One of the questions that many public relations officers or CEOs of companies have asked us is whether it is really necessary to stay current in the media, especially regarding issues that have to do with our company or with our products and brands.
For example: When a company that goes unnoticed by the media suddenly finds itself involved in a smear campaign where its officials are accused of many false negative things and this transcends the media in big headlines, what to do?
Could it be that we forget public opinion and choose to defend ourselves judicially? Watch out! Public opinion can exert some influence even in the thinking of magistrates, not to mention the enormous damage that corporate reputation could suffer. The best, then, is to take control of the agenda in the media always, always and always.
What I want to point out specifically is that in order to do it, you have to apply some principles that have made the great strategists of history popular: Machiavelli, Tsun Tzu, Robert Greene, among others.
In a matter of public debate in the media, the ideal is to exercise control. How? Through strategies and tactics we must make our opponents come closer to us and not us to them.
This is achieved when our opponent speaks the topics that we propose and not the other way around. When we make your communication reactive to ours and proactive, we are taking control of the agenda without a doubt.
When emotion takes precedence over strategic vision, it is when we begin to make mistakes and, without realizing it, we suddenly find ourselves making statements to the press on the issues of our adversary: From that moment on they are setting our agenda and we have lost control of the topics of public debate for letting ourselves be carried away by emotions.
It is not recommended that Crisis Committees be chaired by highly emotional people who confuse aggressive action with effective action. These people cannot act as spokespersons either because it is easy to make them lose control and they make mistakes every moment.
How many times is the story repeated of aggressive managers or directors who carry out a series of bold reaction movements that give them great apparent power and control over their adversaries.
But this is momentary, since by acting thoughtlessly and with great emotional force they make enemies who then unite. Being constantly reacting causes a company and its officers to run out, until they cannot help it any longer.
We must ask ourselves the following question: What is the point of reacting frantically if we are never in control of the situation? Why do we always have to react to facts instead of directing them? The answer is simple: We have a wrong idea of power.
In managing a crisis situation, where the company has to act immediately, strategic thinking has to prevail even over reason and emotion to have power.
The essence of power is the ability to maintain initiative, to make others react to our actions, to make opponents always remain on the defensive. This will allow us to always manage the agenda, have the power and control of the topics of public debate.
It took me many experiences to understand this lesson: You have to learn to control your emotions and not act under the influence of anger in crisis situations, when defamation and slander are sometimes evident and outrageous.
The subject of strategy is complex but fascinating and captivating. We cannot claim to design effective communication programs without considering these elementary principles. In subsequent installments we will continue to analyze all the strategic principles of the great masters.
If we understand dirty campaigns or media attacks as acts of war and act with cunning and intelligence, a crisis situation can become a great opportunity to relaunch the image of our company.
