PR and Ethics
23 views | +0 today
Follow
Your new post is loading...
Your new post is loading...
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

Wells Fargo Deliberately Pushed Dangerous Loans On Blacks, Hispanics: Lawsuit

Wells Fargo Deliberately Pushed Dangerous Loans On Blacks, Hispanics: Lawsuit | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
The suit alleges that Wells Fargo violated the Fair Housing Act, a federal law that prohibits race-based discrimination by mortgage lenders....
Chelsea Haney's insight:

Wells Fargo has been accused of pushing loans on minorities that could be very dangerous for their future and their finances. The accusations made have been said to cost city of Chicago millions of dollars in property tax. The loans were pushed on the people even though it was clear that they wouldn't be able to make the monthly payments. The article said that this is called "equity stripping". This will make the people fall behind on their payments and be forced to foreclose. Apparently this has been going on since 2000 and people suspect that wells fargo has been targeting certain minority races and are being predacious and discriminatory. Once all of the allegations came out Wells Fargo was there to defend their selves. Wells Fargo claims that none of the allegations are true and even said that the community can't just file a law suit and that they need to work together as a community to help borrowers and homeowners in Cook County. Wells Fargo is very defensive and has stated that they stand behind their record, they even let the people know that they are in that community as well, with people who live there. They told the publics that they have been given $8,2 million downpayment to assist a grant program that helped create 547 new homeowners within the Cook County in 2 years. This isn't the first time Wells Fargo has been under fire for this kind of law suit. There was one similar in Miami that was just recently dropped. This case makes me cringe to think how unethical it would be to target certain minorities if the allegations are true. But I think that the way that Wells Fargo has responded with the allegations were very professional and ethical. I think it was great that they mentioned how they have even invested in the city to create more homeowners. They are very firm on what ground they stand which reminds me of the case we read about Miley cyrus and how after she was threatened and everyone was saying she was crazy she still held firm in who she was and wasn't going to give in like she had the other times. I also thought about the image restoration of transcendence. Transcendence is "places the act into a different, broader context. Or even just a different context can work as well." Wells Fargo denied everything and focused on the good that they have done for the community, so they placed the situation in a different context trying to make themselves look good again. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

Walmart: ‘Fat Girl’ costume section ‘should have never been on our site’

Walmart: ‘Fat Girl’ costume section ‘should have never been on our site’ | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
Social media and blogs exploded Monday when word spread that the retail giant had a Halloween section labeled ‘Fat Girl Costumes.’
Chelsea Haney's insight:

Halloween weekend just ended and while it was a fun time, most of us could say that shopping and getting ready for our costumes and parties was downright stressful. Walmart's online halloween section sure didn't help with that stress either. When going online to look for a costume you want to be able to just easily browse through pictures to get ideas of what you might want to be. Well on the online site for Walmart had a separate tag called "Fat Girl Costumes" as a section of costumes to look up. Once this was noticed it went viral. People were tweeting at Walmart, taking screenshots of the page with the title, and posting all over social media how wrong it was to have such a section labeled that. 

Once Walmart received all of the tweets and messages about the "Fat Girl Costumes" link, they quickly apologized about it to everyone who was commenting on it. First it was just plain unethical to have that section up, second Walmart still hasn't given an explanation as to who or why the website was even set up like that. The lack of information or why this happened makes me think of the Facebook crisis that happened and when they only apologized for one thing that was wrong and not giving us more information. It also made me think of the carnival cruise crisis, because even though there was a huge disgusting poop disaster with the one ship, people are still taking advantage of the cruise line and going on vacations. Similarly to Walmart, even though this wasn't ethical, they apologized and it doesn't seem like this issue is going to effect their business in that much of a way. They still have loyal costumers and are able to easily move past this situation. In the Carnival cruise ship article this was said ," And the truth is, Carnival is so sprawling that its well-publicized mishaps may be, from its perspective, unavoidable background noise -- just a part of the cost of doing business." This is similar to Walmart, there is always going to be some kind of unethical or crisis that is going to happen with such a large corporation. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

'Painfully Awkward' Rob Lowe Ad Draws Ire From Advocacy Group (and Earned Media)

'Painfully Awkward' Rob Lowe Ad Draws Ire From Advocacy Group (and Earned Media) | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
Shy bladder sufferers are less than amused by a new ad in which “painfully awkward” Rob Lowe says that he can’t urinate in public. The International Paruresis Association wants the ad pulled. DirectTV says no go. Either way, the kerfuffle is another example of “earned” media generated by paid media.
Chelsea Haney's insight:

