In CNN‘s creatively chosen words, the troubled Carnival Triumph is expected “to finally limp into port later today”–but the PR emergency has just begun!

Cruise line executives breathed a sigh of relief last month during the industry’s peak season. This January got off to a much smoother start for them than last year, when the Costa Concordia ran aground off the Italian coast, impacting the industry’s reputation and bottom line. They were so focused on (successfully) selling their products they didn’t even have time to speak at travel industry marketing conferences.

However, cruise companies’ sense of calm has been shattered again as a result of the Carnival Triumph’s engine fire on Sunday. The vessel drifted off the Yucatan coast of Mexico for more than three days–and despite the fact that no casualties have occurred, the 3,142 stranded passengers have reported deteriorating and deplorable sanitary conditions.

The crisis is still unfolding and it’s too soon to know the full outcome. However, all signs (most prominently falling stock prices) bode badly for Carnival. So far the company hasn’t followed an effective course of action for service recovery during a crisis. Below are our takeaways from the ongoing saga.

1. Don’t keep screwing up:

Hey, accidents happen! And customers can forgive a company experiencing its first crisis. But Carnival ships have repeatedly suffered other performance and safety-related incidents. Carnival is also the parent company of Costa Concordia, so they were already on a short leash in terms of public perception. They should have taken extra precautions to avert another disaster.

Read more

In this video exclusive, crisis communications expert and Solomon McCown & Company president Ashley McCown reviews her top 10 PR crises of 2012. Her top cases range from athletes on trial to deep-fried chickens for traditional marriage. Do we agree? Disagree?

Hurricane Sandy is already old news to most Americans, but it’s still a big deal to thousands, if not millions, in the northeast. Some entities (like the MTA) managed to turn the storm into a PR win, and the much-hated Time Warner Cable now appears to be one of them.

It was a multi-step process: First Time Warner deployed mobile power stations around New York City in order to “allow people without power to charge up their phones, use our WiFi”, etc. Then its reps announced a plan to “automatically credit many” area customers who lost power during the storm, effectively paying them back for service they didn’t receive. Some customers whose accounts weren’t caught by Time Warner’s technical sweep may need to call the company in order to receive their credit, but the vast majority of accounts will be credited automatically.

This week brings more encouraging news: The cable giant and several other companies sponsored food trucks that continue to visit the storm’s hardest-hit areas, delivering free grub to those left without power and/or shelter. Selections include pizza, cheese steak and souvlaki–we approve of their taste in comfort food even more than their humanitarian efforts!

We’d love to hear more customer service stories. Has the company made good on its promises? Can a fickle public forgive Time Warner?

Today a battle wages on Twitter over what most would probably not consider a pressing issue: whether New York should proceed as planned with the ING New York City Marathon, currently scheduled for Sunday morning. The debate has turned bitter and divisive as pro and con camps make their cases.

Mayor Michael Bloomberg and others who think the race should happen argue that a postponement or cancellation would be devastating to the NYC-based businesses that bring in hundreds of millions of dollars each year thanks to the Marathon (this year’s race will include approximately 50,000 runners). Bloomberg pointed to the city’s quick rebound after the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 as an example of crisis recovery, saying, “The city is a city where we have to go on.”

Anti-marathoners essentially argue that the race, which is a massive undertaking, will divert crucial resources from the city’s Hurricane Sandy clean-up efforts–and that travel disruptions will depress participation rates anyway. Quite a few suggested that runners should boycott the race and volunteer to help Sandy survivors instead–and they’ve even set up a Facebook page.

The latest spat concerns the generators required for the race–and the power they could potentially provide to homes devastated by wind and flooding. Some have predictably turned the issue into a partisan bludgeon to use against Bloomberg, who broke character yesterday to formally endorse President Obama for re-election. Drudge Report deemed the headline “Bloomberg Diverts Critical Supplies from Sandy Aid to NYC Marathon” worthy of a siren, while the New York Post ran with “Abuse of Power”. Coincidence?

Another complication: The race starts in Staten Island, one of the areas hit hardest by the storm (at least 19 dead, many homes destroyed, thousands without power). Postponement advocates argue that starting the race there belittles SI residents, many of whom already feel ignored by city and federal authorities. Yet Bloomberg insisted that the race will go on, and today he doubled down on that promise.

