Susan Komen’s loss could be Planned Parenthood’s gain

The decision to stop funding Charities which are under Federal or state investigations, by Susan G Komen Foundation (SK), is having catastrophic effects on its image. The key “victim” in this story is Planned Parenthood (PP), which is being seen as the victim of a political vendetta by the pro-life lobby.
Social media is abuzz with news of this decision.
“I am very disappointed to hear that the Komen organization is withdrawing support from Planned Parenthood. It is sad that an organization which is seemingly dedicated to women's health would make a shortsighted and mean spirited decision to withdraw support from and organization which provides healthcare for large numbers of poor women. I will be encouraging my friends (male and female) to express their feelings as well and withdraw our support from Komen. Shame on those who have made this decision,” is just one example of a post on SK’s website.
While the founder and CEO of SK has come up with a YouTube video response explaining its side of the story, I believe the tide is turning against SK.
To its defense, SK has a YouTube video with Susan Brinker, Founder and CEO of Susan Komen Foundation pointing out : “Donor dollars make the biggest impact possible. Since 2010, we started review of our policies and procedures of evaluation.” She goes on to explain that current grants are not impacted, and that no particular non-profit is being targeted for any political reason.
PP supporters see this as McCarthyism, in a different context.
The political establishment seems to be rallying behind PP, which is seen as the victim here, and is receiving unprecedented support – both in real life and on social media. With 26 Democrats writing a letter to SK’s CEO and New York’s Mayor Bloomberg announcing a personal donation of $ 250,000 from his personal wealth, the reaction is sharp and immediate.
What should SK do ?
Blame it on the political climate or bad communications strategy, one thing is clear : unless SK’s strategic team does something to salvage this situation quickly, they are going to lose a lot of their supporters, for what may perhaps be a legitimate procedural decision.
While their PR team seems to be working hard to explain their side of the story, what they need to be additionally doing is “monitoring” the news and how the story is developing.

Unfortunately for them, it is shaping up in a very negative way, which may actually damage their long-term supporters as well as their political base.

Purely from a communications perspective, the damage must be contained, before it gets any uglier.

Right now, SK's decision to re-engage with PP is nothing but a wise decision to win back some of the moral high ground that they occupied.



SK’s loss may as well become PP’s gain, in the long run.

Fall of the traditional reporter and Rise of the citizen journalist ?

Not really. For all the stories of gloom and doom that are written about how traditional ( read Print) media will die, and will be overtaken by citizen reporting – I believe that it won’t. Good “old” media reporters, who know their business and do a thorough job will always be in demand for one reason : their credibility.
A case in point is that of Ms.Aisha khan, a young 19 yr old girl from Kansas who went missing recently. In less than 24 hours of her having gone missing, I noticed several Face Book posts, a video of her parents being interviewed and a barrage of information on how she possibly could have been abducted.
While this was very plausible, it turned out that she had merely gone into hiding ( god knows why?) and returned “safely and unhurt”.
What is the moral of the story and what is the connection to the point made earlier, you may ask.
Well, the point is this : Social media enthusiasts ( including her family and friends) reacted too soon – without enough due-diligence and fact checking. All the well-known names in the world of Journalism : Robert Fisk, Walter Cronkite, Fareed Zakaria, Riz Khan have built their reputation by credible fact-checking and reporting which is accurate, informative and insightful; and not based on rumors or written in such haste that there is no room for seeing through the lies.
In this case, a good “Old media” reporter would check to see if there is a police complaint, before even thinking of writing a story. He/she would look for facts, perhaps take enough time ( at the expense of being a bit slow), but get all the ducks in a row before crying wolf.
The trouble with Social media reporting ( also its strength ironically) is its speed. Anything with an internet connection and a computer can put up bits of information, which can be called “News”.
In this case, it was the case of a girl, who decided to play a prank. But, she not only damaged her reputation, but also that of her peers, who may perhaps not heed her call for help the next time she is in real trouble.
That is the real danger.

What on earth is "strategic waiting" ?

I am sure you have had moments of lucidity, when you have said or done things which you have regretted later. This may be with a friend, a client or your significant other. Just waiting for a minute, a day, week or a month may have solved the problem.

It is good to remember that in the "real world", we are all dealing with imperfect and incomplete information. If we did have perfect information, then our ideas and perceptions would be drastically different than what they are today. This is not only humbling, but also a deep insight; which can re-shape the way we think and live our lives.

Strategic waiting is a concept, which not many people practice, much less understand. Some may call it "patience", or even "lack of courage to speak one's mind". But another way of looking at it is focus on what speaking out or "communicating" in the heat of the moment will accomplish, and what result will silence have. Sometimes, waiting it out gives us more information, more insights which may not be available right now.

Individuals as well as organizations can learn to "strategically wait" for better results, rather than jump in to act - in thought or in deed.

