We’ve all heard that there is no longer a stigma associated with online dating. Technology is increasingly bringing the human race together while also pulling us further apart, which means that each of us is closer than ever to people we’re never going to talk to–let alone date.

Still, the possibilities of online dating are almost limitless. We love that idea–and it draws thousands of paying customers to sites like Match.com. Unfortunately, as we all know, the Internet is not reality. In fact, at its worst, the Internet involves the most despicable parts of reality masquerading as rainbows and unicorns.

So when a woman recently brought a lawsuit against Match.com for connecting her with a man who ended up stabbing her 10 times, we immediately saw that this story, in addition to being a tragedy, also illustrates a future PR conundrum: to what degree are dating sites responsible for the behavior of their clients?

Read more

In case you hadn’t heard, American Airlines faces a number of significant PR challenges. We would review the bankruptcy, the mass layoffs, the employee strikes and the customer service nightmares, but you’ve heard all that before–we’ll just say there are several reasons that American repeatedly finds itself among America’s “most hated” brands. And while the company reported a very small profit in the fourth quarter of 2012 thanks to the tax benefits of declaring bankruptcy, a rehabilitation is clearly in order.

So what can American do to redeem itself in the eyes of its public? How about a new logo?

Check out the official corporate video unveiling the “much-anticipated” redesign (and try not to gag on all the drama).

There are a few more bells and whistles involved, of course.

Read more

We don’t want to wade too far into the politics of the contentious gun control debate, but from a PR perspective we have to say: we really don’t get the NRA.

First, the organization’s spokesman blamed video games (many of which are directly supported by gun manufacturers) and movies for mass shootings and proposed armed guards at every American school right before releasing a video game for kids. Now, as President Obama prepares to unveil some proposals regarding tighter regulation of illegal gun sales, more intensive background check requirements, and a renewal of the “assault weapons” ban that will never pass the current Congress, the NRA chose to issue an ad that indirectly attacks the president’s two daughters.

The ad asserts that Obama is an “elitist hypocrite” because his daughters have armed Secret Service guards while he opposes the idea of placing a man with a gun in every primary, elementary, and high school in this country (different polls tell different stories about Americans’ opinions on that proposal, but most clearly support tougher gun laws). The president and every member of his family may receive more death threats than anyone else in the US (as do most presidents), but that can’t mitigate the fact that he thinks his kids are “more important than yours.”

Here’s the logic behind it:

Read more

Today we came across a list of “America’s 10 Most Hated Companies” courtesy of Ragan’s PR Daily and 24/7 Wall Street, which compiled the worst of the worst based on “stock performance, employee and customer satisfaction, and management decisions.”

We were intrigued, so we figured we’d peruse the list and see what we could make of it. What are these brands, and what did they do to offend the American public (and their investors) so badly?

Here they are, along with our past and present theories on why they suck:

Read more

Hunting, like public relations, is all about timing. So it’s utterly inconceivable that the NRA has decided that now, as the country is still bereaved, shocked and confused about a spate of unfathomable mass shootings from Colorado to Connecticut, is a good time to release its Target Practice app, which is tailored for gun enthusiasts ages four and up.

Yes, four and up.

The politics of the gun debate aside, we’re perplexed by this app release. The NRA has the resources to employ the best in the PR business, yet this decision is a good example of everything a brand shouldn’t do when navigating a deeply emotional moment for the public (and attempting to emerge with its reputation intact).

The release is poorly timed, insensitive and completely tone deaf to the ways millions of people in America and beyond feel about guns–especially guns and children. We’ve all become far too familiar with the violence, the wasteful loss of innocent life, and the image of individuals with assault rifles marching down the halls of an elementary school.

So what, possibly, could have led the NRA to make such an inexplicable decision? We can only guess that a discussion regarding the timing of this app release occurred in some conference room in some office building in some alternate reality. Perhaps the individuals in this meeting raised these very relevant PR questions:

Read more

Politics is a slick business. We know this, you know this…everybody knows this. But a little bit of investigative reporting by the Tampa Bay Times that exposed a few poorly planned moves on behalf of Florida governor Rick Scott reveals the kind of weird PR that we’ve unfortunately come to expect from our elected officials.

Mr. Scott wanted to improve his image in the eyes of Florida voters during his gubernatorial campaign, so he bought a rescued Labrador retriever. After he won the election, he did what any responsible dog-lover would do: he returned the lab to its previous owner. Wait, what?

