Communications as Ikor

필립모리스가 한 한국 항공사에게 주는 교훈  < ?xml:namespace prefix = o ns = "urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" />

 

미국 Business Week은 작년 11월 29일 이슈에서 “미국에서 가장 비난받는 회사;필립 모리스”라는 제목으로 PM의 처해진 상황과 그들의 PR프로그램을 특집으로 다루었습니다.

 

여러분도 아시다시피, 언론과 공중들의 비난 포화속에서 PM은 살기위한 몸부림을 하고 있습니다. 투쟁적인 공중들에 의해 PM의 광고는 상당히 제한되었고, 여기저기에서 보이던 빌보드 광고나 광고 포스팅이 철저히 금지되었습니다. 프로모션 이벤트도 빈사상태로 내몰리고, 그 흔했던 스폰서쉽도 이제는 어렵습니다. 한마디로 손발 없는 “눈사람”형국이지요.

 

PM은 이제 더 이상 “가용할 수 있는 생존적 커뮤니케이션 노력”으로서 PR의 가치를 무시할 수 없게 되었습니다. 아니 유일한 선택이라고 할 것입니다.

 

비즈니스 위크는 PM의 PA부사장 Parrish의 입을 통해 PM이 예전의 “벙커 멘털리티”라고 불리는 로우키 위주의 소극적 PR자세에서 벋어나, PM의 정의를 스스로 내리는 “목소리를 키우는” 적극적 의미의 PR경영을 추진중에 있다고 전합니다. 이를 위해 PM은 4가지의 주요 PR테마를 선정 추진중이랍니다.

 

그 네 가지 테마를 정리해보면 :

1. PM 자신과 PM비지니스에 대한 정의강조

2. PM자신이 생산하는 제품들에 대한 책임강조 (PM Value의 정확한 커뮤니케이션)

3. PM의 미국 및 세계 기아퇴치 및 가정폭력 퇴치에 대한 노력 강조

4. PM사원들 하나하나가 가지고 있는 주변 커뮤니티들에 대한 관심과 봉사 강조

등입니다.

 

이상의 PR테마를 분석해 보면 PM의 새로운 PR전략의 핵심은 Community Relations강화라는 것을 알 수 있습니다. 위기에 처한 기업 스스로가 명확한 목소리를 내고, 편향된 공중의 시각에 자신에 대한 “스스로의 재정의”을 강조하며 맞서는 전략이 인상적입니다. 또한 그와 동시에 사회적 참여와 봉사를 통한 기업적 책임감의 강조도 주목할만합니다.

 

우리나라 기업 중에서 가장 비난 받는 기업은 어딜까요?

저는 개인적으로 한 항공회사를 주목합니다. 해당회사는 연이은 추락사고로 인해, PM과는 다른 “더욱 직접적이고 강력한 두려움”을 공중들에게 제공하고 있습니다. 그러나 이상하게도 PM 보다는 훨씬 자유로운 커뮤니케이션 환경을 보장 받고 있습니다. 광고, 이벤트, 프로모션, 스폰서쉽 어디에서도 제약이 없습니다.

 

이 항공회사는 PM의 PR전략을 벤치마킹 해볼 필요가 있다고 봅니다. 그 회사가 좀더 전략적인 Community Relationship을 강화 한다면 중장기적으로 큰 효과가 있으리라 봅니다. 만약 불행히도 PM과 같은 “눈사람” 환경을 맞는다면, 그 회사는 국내 및 국제시장에서 살아남을 수 없을 것입니다. 자유로울 때 좀더 적극적이 되면 좋겠습니다.

 

위와 같은 적극적 홍보, 미래 투자적 홍보가 절실히 필요한 한국 PR 시장입니다.

미래를 보는 홍보…!

**********************************************************

PHILIP MORRIS EXECUTIVE DESCRIBES PR CAMPAIGN FOR WHAT BUSINESS WEEK CALLS “AMERICA’S MOST REVILED COMPANY”

 

Philip Morris is conducting a multi-million dollar PR/ad campaign to burnish the company”s negative image.

 

For many years, the company, which Business Week called Philip Morris “America”s most reviled company” in a Nov. 29 cover article, did not have much in the way of a corporate image strategy.

 

Business Week”s Nov. 29, 1999 cover “What we are doing represents a critical shift in our communications stance, from a limited willingness to be engaged with the public and media, to a desire to talk, a desire to be asked questions, and a desire to listen,” according to Steven C. Parrish, 49, SVP/corporate affairs for PM Companies, who spelled out what the company”s PR problems are and how they were dealing with them in a speech at the Conference Board”s “Corporate Image Conference” that was held Jan. 20 in New York.

