Headline news again...

[TAHAWK 1420]

Taken as given that anything said can be twisted, the safest course would be to say nothing - or close down.  Even "no comment" is used by the MSM as an admission of quilt.  At the extremes, mere accusation = guilt.

Advertising is a normal business expense, so long as the work is hired out at arm's length.  

Sacrificing the core supporters to attempt to mollify enemies is remarkably incompetent.  Those who hate Scouting will never stop attacking until it is destroyed.  The target should be the committed supporters and the uncommitted - those already persuaded or persuadable.

In classic liberalism, " I disagree with everything you say but defend to the death your right to say it."  We have few liberals around today, especially among those calling themselves "liberals."

 

 

[fred8033 1589]

Post deleted. 

Edited January 7, 2020 by fred8033

[FireStone 423]

1 hour ago, walk in the woods said:

A marketing campaign right now could have unexpected backlash.

Agreed, and I don't think a marketing campaign is the way to go, at least not right now. Just better responses to these articles would be a great start. The CNN article does include a canned statement from the BSA, but only after one of those "The Boy Scouts of America did not immediately respond to direct questions about the particulars of the case..." note in the article. Just another missed opportunity to offer some sincere comments on the cases and expand upon what the BSA does now to protect youth.

When lawsuits (and national news media articles) use language like, "overwhelming evidence that Scouting attracts large numbers of pedophiles," as in presently, today, the BSA attracts large numbers of pedophiles, the BSA needs to immediately respond to those comments and articles to clearly and confidently state what they are doing about that. I don't see that happening with these delayed responses and statements, and that is the source of my frustration.

Edited January 7, 2020 by FireStone

[desertrat77 1144]

Whatever National's strategy may be (if indeed they even have a strategy) it's not working.  The vacuum of information from Irving portrays an organization on the ropes.  It hardly inspires the men and women who are working in the field, doing their best.

Even if Irving doesn't answer the articles directly, I see no initiative on their part to externally publicize the good news stories that do exist--records numbers at Philmont, etc. 

As @carebear3895 pointed out, National execs prefer local councils to tell the story.  Some local councils do a good job of this; many others make as little effort as Irving does.  Either way, it's a rather clueless PR plan on National's part.

Edited January 7, 2020 by desertrat77

[vol_scouter 365]

From people who would know, the BSA does provide positive, supportive information but the news media usually chooses not to include those comments. 

The news media seems to have a point of view on many (most?) articles and provides only the information supporting their point of view.

When it comes to science topics of which I am familiar or an expert, the news media never gets a story entirely correct. No sure if that is from a point of view or lack of knowledge but it is wrong. 

The BSA is trying to get positive information out through responses to articles such as this and news articles that the media simply refuses to publish. Advertising has enormous costs.

[desertrat77 1144]

1 minute ago, vol_scouter said:

From people who would know, the BSA does provide positive, supportive information but the news media usually chooses not to include those comments. 

The news media seems to have a point of view on many (most?) articles and provides only the information supporting their point of view.

When it comes to science topics of which I am familiar or an expert, the news media never gets a story entirely correct. No sure if that is from a point of view or lack of knowledge but it is wrong. 

The BSA is trying to get positive information out through responses to articles such as this and news articles that the media simply refuses to publish. Advertising has enormous costs.

I see your point.  But I'm also wondering where one can find the positive information from National sources?  As noted earlier, the BSA newsroom has published very little in the last year.

[vol_scouter 365]

desertrat77,

Others have pointed out how information can be twisted and I noted how the media uses very little positive so the BSA is very cautious about what is published to avoid stories being twisted. Also, if the media does not pick up a story, we will never know about it.

vol_scouter

[desertrat77 1144]

14 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

desertrat77,

Others have pointed out how information can be twisted and I noted how the media uses very little positive so the BSA is very cautious about what is published to avoid stories being twisted. Also, if the media does not pick up a story, we will never know about it.

vol_scouter

I understand, vol_scouter, the media is no friend of the BSA.  But organizations that are facing negative publicity usually launch a proactive PR campaign to tell their story.  I don't think an organization like the BSA, with the challenges it faces, can survive by simply being quiet.

Edited January 7, 2020 by desertrat77
Rephrased last sentence.

[FireStone 423]

5 minutes ago, vol_scouter said:

Others have pointed out how information can be twisted and I noted how the media uses very little positive so the BSA is very cautious about what is published to avoid stories being twisted. Also, if the media does not pick up a story, we will never know about it.

What is being said already is about as bad as it gets. We're being branded as a haven for pedophiles, an organization that "attracts large numbers of pedophiles" with almost no vetting process. I fail to see how responding to that kind of stuff could do any more harm than not responding to it.