Dr.Johan Galtung, world-renowned figure in peace studies has said this recently: " If the USA had waited and dealt with the post 9/11 catastrophe, not by going to war in Afghanistan, but by addressing the tragedy of the attacks in a different way, then today the situation in Afghanistan would have been very different. Timing is everything. Countries as well as individuals must learn to strategically wait for the right moment to act or say anything."

A new CSR landscape ?

Corporate Social Responsibility ( CSR) as a model of engagement between the private sector and the wider stakeholders in a society is well established and entrenched in many societies. But in the developing world, CSR is at various stages of development, right from its nascent stage to a very advanced stage; with the private firms working closely on issues such as education, healthcare - and making a substantial contribution to the society.

In the context of the global recession, and decreased development aid from richer countries to the poorer ones, it is estimated that there will be a greater role of the private sector in International development . I wonder how this will shift the CSR landscape ? Will it mean greater CSR initiatives, now that the Aid dollars will reduce from one government to another ?

In reading the latest report by Brookings Institute titled " Global Development Under Pressure", In addition to partnering more systematically with international
private actors, support for sustainable development in any developing country requires collaboration with local businesses and civil society organizations rather than just a narrow relationship with state institutions. Over the long term, it is these enduring elements of broader society that will continue to drive growth
and accountable governance".

The report goes on further to add :"The shift in the global development landscape requiring even greater linkages between public and private actors is not a sudden revelation within U.S. foreign policy circles. The United States has long been an international leader in this area".

I wonder how all of this will shift, and at what pace ? Will private players actually move in, and do "what is right" to create the right business environment so they too can operate well, or as Milton Friedman argued, stand back and say " Social responsibility is not our business".

Listening in the social media space : Why bother ?

I attended a workshop recently at the Foundation Center, on Social media technologies titled "Doing more with less: Social media tips and trends for 2012". While the information presented was all very relevant and timely, the one major take-away for me was this : Social media allows us all to listen carefully to what others are saying, and helps us to learn, tailor our communication and strategy accordingly.

Never before was such insightful listening possible. We are able to zone in, and listen carefully to what people are saying. The very process of hearing, listening and analysing this information can give us tremendous insights about human behaviour and how we can use this information to address our audience.

Marketing communications professionals take pride in their ability to skillyfully craft messages and deliver them to an audience, who in turn, are expected to behave in a certain way. Without careful analysis, we may actually be talking to a wall.
But if we do know what a person or a group of people are thinking, discussing, we can enter the conversation ( on Facebook, twitter) or anyother platform and contribute meaningfully to this discussion.

I strongly believe that social media should teach all of us good listening skills, as much as good skills in creating good conversations and dialogues.

As William Isaacs points out in his book "Dialogue and the art of thinking together" : " The heart of dialogue is a simple but profound capacity to listen. Listening requires we not only hear the words, but also embrace, accept, and gradually let go of our own inner clamoring. As we explore it, we discover that listening is an expansive activity. It gives us a way to perceive more directly the ways we participate in the world around us".

The social media sphere offers us this ability to build relationships, form communities of concern and also help us create positive change through discussion.

The preliminary criterion in the online world remains the same as in the "real world" : the ability to listen carefully and thoughtfully.

Issues management basics : Its all about the mindshare !

Have you ever wondered how certain groups of people take over the debate about an issue, dominate it so much that any alternative discourse doesnt even seem possible.

Think of the Middle East peace process, the two-state solution for example. Or the debate about immigration that seems to have hogged the limelight in the US, in the context of the current economic climate. Everyone i speak with ( barring a few enlightened individuals) agree that it is "ok" for the US to be a bit "protectionist" about jobs, since it is about providing jobs for "our own" people.

I see this trend in the Middle East too. During my stay there in 2008-09, the wave of "Emiritization" was dominant, and I still read comments by former colleagues on Facebook that there arent enough "good" jobs for the locals. Well...

This brings us to the issue I was thinking about : that of mind-share.

How much of the mental space in the "publics" mind has been captured by one line of thinking ? Is this an easy thing to do ? Well, that again depends on the issue ? Is it important to be aware of it ?

Absolutely !

Sometimes, one group of people dominate a discourse and it becomes a part of our collective mind-share, to such a large extent that we forget that this may be false.

As a consumer of information or news, it does help to step back, just for a minute and ask the question : how much of your mind-share is being occupied by this line of thinking/ organization ?

When there is too much noise, it would perhaps help to whisper !

Insight of the week : When there is too much noise, perhaps it would help to whisper- rather than shout.

Counter-intuitive ? Well, this one is common-sensical.

With a cluttered market ( think of the corporate world, the political arena or even your own personal life)- With so many people competing for your time, attention and money, who do you really listen to ? The one who is shouting at the top of his/her voice, or someone who is thoughtful, close to you and who is not "hard-selling" you ?

Whispering has never been as important as today's hyper-connected world.

Get close to someone, get their attention and tell them what you want to - with sincerity and clarity.

And chances are - they will listen.

Good luck and have a great week ahead.