Marketing | Environment | Culture

Tag: authenticity

BP’s Photoshopped Command Center: Why It Matters

So, BP gets called out for Photoshopping an image of their Command Center for use on their website.

Here’s a straight take from CBS News.

Here’s a more colorful approach from Treehugger.

Here are the before and after images (actually arranged as after and before):

British Petroleum, oil, Gulf, spill, disaster, PR, public relations, Photoshop, Adobe, manipulate, alter, image, photo

Before and After Photoshop: BP Command Center

I’ve seen two primary, polar reactions to this story:

  1. “It’s no surprise coming from those no-good, lying, reckless, corner-cutting, profit-hoarding goons!”
  2. “What’s the big deal?  They’ve obviously got bigger fish to fry!” (or fish to slick and suffocate, as it were)

I’ll take a minute to stand more toward the middle, but clearly on one side.

Altering an image is directly opposed to fundamental principles of management and public relations.  For the past 5 years, you couldn’t spend 5 minutes with any Harvard Business Review publication without feeling the movement toward transparency and authenticity.

Social media, in particular, has really brought these concepts in practice to the fore.  Fold in some Seth Godin-style storytelling-as-marketing and the picture is even more clear:  every individual and organization has the opportunity to tell the world who they are, what they’re about, where they’re from, why they’re here.  Beyond that, they can always share what they know, when they know it, directly with people who care.

If, however, these efforts are not received as honest and forthright from a good corporate citizen, this may be done for you (witness: BPGlobalPR on Twitter).  Regardless, companies of all sizes have embraced this opportunity and grown as a result.

As small an infraction as filling in a few Command Center monitors with some action shots may seem, it’s not honest.  When your every move is under the most extreme scrutiny you’ll ever enjoy, why doctor the images that are helping tell your story of response and recovery?  Apparently, trucking in workers for a Presidential photo op isn’t enough.

The BP spokesperson’s response to this story wasn’t awful: “Normally, we only use Photoshop for the typical purposes of color correction and cropping.”  Transparency, authenticity and honesty should be employed constantly, not “normally.”  Yes, it’s asking a lot, but truth is ultimately easier and best.

Among many the issues:

  • BP’s recent safety record is horrific compared to industry peers, so the talking point that the company has been “laser focused” on safety under Hayward is absolutely hollow.
  • Original estimates on the amount of oil pouring into the Gulf (5,000 revised to 50-100,000) now seem as ridiculous as the original cost estimates of the wars in Iraq and Afghanistan ($50-60,000,000,000 revised to $2-3,000,000,000,000).
  • BP has actively restricted access to images and information.
  • BP continues to buy pay-per-click campaigns (Google, Bing, Yahoo, YouTube) to try to steer searches to BP-produced information (to be fair, it’s a fine idea – I mention it because they took some heat for it).
  • BP withheld video of the leak for weeks, only released it through government mandate and continued to withhold HD video from scientists working on the problem.
  • Though off-point with regard to honesty, Hayward’s “I want my life back” and weekend of yachting earned charges of being aloof, insensitive and out of touch (um, 11 people lost their lives permanently in the initial explosion).  He even described the spill as “relatively tiny.”

The list goes on and the point remains: the PR response to the worst oil spill in U.S. history has been neither excellent nor honest.  The scope of this disaster is unprecedented.  It could have happened to any oil company working off shore.  Some PR blunders and gaffes can be reasonably expected.  Active obfuscation, however, is beyond “blunder.”

Bottom line: I find the Photoshopped image to be a micro-representation of an attitude, philosophy and practice completely opposed to the best path forward: transparency and authenticity.

Related Video

CNN’s Anderson Cooper has been very aggressive in covering this story.  A couple videos are linked in the body of this post and here’s a link to another specifically about transparency.  Plus, one embed:

BP CEO Tony Hayward fronts a friendly message with clean birds, clean beaches and colorfully suited workers (kin to the Intel Inside Pentium MMX dancers):

Thoughts?   Feel free to share them.

Yelp Needs Help!

A couple weeks back, one of my Facebook friends posted a story about two class-action proceedings against Yelp.  Today, I saw the latest from Inc. – “Yelp’s Legal Troubles Mount” – about a third lawsuit.  I was immediately moved to write this.

First: Yelp is an online customer review site.  As the trademarked tagline under the logo says: “Real People.  Real Reviews.”  Dry cleaners.  Restaurants.  Schools.  Whatever.  Yelp offers real insights about all kinds of operations in all kinds of towns all across the country (their site says they’re in the UK now, too).
Yelp.  Real People.  Real Reviews.

The basic allegations are of extortion and fraud.  The charge: Yelp reps threaten to highlight negative reviews, bury positive reviews, manipulate awards, etc. if you refuse their offers of a couple/few hundred dollars a month of advertising services.  Yelp threatens to make your business look bad, presumably still in customers’ own words.  Allegedly.

These allegations are coming from a couple dozen businesses of different kinds in different cities.

Let’s assume they’ve done no such thing, as co-founder and CEO Jeremy Stoppelman suggests in a March 4 blog post.  They’ve obviously done enough to elicit the appearance of impropriety.

What matters: trust.  There’s nothing more important than trust, especially if you’re Yelp.

A quick review and analysis of Yelp’s tagline:

  • They trademarked it, so they must care about it
  • The word “Real” constitutes 50% of it
  • The opposite of “Real” is “Fake”
  • They obviously want to distinguish their reviews as credible
  • Credibility in online reviews is often in question

Why would a company that depends on credibility, authenticity and “real” allow business practices to be sufficiently institutionalized in their culture to find themselves in this position?  If customers have any sense at all that the reviews are dishonest in any way, their entire purpose for using the service evaporates.

And for what?  A little short-term cash?  I know times are tough, but why go to heavy-handed sales tactics that are bound to bite back in the end?  Whatever they gained through these tactics will likely be devoured five or ten fold by newly incurred legal fees.

Even if Yelp successfully defends against the three class-action lawsuits (and no more pop up), the appearance of impropriety threatens fundamentally everything upon which the brand is built.  This is a potentially mortal insult added to the injury of the time and money tied up in legal proceedings.  And they brought it upon themselves.

Legal, operational, image and otherwise … Yelp needs help!

© 2024 ethanbeute

Theme by Anders NorenUp ↑