The Chronicle: Colloquy Live Transcript

Campus Flaps in the Age of the Internet

Thursday, April 28, at 1 p.m., U.S. Eastern time

It used to take days or weeks for an incident on a college campus to become a public controversy, if it ever did. Now, thanks to e-mail and blogs, even minor campus dustups scatter much more quickly and a lot farther than just the college itself or the local community. More than ever, universities and colleges are under scrutiny from lawmakers, parents, taxpayers, and alumni, while political partisans often paint inaccurate pictures of campus incidents to advance their own agendas. As the public face of the institution, the president must confront the sudden flood of interest in campus events.

How should presidents handle such public-relations debacles? How can they balance the need to respond quickly with the need to gather all the facts? Is it sometimes better not to respond at all?

» Facing Down the E-Maelstrom (4/29/2005)

Christopher Simpson is president of Simpson Communications, a public-relations firm that was recently hired by the University of Colorado System to repair its public image in the wake of recent scandals there. Mr. Simpson was vice president for public affairs and government relations at Indiana University at Bloomington during the controversy that led to the ouster of the men's basketball coach Bob Knight. He has also worked as a senior administrator at the University of South Carolina at Columbia and at the University of Oregon.

A transcript of the chat follows.

Jeffrey Selingo (Moderator):
Hello and welcome to The Chronicle's live discussion with Christopher Simpson, president of Simpson Communications, a public-relations firm that was recently hired by the University of Colorado System to repair its public image in the wake of recent scandals there.

Our topic is campus flaps in the age of the Internet and how colleges can prevent minor incidents on their campuses from blowing up into public-relations nightmares. Thanks for joining us Chris...

Christopher Simpson:
Good to be here.

Crises have always been a part of colleges and universities -- which are microcosms of our society. But in recent years, the frequency of so-called crises appears to have exploded with the uptick in partisanship -- don't we all spend unlimited time debating red states and blue states -- and the advent of technology. It was bloggers that helped determine the outcome of the last presidential election, and they are rampant in higher education. I don't mean to disparage bloggers -- I read them, too. But the higher ed world has changed dramatically since 9/11, and that date may be little more than arbitrary. Here is the bottom line: If your institution hasn't experienced a crisis, you are long overdue. If you don't have a comprehensive Crisis Communications Plan that is written, tested and implemented, you are foolish. And finally, if you don't understand the financial and reputational impact of potential crises, you are being imprudent.

Question from Terrance Chistesen, graduate student, Ohio State:
Given that there are so many colleges spread out all over the country, do you think that blogs rather than traditional news sources will eventually become the primary source of information about particular colleges, especially small ones?

Christopher Simpson:
I cannot predict the future, but I can understand the very serious impact blogs have had in the communiations cycle. Ignore them at your peril, but don't obsess. We cannot control every message and all flows of information. But we can have strategic plans in place to constantly communiate effectively with our key constituents. When you do this, the impact of an outside entity such as a blog will be lessened.

Question from Jeffrey Selingo, The Chronicle:
Chris, in our story this week, a number of presidents said that they now have assistants monitor and answer e-mail to their public e-mail addresses. Do you think that's a good idea or should presidents be accessible to the public through e-mail?

Christopher Simpson:
Presidents in higher education today are stretched very thin. I advocate -- to ensure their time is used wisely -- having staff monitor email, then discuss contents with the President or Chancellor. The president's thoughts, opinions and perceptions are then relayed by staff. It is not dissimiliar to how a member of Congress or Fortune 500 company responds to constiutents.

Question from Laura Boosinger Warren Wilson College:
What is the "typical" number of staff members a professional PR firm might engage in the initial stage of a crisis management situation? Once the firestorm subsides how many PR staff are still engaged in the project?

Christopher Simpson:
I am not sure there is a typical number...when we are called in as consultants on a pr crisis, generally there is two of us...I have a colleague who has outstanding corporate crisis background, and I have it in higher ed and from my days working in the U.S. senate and the national media...the dollar fee for good crisis consultants is not cheap, and I see no need to employ a team....generally with major crises, I will bring one person in intially, then I -- or he -- will handle. We charge by the hour, thus the client only uses us when needed. Be careful of firms that demand large retainers, etc. I don't mean to denegrate those companies, but crisis commnications is an expertise you need -- selectively.

Question from Jeffrey Selingo, The Chronicle:
Chris, there was some disagreement from college officials I talked with for my story about how quickly they need to respond to a crisis on campus. Some said these days the response has to be immediate even if all the information is not known; others said wait for the facts, because the only thing the college has is their credibility. Who is right?

Christopher Simpson:
In today's global communications environment, instant is almost not quick enough. note that many newspapers today will post stories during the day on their web sites, with a note that says" "story is not complete" or "story will be updated during the day." the noon story may have a different slant at 3, 6 or 9 pm...thus, you must be very quick to control the message and flow of information, which is key in times of challenge and crisis.

Question from Tom Lowry, Michigan State:
Should colleges control what their faculty or students say on blogs?

Christopher Simpson:
This may not be a popular answer -- but yes, if they own the servers. I have worked in senior administrative positions at three major research institutions and we have dealt with everything from student run porn sites to border line-terrorist postings to businesses run from dorm rooms. If you want total freedom, don't host it on the university server.

Question from Director of media relations, small private college:
I have a small staff, so I can't monitor the Internet constantly for news about our college and definitely don't have time to check out what blogs may be saying about us. Besides hiring someone like you to help out with the work load, do you have other suggestions about how I can monitor the Internet to be sure there is not incorrect information out there about us?

