We all know that two-way communication is one of the keys to successful
PR. Professionals should listen to their stakeholders and not only follow their
own mission without paying attention to others. But what if PR tries too
hard to adapt to their stakeholders’ opinion?
Channel removes talk show from online platfrom
In March the German talk show “Hart aber fair” (hard but fair) aired a
show about gender equality and gender mainstream. The show gained many negative
reactions, e.g. official equal opportunities officers complained about it and
claimed that the guests were not well selected (they included a German actress)
and that the host of the show made the topic look ridiculous. In a newsletter
from August, the broadcasting commission of the relevant channel announced that
the show was untrustworthy and due to the massive criticism, they decided to
not replay the show and in addition, remove it from the website, where shows
can usually be watched online for several months. This decision received big
media attention and many news websites reported about it.
Channel puts the talk show back online
Only a week later, the channel announced that the show was back online.
The director of the channel said about taking the show out, “the strong
reactions show now that it was not the right decision”. After the show had not
been online anymore, some people and newspapers had claimed censorship and
because the channel wanted to show that they are independent, they put it back
online.
Channel airs a new talk show with same guests
 |
| Source: Spiegel Online |
Later in August, the channel announced in a press release that they plan
to air another talk show about gender equality with the same guests as in March.
This show aired on September 7, 2015. It included indeed the same guests, but
with the addition of a representor of one of the gender equality commissions
that had complained about she show in March and also the director of the
channel, who stayed for the beginning of the show. The reactions of the online
news were negative again. Spiegel Online wrote, “It still wasn’t about
arguments.”
The channel's directors in power changed their minds a couple of times.
They tried to listen to their stakeholders but in the end always received negative reactions. So, what
should they have done better?
- by Valerie Kirsch
- by Valerie Kirsch
I just read an article about this where the author suggested to air this talkshow with the same topic and same guests every Monday from now on. She proposed to do this for as long as every member on Twitter is happy with the show: "just wait another three shows and it will become a classic".
ReplyDeleteSource: http://www.sueddeutsche.de/medien/wiederholung-von-hart-aber-fair-jetzt-noch-dreimal-dann-ist-das-kult-1.2638846-2
I think this is a good example of dysfunction of organizational identity dynamics. The directors are adapting TOO much to the audience of the Talkshow (mirroring). This might cause loss of the channel's organizational culture.
ReplyDeleteThis comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteTo be honest, I think the problem here is an overall lack of consistency. Of course, it's important for the show to listen to its stakeholders and their reactions and, according to that, making a decision (in this case, taking that episode out). However, bringing it back again? It doesn't make sense. As a brand, the channel should've sticked to a position, adapt to the public perception, but still maintain integrity.
ReplyDelete