By Fraser P. Seitel
It is axiomatic in public relations that your loyalty belongs to he who signs your pay check.
Stated another way, if it comes down to a decision between accommodating a reporter or staying true to client wishes, you must choose the latter every time. (The exception is if your client asks you to lie about the fact he purposely texted a photo of his crotch to a female constituent.)
What “loyalty” also means is advising your client quickly to disengage, admit guilt, or even sever an associate once it is clear you’re on the wrong side of an issue.
Most recent example of this “cut quickly” public relations strategy came last week, when Kia Motors issued a stinging rebuke of two award-winning, Brazil advertisements ostensibly done in its behalf.
The ads for Kia's dual-zone air conditioning, which won the 2011 Cannes Silver Lion award, depicted split screen cartoons; one side an innocent scene with a man and a little girl and the other side the same scene in a provocatively lascivious version that smacked of pedophilia.
The ads, the epitome of bad taste in any language (except perhaps Portuguese and French), were immediately denounced by Kia Motors.
As soon as the R-rated ads won the prize in Cannes and began to attract worldwide attention, Kia posted a swift and complete castigation on its Facebook page:
"This ad was not created in the U.S. by Kia Motors America (KMA) or any of its marketing partners ad does not reflect the opinions or value of KMA or Kia Motors Corporation. The ad is undoubtedly inappropriate, and on behalf of Kia Motors we apologize to those who have been offended by it.
"We can guarantee this advertisement has never and will never be used in any form in the United States, and our global headquarters in Seoul, South Korea is addressing the issue with the independent Brazlian distributor."
Kia went even further by calling into question both the integrity of the Sao Paulo advertising agency that created the ads and the Cannes competition itself.
Kia said it had “no business relationship” with the agency, even though contest rules demand that”ads must have been made for clients and run as part of normal campaign paid for by client media budgets.”
Kia’s quick action to distance itself from the ad and the competition effectively shifted negative attention to the agency in Brazil – aptly named, Moma Propaganda -- that created the offensive ad and the Cannes Silver Lion competition.
The latter, as it turns out, is no stranger to presenting awards for unapproved, pedophilia-inspired advertisements. In 2008, J.C. Penny protested after it was awarded a Cannes Lion for an ad portraying two teenagers putting their clothes back on before hot-footing it out of a basement. That ad was created by a former employee of Penny’s ad agency and, like the Kia example, never authorized by the company.
Most organizations, like Kia and J.C. Penny, care mightily about protecting their reputations from association with unsavory people or issues, like pedophilia. At the slightest hint of such association, an organization must strike out categorically against those perpetrating the tie, regardless of the repercussions to the offending party.
This is precisely what Kia -- and before it, Penny – did immediately to redeem their good names.
Apparently, when it comes to protecting their own names, the Moma agency in Brazil and the Cannes Silver Lion award competition in France could care less. |