This was kind of a humorous find and was fun to try and tie it into public relations and ethics. So apparently Rob Lowe is in some DirectTV commercials that talk about him having problems going to the bathroom. This may have made some of the older viewers a little upset about the real problem that happens to people as they age. This made people so uncomfortable that they wanted the ad to be pulled from TV and directTV's response was that they needed to "lighten up". To me I found this commercial to be funny, although it was weird. Even though there have been a few backlashes against these commercials DirectTV said that they aren't going to pull the ad and they just explained that it was a for fun and to get people's attention: which worked. That was their plan, to make a weird commercial about an older man who had a bathroom issue and to get us thinking "what does this have to do with DirectTV?" and it did. In fact this commercial was really popular for a while so it worked for the best in DIrectTV's favor. This reminded me of the The Best Job Ever because the people who made the ads weren't sure how people would react or if it would even work and it did. For this commercial DirectTV got bot good and bad responses but the good outweigh the bead. Plus the talk of the bad still led to conversations about DirectTV which turns into good publicity. I would say that making fun of the old man with bathroom problems wasn't unethical and that DirectTV did a great job explaining the joke to the costumers who took it to heart. They also used a well known celebrity for the commercial which was an example of 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

Jacksonville Jaguars call mascot’s Ebola joke an ‘extremely poor decision’

Jacksonville Jaguars call mascot’s Ebola joke an ‘extremely poor decision’ | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
The mascot, Jaxon de Ville, carried around a sign that read ‘Towels carry Ebola’ during Sunday’s game against the Pittsburgh Steelers.
Chelsea Haney's insight:

As the whole United States of America is on alert since cases of Ebola has been exposed to our soil, some have dealt with the scary news in various forms, including unethical ways. The Jacksonville Jaguar mascot is known for having a humorous take on lots of issues involving other teams they are against or just clever puns. I would say that in the recent fame against the stealers, Jaxon de Ville took his humor a little too far. 

Just this Wednesday we found out that the first man to contract Ebola in America passed away from the vigorous diseases. Hearing this information makes the seriousness of the diseases real for americans. Just a few days ago, the mascot for the Jacksonville Jaguars made the poor decison of making a sign that said "Towels carry Ebola" referring to the towels that the steelers fans were waving around. This was clearly unethical and wrong to even refer to the serious diseases. Right after this happened, twitter blew up with fans of the Jaguars saying how wrong it was and steelers fans furious as well. The owner of the team came in quickly apologizing for the actions of the mascot and said he realized that it was a mistake and they were taking care of it internally. 

This reminded me of the case that we read in class where we talked about Miley Cyrus and how when she first tried to be "sexy" the fans reacted badly to it and she quickly apologized for her actions. The mascot obviously thought it was okay for him to add humor to the issue, but america wasn't ready and saw it as unethical. For Miley, her fan base was not ready for her to be rebellious or a symbol of sex. In the case study we read it said "Moreover, through responses like boycotts, as well as protests that receive media attention, or no longer supporting an artist via record purchasing or concert going, audiences can voice their disdain toward the artist‘s performance of his image or the negative actions that he may engage in." Some of the fans were so upset they were boycotting the team until there was an apology. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

The worst media disaster of April 2014

The worst media disaster of April 2014 | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
We’re calling it early this month, because we don’t think much of anything can top this sports team owner’s statements, nor his organization’s response to them.
Chelsea Haney's insight:

Owner of the NBA Clippers, Sterling, was taped telling his "girlfriend" that she was not to be hanging out or bring black men around when he was around. To be honest, this never made sense to me seeing how about 90% of his basketball team were african americans. His racist and inconsiderate comments brought him into the spotlight quick.  He was soon threatened to have the team taken away from him. When he found that his comments were leaked. At first he didn't deny any of it, but also didn't apologize. He came out with his people commenting for him but didn't directly come out and apologize until a couple weeks later when he agreed to be interviewed about it and knew he for sure was loosing ownership of the Clippers. Through this process it was clearly not ethical in any way for him to make such comments to his girlfriend. In my opinion the way he handled the whole situation was also very unprofessional. This case kind of reminded me of the Kennedy articles we just read about with the Chappaquiddik case. The way they both handled the issue was very similar to me.  They both later came and apologized but only after the media took over and made it a huge issue. He also used minimization trying to back up that what he said should have never been leaked. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

'Blackfish' Director Talks SeaWorld Revenue Drop: "People Are Truly Willing to Change Ethically" - Hollywood Reporter

'Blackfish' Director Talks SeaWorld Revenue Drop: "People Are Truly Willing to Change Ethically" - Hollywood Reporter | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
A version of this story first appeared in the Aug. 29 issue of The Hollywood Reporter magazine.
SeaWorld's second-quarter earnings continued a ...
more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

GOP spokeswoman resigns after criticizing the First Daughters

GOP spokeswoman resigns after criticizing the First Daughters | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
PR pros can take note from the soon-to-be former political communications director's recent debacle. Critics say her comments about President Obama's daughters, and subsequent apology, were anything but classy. 
Chelsea Haney's insight:

