Farr on PR: Did he really just say that?
Jezz Farr
What to do if the president of the United States claims your product could trigger neurological behavioural differences in children, as he has suggested with Tylenol and autism? A PR challenge if ever there was one.
What if he fell out with your bank’s CEO and subsequently claimed the bank is anti-American and ripping off its US clients? Is that totally beyond the realms of possibility?
Banks have had their fair share of experience dealing with crises. Not long ago, it was FX scandals and Libor manipulation. In-house comms teams became skilled at handling them and crisis communications became almost a little industry unto itself.
Investment banking is a bit quieter these days but all the more reason to maintain the crisis comms playbook and grease its gears and levers. As we all know, it’s not what happens but what you do about it that is important. Tylenol and parent Kenvue appear to have acted thoughtfully and sensibly after Trump claimed acetaminophen (or paracetamol), the active ingredient in Tylenol, has a causal link to autism.
Low profile
They haven’t gone for an all-out attack on Trump – that would only look defensive and make things worse. Rather, they have kept a relatively low profile. In short, they have said "look at the science and consult your healthcare specialist".
Most of the teeth-gnashing has been done by the medical establishment – not surprisingly, given how useful acetaminophen/paracetamol is – and is very helpful for Tylenol. Whether this is by design or not I can’t say.
Nevertheless, the company’s low-key response is correct for the situation. There are too many moving parts to know what the picture will look like in a few weeks’ time. When so many politicians, business pundits, journalists and influencers are weighing in with their opinion, it is very difficult to predict how the dust will settle.
Wiser, then, to make a thoughtful and unprovocative statement that addresses the issue but also buys time to allow the company to marshal its resources and come up with a communications strategy that can be rolled out over the coming months (if not years).
Could Trump say something unwelcome about your bank? He has already put pressure on the Federal Reserve. And I remember at the start of his first term in 2017 that bankers were terrified of saying anything critical about the US in fear of the president lashing out (on what was still then Twitter) at their organisation, as he had at others.
HSBC, where I was at the time, was not immune. There was palpable concern after one senior economist criticised a Trump policy, another colleague said something derogatory at the World Economic Forum in Davos and a third in Hong Kong teased the Trump administration in a sales note to clients. All in one week or so.
Each was enough independently to raise senior management's blood pressure but together they were a potential disaster, especially for a non-US bank. It wasn’t in the end of course but the comms team was still asked to review many a document to make sure there was no language that could rile the president – to "de-Trump", as it were.
Getting it wrong
Communications play a dominant role in a crisis. Getting it right – internally and externally – can be the difference between survival or collapse.
An example of where communications – or lack thereof – contributed to disaster was the failure of Credit Suisse. After a run of scandals and years of mismanagement, poor communications at crucial pinch points accelerated the bank’s downfall. It maintained radio silence when the market was baying for information. It had no narrative and towards the end made confusing statements about its financial health. This undermined confidence and ultimately forced a sale to UBS.
Tylenol’s response to its crisis has so far been good. It is early days and the company is still dealing with wildfires. But at some point it will be time to retake control of its own story and remind people why they buy Tylenol in the first place.
This might be a tricky path to navigate: on one hand they don't want to trigger more comments from the White House while on the other establishing that Tylenol is safe. The alternative – standing still and doing nothing – is not an option. If the company is anything like my former employers, senior management will have quickly assembled its crisis comms team alongside other advisers and are preparing a strategic comms plan to address its stakeholders.
Millions of Americans have grown up with Tylenol in their homes and I suspect they have some sympathy towards the company, making its messages somewhat easier to swallow. If Trump were to say something equally seismic about an investment bank, I'd wager the sympathy quotas would be a little lower. What do you reckon?
Jezz Farr has been a senior communications adviser to major international banks for more than 25 years