For the tech Gods, it seems like the easiest PR lessons are the hardest to learn.
Case in point: The report in this week’s The Wall Street Journal that Google is shutting down Google+ following the discovery of a software glitch earlier this year that exposed user information of nearly 500,000 consumers.
Adding insult to injury, Google chose not to disclose the breach because of fears that doing so would draw regulatory scrutiny and cause reputational damage.
With the story splashed on the front page of the Journal—not to mention widespread pickup among the major media outlets—Google has only itself to thank for the negative media attention and what is sure to raise eyebrows within regulatory precincts.
Following the Journal report, shares of Google-parent Alphabet fell more than two percent.
Rest assured, we don’t have to take up a collection for Google
But this may be an opportune time to remind Google—and every other brand domiciled on planet earth—that the instant a company chooses not to disclose sensitive information is when such information becomes destined for daylight.
It’s PR 101—whatever you wish to keep from the public (and/or your stakeholders) will see daylight
It may take some time, but it will get there eventually. The result is that brands get their wings clipped and, depending on the extent of the damage, may have to drain months if not years of building a reservoir of good faith with stakeholders and start all over again.
It never fails. Whether it’s an overdose of hubris or putting too much faith in the cost-benefit analysis, brands make the same mistakes when it comes to thinking they can inoculate the public from learning about information the company would prefer to keep under wrap.
Transparency is not a one-way street
Brands and organizations that expect transparency from their partners, suppliers, and customers also have to be willing to pony up.
Google was quick to alter the optics. One day after the Journal story ran online, the search giant unveiled a slew of new products, including its latest smart phone, Pixel 3 and Chromebook tablet, called “Pixel Slate,” in New York.
The timing is a bit curious, but classic PR—meaning change the conversation stemming from negative media coverage and talk about something that will generate neutral if not positive media coverage.
Companies are pretty good at pivoting on negative coverage. However, as the Google+ dustup demonstrates, they have to disclose sensitive information with much more alacrity and own the fallout.
Want more like this?
Subscribe to get daily or weekly PR News updates from Bulldog Reporter
Trust is collapsing in America, and across virtually all levels and institutional ecosystems—and comms giant Edelman reports this trust-building urgency for public companies in its new Edelman Trust Barometer Special Report: Institutional Investors, revealing new...
Here you have it! The most notable journalist and media industry moves of the past week. USA AND CANADA Follow us on Twitter @Press_Moves News and Media Associated Press: promotes Anna Johnson (@Anna__Johnson) to News Director for Europe and Africa. Los Angeles Times:...
According to Inc., 84 percent of people trust online reviews as much as friends—so for this reason alone, it makes sense to share as many positive reviews and testimonials with your target audience as possible. Of course, there’s a big difference between collecting...