The Chief, The ’Skins & The Right Thing To Do

Maybe it's time.

We at Caler&Company tend to look at public-relations controversies in a couple of different ways. We’re interested observers, followers of news and rumors…and at the same time we’re industry insiders, always wargaming how we’d navigate similar challenges. “If they were our clients…” is how many a conversation ’round our watercooler begin.

Full disclosure: the Cleveland Indians and the Washington Redskins are not our clients. We have no say in how they handle the perennial (yet currently very active) controversies surrounding the Native American themes in their team names and mascots.

But if they were our clients, here’s what we’d tell them…

It’s true that political correctness can run rampant, far past the point of ridiculousness. It’s also true that a significant segment of the population, maybe even one that’s concentrated among the sports-loving types, reacts pretty negatively to political correctness. They value history and tradition, like the 66-year-old legacy of Chief Wahoo, and the 81-year-old history of Washington’s team name.

On those criteria alone, a public relations professional might be justified in telling the teams to hang tough. They could probably make the argument that the fans will appreciate their steadfastness all the more.

But the best public relations strategy, we’d tell them, always has to be this: Just do the right thing. And we’d ask them if retiring Chief Wahoo and the name “Redskins” is a matter of political correctness, or is it the right thing to do?

The traditions and memories those teams and their symbols are steeped in are overwhelming positive. Fans of those teams think of great times with family and friends, of thrilling triumph and crushing defeat, when they see the Indians or Redskins names and logos. Racial injustice and humiliation are surely the furthest things from their minds.

But that doesn’t alter the fact that “Redskins” is a slur, and Chief Wahoo is a gross stereotype.

If they were our clients, we’d tell them they could probably hang tough if they wanted to. They could probably thumb their noses at any and all who took offense, and most likely get away with it. For a while at least. Times and attitudes change after all. One day, we’d tell them, they could probably expect a reckoning.

Or they could do the right thing, right now.

Saying goodbye to the Chief, and renaming the ’Skins, isn’t the same as admitting that there was racism inherent in the long history of those franchises. We think even the most vocal critics realize that the teams’ management, players, and fans are motivated only by love of their sport and their hometown traditions.

And resist it though they might, we think even the most diehard fans will come to accept change, maybe even embrace it. New traditions are being born all the time, after all. If they’re born to replace ones best left in the past, then so much the better.

The C4

1. Public relations is a prominent offering on the Caler&Company menu. We love our close engagement with our public-relations clients, and the rollicking challenges that come with real-time PR operations. We can’t turn it off. So we analyze PR cases. The thornier they are, the more we analyze them.
2. We’re well aware, then, that the Washington Redskins and the Cleveland Indians have had slow-burn public-relations trials for decades now, churned up by those who say they’re indiscriminately insulting American Indians. We also know that at present the controversy seems to be heating up a bit.
3. But who knows. Maybe it’ll blow over. Surely the PR pros at work on this know that’s a possibility. The teams very well might not have to change a thing.
4. But they should. The world gets a little better every time we discard a slur or stereotype. Kind of makes you wonder why we don’t discard them all.

I Phone Home...

When I'm off the map.

Image c/o Businessweek.

The launch of any new Apple device is rabidly anticipated and treated with a level of fanfare that’s slightly puzzling to those of us who haven’t yet drunk of the Apple-flavored Kool Aid. The late September release of the iPhone 5 was no different.

However, one particular difference became evident within days as not-so-happy iPhone 5 owners began reporting surprising problems with the newly created Apple Maps, which was rolled out with the iPhone 5 as a competitor to the industry-leading Google mapping program. The specifics of the Apple Maps issues, which include incomplete and inaccurate road and route data, and even typos in place names, speak of an unready product rushed into service. Clearly not what we’d expect from history’s most successful tech company.

But Apple’s real problem is still developing: their gaffe has turned their newest product into a late-night punchline. (Example: A guy with an iPhone 5 walks into a bar. Or a church. Maybe it was the Pacific Ocean.)

Apple CEO Tim Cook has issued an apology, and fixes are reportedly being expedited. Given the still-strong sales of the iPhone 5, and Apple’s resiliently loyal fanbase, it’s likely the company won’t suffer too much for their mistake.

But that shouldn’t excuse them for the worst kind of PR disaster: the self-inflicted kind. This one began with the widely panned decision, made back in the summer, to ditch Google Maps — reportedly in retaliation for Google’s entering the mobile-hardware arena. The inside story remains to be written, but it sure seems like Apple’s habit of cutthroat competition resulted in the too-soon release of an inferior product, all at their customers’ expense.

The bottom line is that Apple’s reputation, like every company’s, is their most important nontangible asset. No company can afford to risk it needlessly. Apple will undoubtedly survive the iPhone 5 maps fiasco. But how well will they fare the next time hubris lays them low?

Do they really want to find out?

The C4:

1. The iPhone 5 was released on September 21, 2012. Like most Apple releases, this one was treated as one of the most momentous tech happenings of the year.
2. The story quickly shifted, though, as users reported problems with the on-board Apple Maps program, which seemed to make it as useful for navigation as a demagnetized compass. Even though sales of the device are strong, the launch has turned into a PR fiasco, necessitating software fixes and a CEO apology.
3. It never should have happened. The whole sorry episode seems to be the result of Pyrrhic competition between Apple and Google, and of the unacceptable practice of rushing unready products to market.
4. In the long run, despite a hit to their reputation, Apple probably won’t suffer inordinately for their mistake. But reputation is finite. One hopes Apple has learned something from this, lest their reputation comes to be defined by it.