 

Bunker Mentality

 

Instead of speaking “openly and honestly about our company–who we are and what we do, and the range of products we produce–we too often stayed in the bunker and allowed our critics to define us,” said Parrish, who noted the company”s PR philosophy was to “stay out of the paper. Hire the best lobbyists in the world to deal with government, but let public opinion take care of itself.”

 

“If corporate image were only a matter of good business, good people and successful products, we”d be in clover,” said Parrish.

 

Steve Parrish “But, the general public cares about more than just business fundamentals; they care about things like a company”s reputation for honesty and ethical practices,” said Parrish.

 

In PM”s case, he said people noticed “we own a tobacco company, and as such, we were perceived as irresponsible, unresponsive, or worse,” said Parrish, a former PM litigator.

 

While the company was beleaguered by lawsuits and bad publicity during the “Tobacco Wars,” the company went below ground, rather than engage.

“As time went on and lawsuits proliferated, our negative public image became a real problem for us,” said Parrish, who noted shares of PM stock were at historic low levels this past year.

 

Research Conducted

 

Beginning in 1997, a decision was made to “change gears” by trying to learn as much as possible about what goes into a good corporate image, and how people perceived PM.

 

The research findings showed PM”s negative image was largely due to public concern about tobacco issues and a strong mistrust of the company”s values.

 

Parrish said the research also suggested that PM could improve its image “simply by speaking.”

 

Four PR Themes

 

He said PM”s image-building campaign has been tailored to address four critical messages.

 

First, PM is the largest consumer packaged good company in the world, making brands that people know and trust.

 

“Virtually every American family–more than 9 out of 10 households–buys PM products–Jell-O, Kraft, Macaroni and Cheese, Maxwell House coffee, Toblerone chocolate.

 

Secondly, PM is working to be a responsible marketer and manufacturer of a risky product.

 

“With regard to tobacco, we want people to know that we have heard their concerns about smoking, and particularly about problems like youth smoking and second hand smoke,” said Parrish.

 

As a result of the Master Settlement Agreement, all tobacco billboards are down, transit advertising on buses, taxis and at bus stops is a thing of the past. Branded merchandise such as hats and tee shirts is no longer distributed by any tobacco company. Event sponsorships are now severely limited and in some cases completely banned, Parrish said.

 

Parrish said PM”s domestic tobacco company has voluntarily created a new Youth Smoking Prevention department, which includes a $100 million ad program that talks to kids about not smoking, and additional spots to help parents talk to their kids about not smoking.

 

Parrish said the same principle of responsibility applies to other products that it makes, such as alcohol abuse and drunk driving.

 

PR Policy Established

 

To address concerns of this kind, PM has adopted a general corporate policy called “constructive engagement.” Parrish said this means making “proactive efforts to listen to government officials, the media, citizens groups, and others in order to find reasonable solutions to issues related to our products.”

 

The third theme of the campaign is a community service program in which priority is given to hunger relief and domestic violence.

 

The fourth theme focuses on PM”s employees, portraying them as good, decent people who she their neighbors” values and concerns, and who participate in the well-being of the communities where they live and where PM does business.

 

Parrish said the media buy for ads goes beyond what is typical for a corporate image campaign.

 

It includes the Sunday morning opinion leader audience but also goes to mainstream Americans.

 

Website Created

 

“Our problems are so large and the negativism about PM runs so deep that we believe we must reach much further than other companies would have if we are to achieve our objectives,” said Parrish.

 

It learned in testing and developing the TV commercials that it had to have a Web site to back them up, said Parrish.

 

While PM did not have a website until last fall, “putting it up was a great liberating experience for us,” said Parrish. It focused on PM”s acknowledgements of the health effects of smoking and the addictiveness of smoking.

 

Parrish said the publicity drove hundreds of thousands of people to the website.

 

Speaker”s Bureau

 

Parrish said a Speaker”s Bureau, which was established started several months ago, is “off and running.”

 

“In our speeches, we talk about who we are, the products we make, and our economic contributions. We talk about the fact that we have been silent too long and haven”t listened enough,” said Parrish, who spoke last fall to a Rotary Club meeting in Denver.

 

Business Week said Parrish, who is scorned by tobacco foes as the industry”s “Minister of Propaganda,” was “assaulted with tough questions” when he finished his speech.

 

Cigna ends censorship practice

 

Cigna Corp.”s healthcare division has ended a practice of censoring negative references to smoking in a quarterly newsletter that it produced for employees of Philip Morris Cos.

 

The newsletter, called Well-Being, was produced by the Philadelphia-based insurer as part of its contract to provide healthcare benefits to employees of Philip Morris.

 

Several other major employers got the newsletter, but the content in those issues were not changed, according to a Cigna spokesman.

 

E-mails between Cigna and Philip Morris show that from 1996 to early 1999, the companies shared information about the content of coming health articles, and Cigna agreed to remove or edit pieces Philip Morris found objectionable, The Minneapolis Star-Tribune reported.