Edited January 7, 2020 by FireStone

[elitts 464]

The best way I could see for the BSA respond to this publicly would be to NOT respond to it directly, but instead have publications telling people "What you should expect when you sign your child up".  Kind of an awareness campaign about , casually throwing in when it started.

Something very short like:

HOW TO KNOW IF YOUR TROOP IS DOING IT RIGHT!!
_________________________________________________________________________________________
* Every Scouter involved with your child will be subjected to a criminal background check;

* Every Scouter will have received complete training and testing in BSA's Youth Protection program;

* No Scouter will ever be alone with any scout other than their own child;

If you see or become aware of anything that makes you think these rules aren't being followed, please report it to: 555-XXX-XXX

** These methods were instituted as of :  Some date in some year

_________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

Those are the kinds of quick, informational bullet points that might have a chance of getting thrown into a news blurb about the ongoing lawsuits.

Edited January 7, 2020 by elitts

[TAHAWK 1420]

8 hours ago, vol_scouter said:

From people who would know, the BSA does provide positive, supportive information but the news media usually chooses not to include those comments. 

The news media seems to have a point of view on many (most?) articles and provides only the information supporting their point of view.

When it comes to science topics of which I am familiar or an expert, the news media never gets a story entirely correct. No sure if that is from a point of view or lack of knowledge but it is wrong. 

The BSA is trying to get positive information out through responses to articles such as this and news articles that the media simply refuses to publish. Advertising has enormous costs.

Journalism, in the sense of  energetic investigation and a drive for accuracy, died decades ago with few exceptions.  Now it's "He said"/"She said"  and "If it bleeds, it leads."

CNN initially reported in its on-line version that the attack in Baghdad that killed  Soleimani was by "three Katyusha rockets."  I contacted them and pointed out that those rockets are WW II-era ballistic rockets - unguided  area weapons - very inaccurate and that the U.S. doesn't use them.  The story then changed to "drone attack."   This was a big deal story and a hash was made of it right out of the gate.  The claim of Katyushas suggested an attack by ISIS or some other group opposed to Iran, and, given that it was CNN, anything was possible.

Our local remaining, dying newspaper, reported a few years ago that Jews and Muslims are offended by the public display of the Ten Commandments because "They are from the Christian Bible."   The story was by their "Chief foreign news editor, who supposedly has a BA in "liberal arts" from Smith. All that education set to naught by the failure to see The Ten Commandments.   My old Honda had a bumper sticker given to me by the Troop SM, a cantor; "Moses says take 10."  Muslims feel they have a better version but are emphatically not offended at what they regard as an older revelation from Allah, since updated by the revelations accorded to the Prophet  Muhammad  centuries later.

Most of the material in the Cleveland Plain Dealer for several years is days-old cut-and-paste  from AP, NY Time, Washington Post, and LA Times.    It employs a fraction of it's former staff.  It mourned the  death of the Cleveland Press.  TV will mourn the death of the "PD"  when life support is discontinued.  

[ParkMan 1293]

20 hours ago, desertrat77 said:

I understand, vol_scouter, the media is no friend of the BSA.  But organizations that are facing negative publicity usually launch a proactive PR campaign to tell their story.  I don't think an organization like the BSA, with the challenges it faces, can survive by simply being quiet.

This is the key point.  The BSA doesn't need a "marketing" strategy with glossy TV ads, it needs a public relations strategy.

Today, the BSA is letting others define it - lawyers, the news media, etc.  The BSA should not simply respond to articles and send out press releases.  The BSA needs to get ahead of this story and define itself.  The BSA should create news that tells the story of Scouting and it's values.  Instead of simply telling people about the great YPT program the BSA has, the BSA ought to be convening summits in Washington or New York of national leaders on the prevention of child abuse.  The BSA should be embracing victims of child abuse and helping them to tell their story.  Create some kind of significant fund to compensate victims of abuse and assist victims in getting access to it.

The BSA PR head should be on the speed dial of every media person originating stories in this area.  Be open and transparent with the media about what happened and what needs to be done.  Be THE expert on past abuse in youth organizations.  

But, in short - the BSA needs to learn the first rule of crisis management.  You have to be proactive and get out in front of the crisis.  This is why I made my earlier suggestion.  Instead of promoting some mid-level marketing professional from some big council to the national role, the BSA ought to open the checkbook and go out and hire someone who really understands this stuff.  Perhaps a professional spokesperson from a major politician.

[desertrat77 1144]

1 hour ago, ParkMan said:

This is the key point.  The BSA doesn't need a "marketing" strategy with glossy TV ads, it needs a public relations strategy.