Poor social media judgment and ethics strikes again! This time it was Elizabeth Lauten, who just a few days ago, Dec 1st, spoke too much on her own Facebook page about the First Daughters. I had to do some researching about Lauten and found that she is the communications director for Rep. Stephen Fincher in Tennessee. This means she must have taken some courses on communication ethics at one point in time. Lauten must of forgotten those ethics when she took to her Facebook wall and wrote some rude comments about the First Daughters. She commented on their appearance and criticized their attitude toward their parents and being in the public eye during the Thanksgiving address. Honestly I don't blame the girls for looking a little tired or bored standing up behind their dad, but that doesn't make it write for a women who is also a communications director for another polition to comment so rudely. When commenting about the girls it also reflected on Fincher since she is his communications director. This makes not only him look bad but also could effect who he represents as well because she is directly linked with Fincher. When people saw her posting they were outraged and compared it to online bullying. After the uproar, Lauten wrote an apology and resigned from her job. Of course there are people bashing her apology saying it wasn't heartfelt or real but I think she is doing the right thing for stepping down. I compared this PR ethics case to image restoration of mortification. In the reading it said that mortification is "the accused simply admits being guilty or responsible for the wrongful act and asks forgiveness."In her apology she seemed to be ashamed of the words she used against the First Daughters and even announced that she would be resigning because of her mistake. This case also just made me think about Amy's bakery and how they took to social media with their thoughts to harshly and quick. Although Lauten only had one post, it's similar because they both used social media for unethical reasons. This was just another blind mistake that I think every PR and communications person should know not to do, even if it's on your own social media cites, you will make whoever you are working with look bad as well. What you post most of the time represents who you are and what you stand for and if that might conflict with your employer then you could lose your job like Lauten did. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

Redskins cleared to sue Native Americans offended by team name

Redskins cleared to sue Native Americans offended by team name | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
Washington's NFL team owner Dan Snyder said he would never change the controversial name, and a recent ruling allowed him to sue the Native Americans who registered complaints against it. 
Chelsea Haney's insight:

The Washington  NFL team, Redskins, has always had some kind of uproar attached to them because of their team name. Some people don't just see the name as a football mascot but take it to literal terms and see it as a racist term. After a few years of debate with the team owner about changing the name to a less offensive one, Dan Snyder made a statement saying he will never change the name. 

The bigger issue from this now is there has now been a ruling saying that Dan can now sue the Native Americans who have complained about the name and have even sometimes picketed outside of the stadium. After the group of Native Americans showed up at one of the football games persisting a name change, Dan used his new right to sue them who took the complaint to the patent complaint to officials. 

This crisis between the owner of the redskins and the Native american group reminded me of the article we discussed in class about Amy's baking company.  Although this crisis isn't as juicy or messy, I think it relates in how both Amy the owner of the bakery and Dan the owner of the Redskins react when there is some kind of backlash against their company and team.  This isn't the first time Dan has sued for his team and the protection of his team. He recently sued most of his seasonal ticket holders and sued the Washington City Paper for writing a "criticizing piece" about his team. Just like Amy's and her husband, they do anything to protect their company, and most of the time, none of it was ethical in any sort of way. I believe it's unethical to not even consider the Native American's side and why they see the name as racisit and then turn around and suing them for what they believe. Amy and her husband were also very quick to responding to the Facebook comments and threatening to file a law suit against certain people. One of the "lessons learned" for the Amy's bakery article told us that we need to "Learn to walk away". It kinda seems like this is what Dan should do. The article said, "Finally, when facing unwelcome feedback on social media, it’s important to know when to walk away." Although it wasn't social media and he was facing riots he could just walk away from it instead of suing. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

Ferguson police chief's apology 'too little, too late'

Ferguson police chief's apology 'too little, too late' | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
Police Chief Thomas Jackson's address was meant as a sincere way to engage with members of the Ferguson community. Many critics saw it differently. (Update)
Chelsea Haney's insight:

A few months ago a boy named Michael Brown, in Ferguson MO, lost his life from being shot by a police officer. After being shot the city broke out in violence and rioting. The dangerous state led to looting, more shootings, and trashing the area. While all of the violence was happening a case was still trying to develop to figure out what really happened and why Michael Brown was shot in the first place. This tragedy has caused so much pain for the St. Louis area and families and many would say that on the PR side, it has been handled very poorly. Reading this article, it stated that the apology released is among the many PR mistakes made with this issue. The Ferguson police chief apologized for the first time since the shooting happened in August. 

The apology was said to be "a little to late". When listening to the apology I thought that it sounded sincere but many people couldn't get over the fact that it was indeed overdue. He took time to apologize to the family of Brown and to the community.  He didn't address what was going to be done after and how the situation is currently being handled. The police department was working directly with a PR firm called Devin James Group, who has been helping with the news coverage of this issue with the police department. The Devin James group was hired to help them repair the towns image, but I would argue that they haven't helped enough.  The apology that was written for the police chief should've been given way before the riots even started. I think that it wasn't ethical because they were so late in this.  Most of the publics thought very lowly of the apology and didn't see it as sincere because of the tardiness. 

