Wall Street Journal provided the company a solid foundation for which to air its side of the story.

As I weave this story again, I’m drawing your focus to the profound impact social media has all companies. Size Doesn’t Matter!! Word-of-mouth marketing is an amazing channel. If you watched the man in the video biting off the finger of an orangutan when he opened a Kit Kat, it’s highly likely you’ll never eat another (uh, chocolate bar).

Media Relations and P&G’s What-If Plan

By

Today’s post is a compendium of news about Fortune 100 crises. If you’ve watched this space, you’ll recognize these names – Nestle, BP, and Proctor & Gamble. Don’t know the crisis each is managing? Then perhaps you’ve not been consuming social and traditional media, for these corporations are in the news several times a day of late due to rain forests, oil and diapers.

To bring you up to speed, here’s the Soulati-‘TUDE! Nestle post. This week, my “Got a What If Plan?” oriented to the oil debacle paved the way for the next day’s post on diapers, rash and Procter & Gamble.

So great to see a sequential flow, and the only reason I re-introduced this content here is as a foreword to this article in Advertising Age “Inside P&G’s PR playbook: How Pampers Battled Diaper Debacle” about a behind-the-scenes look at the public relations machine for Proctor & Gamble. The internal team and its agency kicked into high gear at the onset of mommy complaints that the new Pampers Dry Max caused diaper rash and “chemical burns” on babies’ behinds.

For anyone in corporate or agency public relations, I strongly encourage you read this piece. It is a fascinating unfolding of a public relations machine in synch with product marketing, corporate strategy, and internal response to a brewing external crisis.

The story was written by Jack Neff after Advertising Age was granted an insider view of the marketing public relations team in action. He followed them for half a day to watch strategy and execution. I’ve not seen a story of this nature delivered smack in the middle of a crisis. If I were a stakeholder, you can bet my concerns would be alleviated after reading this piece.

In companies the world over, there is crisis. Social media has elevated these issues beyond comprehension and presented them to the consuming public on a silver platter. This trifecta is a textbook case for students, and I hope academicians and volunteer public relations professors are watching these three situations closely. There’s no better way to teach than by real-world example, and none of us are too old to keep learning.

Only one word of counsel for today:

It’s more critical than ever to shore up external messaging. When social media comes calling, one word gone awry can upset the entire apple cart.

Social Media Groundswell Tipping Point and Nestle’

By

Nestle’ SA is suffering a groundswell of negative social media commentary that began March 17 when Greenpeace International released a report about Nestle’s purchase and use of palm oil. Greenpeace alleges the palm oil comes from an Indonesian company that cleared rain forests to build palm plantations.

The Twitterosphere has been abuzz about this story, and the Nestle’ Facebook fan page (with more than 96,000 fans) has thousands of negative hits from activists, environmentalists, Greenpeace, animal rights supporters, and the like.

In the March 29, 2010 Wall Street Journal, the backlash against the company is reported as global and devastating (if you’re Nestle). This situation, more than the Domino’s Pizza incident I watched unfold on Twitter last year, is global viral. It’s buoyed by the digitally savvy who’ve used social media effectively to push a viral message that Nestle is killing orangutans.

If you sat in the corporate communications department of Nestle, what would you recommend as public relations strategy? And, to those of you who do do crisis communications, is this considered a crisis, in your opinion?

  • Nestle is an iconic global brand targeting audiences across the spectrum of age groups who consume infant formula, cereal, pet food, bottled water, energy foods, cocoa, chocolates, and more. Millions of brand-loyal people touch Nestle products. Similar to Toyota, apology and/or clarifications about the company’s products and stance on the environment should be immediately shared. On the Nestle Web site, there is a statement about the palm oil situation (see above link).
  • Executives should avail themselves to the consumer public in a Web forum to field questions. Digg features such forums for high-level executives (the Toyota U.S. CEO was interviewed on Digg).
  • Groundswell is a fabulous read. Ms. Li and co-author Josh Bernoff of Forrester Research suggest “groundswell thinking is like any other complex skill — it takes knowledge, experience, and eventually, enlightenment to get there.” In an early chapter of the book on strategies for tapping the groundswell, the authors offer “five strategies companies can pursue in the groundswell, and these include listening, talking, energizing, supporting, embracing.” (These are exactly what Nestle’ needs to be doing.)
  • I asked my Chicago colleague Christine Esposito of Terracom Public Relations, a 20-year-old environmental public relations firm, to weigh in on this discussion. I wanted Christine’s take on Greenpeace and what it might do (besides rejoice at the success of its global viral campaign).
  • Christine suggested Greenpeace could benefit its edgy activist image by recruiting more mainstream NGOs that are similarly concerned about palm oil production. They should sit together at the boardroom table with Nestle to spell out the allegations, listen to how the corporation responds, and hammer out a resolution. (Hmm, this sounds like mediation, and perhaps it’s very similar.)
  • Another thought is immediate elevation by Nestle of its cause-related marketing efforts. Whatever programs Nestle’ corporate communications has had in place, boost them up to engage with environmentalists and show the company does care about Indonesia’s rain forests, among other protected habitats and animals.
  • To round out its team of experts, Nestle’ should hire Paul Rand and his team at Chicago’s hot word-of-mouth marketing agency Zocalo Group. Paul is president of the Word of Mouth Marketing Association, and he is a high-level influencer in brand evangelism. (I worked with and for Paul in my Chicago agency days and respect his intelligence and ability to deliver in such situations.)

Nestle did not dally in its response to this situation. Regardless, it’s difficult to control the Tipping Point. As a teachable moment, this case study is one for the books, and it’s still unfolding. Once the first domino was tickled, the rest just fell into place.

What strategies would you offer Nestle and/or Greenpeace International to push this situation to resolution and repair a damaged brand?