Today, the BSA is letting others define it - lawyers, the news media, etc.  The BSA should not simply respond to articles and send out press releases.  The BSA needs to get ahead of this story and define itself.  The BSA should create news that tells the story of Scouting and it's values.  Instead of simply telling people about the great YPT program the BSA has, the BSA ought to be convening summits in Washington or New York of national leaders on the prevention of child abuse.  The BSA should be embracing victims of child abuse and helping them to tell their story.  Create some kind of significant fund to compensate victims of abuse and assist victims in getting access to it.

The BSA PR head should be on the speed dial of every media person originating stories in this area.  Be open and transparent with the media about what happened and what needs to be done.  Be THE expert on past abuse in youth organizations.  

But, in short - the BSA needs to learn the first rule of crisis management.  You have to be proactive and get out in front of the crisis.  This is why I made my earlier suggestion.  Instead of promoting some mid-level marketing professional from some big council to the national role, the BSA ought to open the checkbook and go out and hire someone who really understands this stuff.  Perhaps a professional spokesperson from a major politician.

I agree.  The BSA has traditionally been rather flat-footed when dealing with negative publicity. 

I'd fully support the hiring of a high-speed PR pro.  Money well spent.  Stop the puff-ball/favorite color stories for the internal audience ("Top 7 MBs Earned in Months with the Letter 'R'").  Instead, let's start telling the world who we are.

A couple of dynamics:

- The desperate need for external PR aside, National also needs to have a complete re-look at how it communicates within our organization.   What's really going on?  Are we nearer bankruptcy that we think?  What is the status of our mortgaged high adventure bases?  We really don't have a clue because we volunteers (and many council pros) are treated as if "you don't have a need to know."  A good example is the dues increase fiasco of last fall.  Stony, imperious silence by National.  Then "Sell more popcorn."  Really?  I think we deserve more.  I don't expect to be given every little detail, but a frank update and words of encouragement from our pros would go a long way.

- Mr. Mosby's hiring is a good step.  It's an unspoken admission by National that their career progression plan for senior executives doesn't work.  Just because Mr./Ms SE runs the gauntlet and is pulled up by their bootstraps to National, doesn't necessarily mean they are qualified to lead our organization at that level.  We have a national staff that is consistently three steps behind.  The media, the legal world and public opinion are shaping the entire discussion, and our National staff doesn't utter a word.

Edited January 8, 2020 by desertrat77

[FireStone 423]

22 hours ago, ParkMan said:

This is the key point.  The BSA doesn't need a "marketing" strategy with glossy TV ads, it needs a public relations strategy.

Today, the BSA is letting others define it - lawyers, the news media, etc.  The BSA should not simply respond to articles and send out press releases.  The BSA needs to get ahead of this story and define itself.  The BSA should create news that tells the story of Scouting and it's values.  Instead of simply telling people about the great YPT program the BSA has, the BSA ought to be convening summits in Washington or New York of national leaders on the prevention of child abuse.  The BSA should be embracing victims of child abuse and helping them to tell their story.  Create some kind of significant fund to compensate victims of abuse and assist victims in getting access to it.

The BSA PR head should be on the speed dial of every media person originating stories in this area.  Be open and transparent with the media about what happened and what needs to be done.  Be THE expert on past abuse in youth organizations.  

But, in short - the BSA needs to learn the first rule of crisis management.  You have to be proactive and get out in front of the crisis.  This is why I made my earlier suggestion.  Instead of promoting some mid-level marketing professional from some big council to the national role, the BSA ought to open the checkbook and go out and hire someone who really understands this stuff.  Perhaps a professional spokesperson from a major politician.

Excellent ideas. You're right, the BSA needs to define itself, not just offer comments when asked (and apparently delay responses, too, based on the article I mentioned in the original post). Not only are they reactive, they're slow about it, too.

They need to get ahead of it. There is so much good going on in the organization when it comes to YPT, and that story is just not getting told. I'd venture a guess that we're actually among the best youth organizations when it comes to youth protection policies. I can't think of another organization that requires adults to do so much so often when it comes to learning about abuse prevention and adhering to policies and best-practices to police ourselves from within (2-deep, etc).

And they need to correct the current narrative. I know that locally, we have some parents that think we just fill out a form and buy a tan shirt and that's how we become leaders. Nationally that idea is probably just as common, and National isn't fixing it. Now more than ever we should be telling parents exactly what the process is for becoming a leader, everyone should know that we're background-checked, trained, and follow youth protection practices at every single meeting, outing, and activity.

[vol_scouter 365]

Do you all understand that the response that the BSA sends to the media is edited by that media?  The media often (usually) omit much of the positive in a response.

The BSA cannot compel the news media to pick up a story so getting ahead of stories or getting positive news out to the public is not something that the BSA can control.

Everyone seems to believe that positive stories and effective responses are not being made but that is simply not true. The media tells the story that it wants you to consume, not what is true or accurate.