This can be tied into our case studies class because it reminded me of the Malaysian Airlines article we read and how they were late in communicating with the families of the crash their failure to communicate correctly with them. The major mistake was that they tweeted the family members about the crash and which was very insensitive. This is very similar to that case because most people would say that waiting this long to apologize was also insensitive. The 5 lessons learned article we read in class said "The tragic loss of lives should be the biggest concern of everyone. But as a community of communicators and public relations professions, we’ve watched the crisis communications challenges fueled by non-stop media speculation."I think that this is true for the Michael Brown case as well. It was so tragic about the loss of this boy but everyone was so fixated on who was to blame and lashing out against the community and police department.

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

Men's Health Magazine offends with tweet about female sports fans

Men's Health Magazine offends with tweet about female sports fans | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
The magazine apologized after a social media firestorm regarding an article and tweet suggesting ways men can discuss sports with women. 
Chelsea Haney's insight:

Most people would say that making comments on women not being as athletic as men or just comparing the genders in general isn't kind or ethical, though we see it all the time. Especially right now in our society, women are fighting even more to become equal with men. Women are more plugged into sports and entertainment of sorts now than ever before. In fact some of my friends, that are girls, know  even more about sports than my guy friends. But the writer of the Men's Heath Magazine didn't think comparing was that much of an issue.  A writer for the Men's Heath Magazine wrote an article on "How to talk about sports with Women", this insinuates that women don't know anything about sports  or know how to talk about them. This was a slap in the face for a lot of women who came in contact with this article. Most of the people took to twitter and replied saying how wrong it was to post such an article that made us look demeaning. This was a hit for the magazine as well. Some women may buy this for their husbands or significant other and saw the article and decided not to purchase it anymore. As soon as the backlash against the article and magazine began, the magazine took to social media to apologize for the article. When apologizing they said that they "never meant it to seem that men are inferior to women". They also said that they had deleted the article due to so much negative feedback. The apology wasn't enough for some of the subscribers. People tweeted back saying they canceled their subscription. They even started giving tips to how they should write future articles in a different tones and directions, I found that to be a little humorous. I thought I would compare this to the image restoration of Minimization. The reading we read stated that minimization is when "the accused tries to minimize the negative effects associated with the wrong act by attempting to show that the misbehavior or act is not as bad as initially thought or perceived by the audience." I would say that they used minimization because in their apology they said "It wasn’t meant to suggest that women are in any way inferior to men, in sports, or anything else. But … we’re sorry that it did." So they tried to minimize it by saying that it was never meant to be what it ended up being. I would say that this image restoration was not a complete success because many people were still angered and didn't feel their apology was sincere. 

more...
No comment yet.
Scooped by Chelsea Haney
Scoop.it!

DiGiorno Interrupts Serious Conversation About Domestic Violence To Sell Pizza

DiGiorno Interrupts Serious Conversation About Domestic Violence To Sell Pizza | PR and Ethics | Scoop.it
Twitter is a place for complex debates about important topics. It's also a place for brands to shamelessly self-promote. On Monday, these two functions collided in a terrible way.

DiGiorno Pizza, in a bafflingly tone-deaf tweet, used the hashtag &...
Chelsea Haney's insight:

Within the last week a video of NFL player Ray Rice leaked of him physically abusing his fiancé. Once this video went viral twitter users used the hashtag #whyIStayed to list reasons why women chose to stay in a abusive relationship. It was a way for women to vent and see that they weren't alone.  DiGiorno, seeing an opportunity to promote their frozen pizza tweeted "#WhyIStayed you hadpizza", not realizing the trend was about domestic violence. This tweet was completely insensitive to the topic of domestic violence and made it seem like their frozen pizza was a reason to take abuse.

DiGiorno was quick when realizing the mistake they had made and deleted the tweet, then sent out an apology. The way difiorno responded reminded me of the benoits theory of  corrective action and mortification. 

DiGiorno has been apologizing and claiming that they weren't aware of the meaning behind the hashtag. Accodring to Benoits restoration theories we have been reading about in class, DiGiornio showed corrective action. The article of theories says that corrective action is "the attempt to restore the image by trying to correct the problem." This took place when DiGiorno immediately deleted their tweet.  They also used the image restoration of mortification. DiGiorno's tweet following the offensive one was an apology.  They then came out with  a statement about their values and how they never meant to offend anyone and took domestic violence as a serious matter. Overall, I think that DiGiorno handled their crisis in an ethical way. But I also see that they need to make sure they are doing their research of trends on twitter before trying to self-promote. 

more...
No comment yet.