Scott didn’t just buy the dog:

Read more

So, last week we took the time to lecture our readers on the nature of native advertising–and this week’s biggest media “scandal” conveniently gives us an opportunity to show everyone how not to do it.

In summary: Established magazine The Atlantic, long a home to respectable journalism, ran a sponsored post that was little more than an official release from the Church of Scientology.

The church is scrambling to get some good press before journalist Lawrence Wright‘s upcoming expose Going Clear: Scientology, Hollywood and the Prison of Belief hits the nation’s bookstores and e-readers. The post itself amounted to a comical report about how leader David Miscavige has helped the church expand its membership; it included little beyond (obviously staged) photos documenting the recent openings of Scientology “centers” around the world.

And that’s not all: The Atlantic also carefully monitored the story’s comments section, erasing many of the (overwhelmingly negative) comments from users before closing them down altogether. Bad move, guys.

Now it’s damage control time!

Read more

In a breaking story that will surprise very few, sources close to Lance Armstrong confirm that he used his exclusive interview with Oprah Winfrey (taped yesterday) to admit that he took illegal, performance-enhancing substances throughout his cycling career–and that he plans to testify against officials who “encouraged” the practice.

Even as Armstrong confessed to what pretty much everyone suspected, he also seems to have hedged a bit, using the “everybody was doing it” defense to argue that he was not, in fact, a doping “ringleader”. Given his extremely aggressive PR efforts in denying all relevant accusations for years, we’re not quite sure anyone will buy that line–but he clearly made a strategic decision in the interest of saving what’s left of his multimillion dollar reputation. By testifying against others involved in the scandal, he hopes to overcome his lifelong ban from competitive sports so he can continue to compete in “triathalons and running events” while raising money for his charity.

This is obviously a big story, and some within the industry see it as a major PR win for Oprah, whose influence has been slipping of late as her OWN Network struggles to gain viewers and seeks media attention via moves like a partnership with The Huffington Post. Oprah clearly aims to make the most of the interview–she’s splitting it into two parts, and directly after its conclusion she tweeted:

Just wrapped with @lancearmstrongMore than 2 1/2 hours . He came READY!

— Oprah Winfrey (@Oprah) January 14, 2013

Read more

Yesterday brought news of the most interesting story to emerge from this year’s Consumer Electronics Conference. It’s a classic tale of media ethics gone wrong, and we see it as a major PR fail.

Despite being America’s worst employer, Dish Network occasionally comes up with some cool tech innovations. Prime example: the Hopper with Sling DVR that gives users the power to enjoy “live streaming of every channel from anywhere”. Yeah, it’s a big deal, and CES organizer C|NET nominated the Hopper for its “Best of CES” awards. One problem, though: Fox, CBS and pretty much every major network has filed suit against Dish for allowing viewers to “hop” or skip over all commercials. Oh, and CBS is CNET’s parent company.

So what did CBS do? They banned all Dish products from CES awards consideration/promotion, citing the ongoing lawsuit. Not only is CNET prohibited from giving the award to dish–they can’t even review any Dish products. Here’s the disclaimer:

The Dish Hopper with Sling was removed from consideration due to active litigation involving our parent company CBS Corp. We will no longer be reviewing products manufactured by companies with which we are in litigation with respect to such product.

If you think this resembles a blatant case of shutting down the competition, you’re right.

Read more

The House of Mouse in California is in the midst of a public relations conundrum.

Disneyland is now taking pictures of its guests—including children—in an effort to crack down on the illegal use of multi-day passes.

Disneyland claims that third party “scalpers” often buy the tickets, which cost $205 for three days, then rent them at elevated prices to park-goers on one-time visits. While both parties benefit from this setup, Disney, of course, is upset over the specter of lost profits.

So by taking pictures of multi-ticket holders as they enter the park and comparing those faces each time that same ticket is scanned, Disneyland aims to stop the abuse of its “park hopper” tickets by denying entry to anyone whose face doesn’t match that of the original ticket holder.

This strategy poses several PR concerns for the Disney, though. To many, the brand no longer represents a magical kingdom that brings joy and imagination to children but a capitalistic monolith that leverages its cultural influence to bring itself greater profits at the expense of cash-strapped families. And let’s face it: this crack down isn’t going to help the latter image.

Read more