For those who watch the Daily Show you'll have seen that recently they did a piece on a Quebec town named Asbestos, which surprisingly actually exports Asbestos.
The town came off looking like idiots. I suppose it could have been worse, as they could have come off as looking like criminals fully aware of the health hazards associated with their 'product', which they did not appear to be, they seem to genuinely believe that Asbestos isn't that big a health risk when used properly.
The most staggering element of all this was that the asbestos mine owner granted the interview with the Daily Show without knowing what the Daily Show even was, he thought it was a genuine news outlet.
Anyway, I don't know why anyone running an Asbestos mine would be granting interviews anyway. There is no good story here. There is no angle you are going to find that makes exporting Asbestos (because you can't sell it in your own country because no one will buy it due to health issues) make you look good.
So what could the town / mine owner have been hoping to achieve by granting a media interview?
The only explanation is what I'd call 'living in a bubble' thinking. If you genuinely believe there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, then you assume that others will see it the same way you do. And that's the impression the Daily Show piece gave, not that these people are criminals, but rather, that they truly don't see anything wrong with asbestos.
And before you think (the way I did) that when it comes to asbestos surely it's not possible to be that unaware of how others would view this type of topic, take a look at what the Prime Minister said when campaigning in that region...
"Canada is one of a number of exporters of chrysotile, and there are many countries where it is legal (to use)," Harper told reporters. "This government will not put Canadian industry in a position were it is discriminated against in a market where sale is permitted."
So it's not that crazy if you genuinely believe there's nothing wrong with asbestos (when used "safely") and then such views are supported by the Canadian government, to think that others will understand your perspective.
The lesson learned in this situation - CALL A PR PERSON! I'm serious. The first thing the town / mine should have done was pick up the phone and call any PR agency / consultant and get their counsel. Any PR person would have told them within five minutes that they were walking in to a ready-made PR disaster.
And if they still wanted to do the interview, strategies could have been implemented to at least attempt to contain the damage would include:
1) Reference that it's not illegal by the Canadian government to export asbestos
2) Provide contenxt (how many asbestos exporters are there in North America? 10, 50, 100?)
3) Provide details on safety measures associated with asbestos sale (does someone buying asbestos need a certain state-sanctioned license to buy it?)
Any PR person would have told them that despite the Daily Show being a major media outlet, nothing good would have come from this interview, there was no up side here.
And I'll say this about the Daily Show, to certain degree, shame on them for playing 'gotcha' journalism as they obviously did not inform the town who they were or what the purpose of the interview was about. As PR people know, the media generally let you know the questions they will be asking and what the focus of their story is, in this case the focus was the dangers of exporting asbestos (but my money says the angle they probably pitched the town was the uniqueness of the towns name and that they found a town named Asbestos to be interesting and they wanted to 'learn' more about the town).
I wouldn't be surprised if they had approached other asbestos exporters who were more media savvy or who knew what the Daily Show was and got turned down. So they ultimately found the most media-ignorant operation, clearly did not explain what their focus was going to be (because no one in their right mind would walk blindly in to such an interview) and used them as fodder for the point they were seeking to make.
Oh well, a great case study in why every organization should have access to PR resources. Even if they aren't in-house, you should at very least have a PR resource on retainer so that when something like this happens you have someone to call. And if you don't have a PR resource at your disposal, then you need to seriously question whether you should be engaging in media interviews.
The town came off looking like idiots. I suppose it could have been worse, as they could have come off as looking like criminals fully aware of the health hazards associated with their 'product', which they did not appear to be, they seem to genuinely believe that Asbestos isn't that big a health risk when used properly.
The most staggering element of all this was that the asbestos mine owner granted the interview with the Daily Show without knowing what the Daily Show even was, he thought it was a genuine news outlet.
Anyway, I don't know why anyone running an Asbestos mine would be granting interviews anyway. There is no good story here. There is no angle you are going to find that makes exporting Asbestos (because you can't sell it in your own country because no one will buy it due to health issues) make you look good.
So what could the town / mine owner have been hoping to achieve by granting a media interview?
The only explanation is what I'd call 'living in a bubble' thinking. If you genuinely believe there is nothing wrong with what you are doing, then you assume that others will see it the same way you do. And that's the impression the Daily Show piece gave, not that these people are criminals, but rather, that they truly don't see anything wrong with asbestos.
And before you think (the way I did) that when it comes to asbestos surely it's not possible to be that unaware of how others would view this type of topic, take a look at what the Prime Minister said when campaigning in that region...
"Canada is one of a number of exporters of chrysotile, and there are many countries where it is legal (to use)," Harper told reporters. "This government will not put Canadian industry in a position were it is discriminated against in a market where sale is permitted."
So it's not that crazy if you genuinely believe there's nothing wrong with asbestos (when used "safely") and then such views are supported by the Canadian government, to think that others will understand your perspective.
The lesson learned in this situation - CALL A PR PERSON! I'm serious. The first thing the town / mine should have done was pick up the phone and call any PR agency / consultant and get their counsel. Any PR person would have told them within five minutes that they were walking in to a ready-made PR disaster.
And if they still wanted to do the interview, strategies could have been implemented to at least attempt to contain the damage would include:
1) Reference that it's not illegal by the Canadian government to export asbestos
2) Provide contenxt (how many asbestos exporters are there in North America? 10, 50, 100?)
3) Provide details on safety measures associated with asbestos sale (does someone buying asbestos need a certain state-sanctioned license to buy it?)
Any PR person would have told them that despite the Daily Show being a major media outlet, nothing good would have come from this interview, there was no up side here.
And I'll say this about the Daily Show, to certain degree, shame on them for playing 'gotcha' journalism as they obviously did not inform the town who they were or what the purpose of the interview was about. As PR people know, the media generally let you know the questions they will be asking and what the focus of their story is, in this case the focus was the dangers of exporting asbestos (but my money says the angle they probably pitched the town was the uniqueness of the towns name and that they found a town named Asbestos to be interesting and they wanted to 'learn' more about the town).
I wouldn't be surprised if they had approached other asbestos exporters who were more media savvy or who knew what the Daily Show was and got turned down. So they ultimately found the most media-ignorant operation, clearly did not explain what their focus was going to be (because no one in their right mind would walk blindly in to such an interview) and used them as fodder for the point they were seeking to make.
Oh well, a great case study in why every organization should have access to PR resources. Even if they aren't in-house, you should at very least have a PR resource on retainer so that when something like this happens you have someone to call. And if you don't have a PR resource at your disposal, then you need to seriously question whether you should be engaging in media interviews.
Comments
Post a Comment