Read more

Everyone interested in how to execute proper messaging in the wake of a crisis or tragedy should pay attention to J.Crew. In the days leading up to the storm, the company sent out its usual email blasts touting the “winter’s brightest coats”, helping customers figure out “how to wear winter whites”, or enticing them with subject lines like “Tweed, please”. The company didn’t mention Sandy itself until today, when its message read:

Expressing concern for storm victims? Check. Explaining how the crisis will affect customers? Check. Avoiding any attempts at humor or blatantly exploiting the crisis for attention? Check.

Now that wasn’t so hard, was it?

Advertisers must have their precious data…

The Western world has a strange relationship with advertising: We really hate it when ads get intrusive on us, and we use every possible method to avoid watching them (DVR, hello), but we also seem to love certain spots (the fact that 54 million people watched that Darth Vader VW ad on YouTube strongly supports this theory).

So we understand on an abstract level why ads are necessary, but we want to watch them on our own terms, and we can’t seem to accept the fact that our favorite programs (and our precious Internet) could never survive without them. We don’t want to pay for our entertainment, but we don’t want to be forced to watch the ads that subsidize it, either. This is obviously a bit of a problem.

Well, based on the ad world’s aggressive response to the ongoing “do not track” browser controversy, we’d say they don’t seem to care too much what we think of them—they just want to get their content in front of as many eyes as possible, and they don’t mind being a little dickish about it.

Here’s the deal as it stands: The “do not track” option on browsers would theoretically allow web surfers to close the portal through which advertisers collect their precious, precious data. Most Americans love that option, because we don’t think that our private travels through the World Wide Web should double as research sessions for whatever companies happen to be interested in tracking us.

Read more

Last weekend’s The New York Times profile detailing the internecine battles over the 9/11 Museum at Ground Zero was a classic tale of political infighting: Three massive egos, each representing huge geographic and demographic groups, arguing over the details of planning and funding for a major urban rehabilitation project and tourist destination.

“America’s Mayor” himself Rudy Giuliani took the opportunity to express his frustration, and after reading the article quite a few of us felt like the museum might continue to embarrass the states of New York and New Jersey for many years to come.

Well, today brings news that Michael Bloomberg, Chris Christie, Andrew Cuomo and their respective organizations have reached an agreement after more than a year of total inactivity. How convenient that they happened to strike a deal on the anniversary of the event itself! You might call it a PR coup—or an example of the timeless power of peer pressure.

Read more

We’re not sure if the task of doing damage control for Penn State is the toughest, most thankless PR gig in the country right now, but it’s got to be pretty close. According to a recent Reuters article, the University is hoping that Karen Peetz, chairman of the school’s board of trustees and big-name executive at Bank of New York Mellon Corp., can help them resuscitate their severely damaged reputation despite the fact that she doesn’t work in the PR field and never really signed up for the job.

While some grads remain true to their alma mater, Penn State’s star has clearly dimmed in the eyes of the public. All agree that the school made some huge ethical and public relations mistakes when dealing with (or trying to wish away) the Jerry Sandusky sex abuse scandal. While the school hired PR firms to deal with the fallout, Peetz has effectively served as its public face during this most difficult hour even as her dual roles in PR and finance threaten to collide with one another. Read more

CEO visibility, or lack of it, is an ongoing PR issue and one that has been frequently mentioned at media industry events. Examples abound of corporate leaders who are tight-lipped during tough times or deliver misleading comments. Many CEOs only make a public appearance when the news is favorable or prefer to network with each other at gatherings such as the annual summer conference in Sun Valley for media and tech leaders.

Instead of covering this topic in our usual manner, we’re borrowing an alternate approach from Calvin Trillin. As an author, humorist and longtime contributor to The New Yorker, Trillin often wrote poems about politicians and current events. Inspired by his rhyming wizardry, we thought this would be an effective style for tackling the CEO dilemma.

CEO (In)visibility

The problem:

CEOs are ultimately accountable
Even when issues seem insurmountable
In the business world there is constant disaster
If not handled well, things get worse much faster

CEOs collect exorbitant pay
But when crises hit most have nothing to say
Or if they do it is after delay
Or they use stand-ins who get in the way

Richard Edelman, a renowned PR pro
Thinks CEO public face-time has hit a new low

Read more

As we mentioned in this morning’s Ticker, LinkedIn is working with law enforcement to find out what the heck happened the other day with the password hacking. The network maintains that they haven’t found any evidence that anything sensitive has been published, and they’ve taken every measure to protect user privacy. We still don’t know how many people were affected, but LinkedIn says it’s taking the “better safe than sorry” route in terms of disabling anything that may have been susceptible.

Read more