Christopher Simpson:
Scan the new technology, which includes software -- though it is in the earliest stages -- that can monitor and report back to you chat room conversations. This is intriguing, but only to this point: You understand what is being said, but not necessarily by who and to whom. What is most important is to always begin by asking your internal team: "Should a crisis occur, who are the most important internal and external audiences we need to reach?" The chatroom patrons may not be a key audience. Monitoring chatrooms is tactical; segmenting key audiences is strategic. The latter is most important.

Question from Lisa Wakefield, U. of California:
Why do colleges even have to pay attention to what's being said on these blogs. Aren't we just making the bloggers legitimate by answering their rants?

Christopher Simpson:
Unfortunately, the mainstream media pays attention to some bloggers -- and this is growing daily -- so you ignore them at your peril. do not obsess over bloggers, and remember the key is always to segment your audiences: which four, five or six key audiences do you need reach on a regular basis. think audiences, which is strategic, not just bloggers, which are tactica.

Question from Laura Kvinge, SunGard SCT:
How do you recommend communications / PR people at institutions best find and track blogs?

Christopher Simpson:
I will sound redundant soon, but always begin your communications effort by segmenting audiences: who are the four, five or six key audiences you need to reach effectively and continuously? You should then have someone responsible for monitoring and outreach of each (alumni staff monitors alumni; foundation staff monitors donors, etc.). If there are blogs out there germane to these audiences and activities, you will hear about it. Finally, have your media relations and IT team always tracking where information is derived. That will pick up blogs very quickly.

Question from Jeffrey Selingo, The Chronicle:
Should college presidents or other officials start their own blogs?

Christopher Simpson:
Many university presidents and major research institutions have their own blogs, so I would certainly consider it. But first, determine your goal: what are you trying to acconmplish in your communications efforts, and does a blog help reach that goal. again, think strategic -- how to most effectively reach key audiences -- not tactical, should I put up a blog. See those institutions that have blogs and check with colleagues there to measure its success and/or effectiveness

Question from KH Gunderman:
I'm told reporters are mandated by their editors to monitor chat rooms as often as hourly to find hints to what may turn out to be stories then printed or broadcast in traditional media outlets. DO you agree and if so doesn't this suggest that we have no chance but to monitor closely what is essentially our brand?

Christopher Simpson:
No reporter I know or deal with regularly has such orders, I can assure you. That makes for very, very lazy reporters who are sitting in the newsroom, not working a beat. Having said that, reporters increasingly are monitoring key chatrooms, and this will only increase short term. So again, ignore them at your peril. Your media relations team should have good enough working relationships to talk with beat reporters and learn if, in fact, this is a tactic they are using. Finally, I am not sure I agree with your definition of "brand." We believe your brand is the promise you make to your key constituents. What you reference I would define as image.

Question from Jeffrey Selingo, The Chronicle:
Are campus PR offices adequately equipped these days to work in this new environment both in terms of equipment and people? If you were designing an office from scratch, how would you put it together?

Christopher Simpson:
I would develop an integrated marketing approach where you have the senior communications person reporting directly to the president or chancellor. That person is responsible for the office that builds and then maintains the image, reputation and brand of the institution. I would be heavy on technology staff to have state of the art digital communications, a small but high-powered media staff, small publications staff that outsources much and one, two or three (depending on campus size) staff to "service" the academic schools, alumni, foundation, athletics, admissions, etc. note the goal: to build and maintain the image and reputation. This means much, much coordination. Centralization is ideal, but rarely is that a battle you want to fight.

Question from Staff member, University of Colorado:
Was use of technology (e-mail, blogs, chat rooms) a problem that you're dealing with here at Colorado?

Christopher Simpson:
CU has a very strong staff of in-house media/pr pros, so I am far from the only one working on that institution's challenges and opportunities. But collectively, the team has certainly watched digital communications. In our current digital environment, you ignore the new technology at your peril.

Jeffrey Selingo (Moderator):
We're about half way through today's chat. Please keep the good questions coming.

Question from PR Consultant:
Can you give me an example of the types of blogs and bloggers the other participants are most concerned with? Are they students or faculty with blogs or are these external news sources or both?

Christopher Simpson:
Let me give you an example of problematic blog sites or digital communications. When I was the VP of public affairs and govt relations and special counsel at Indiana University in 2000, the institution dismissed basketball coach Bob Knight. I was the chief PR architect and spokesperson, so I was very visible in the media (much too visible my wife would tell you). The day after the dismissal, there were three key websites -- the precursor to blogs -- such as "iusucks.com" on these, hosted by Coach Knight supporters, the president, athletic director and I were featured -- with email addresses, office addresses, home addresses and office, home and cell numbers. They enouraged their colleagues to weigh in. They did. In the first 24 hours, I got 3,500 emails -- 99% negative, perhaps as much as half profane and a small percentage had to be turned over to the police. Today, that response would come from a blog site. It was essential that we monitored what was being said, and how, and I tried to respond. Faculty blogs on research or student blogs on sports are not a concern; it is generally your opponents who post web sites and blog sites that should be of the greatest concern.

Question from Melvin Melton, Communications student UNCC:
At Colorado the crisis began in the Athletics Department then spread well beyond,when and how should the larger university get involved in an athletics crisis where chat rooms, blogs etc. proliferate?

Christopher Simpson:
Here is what is most interesting about big time athletic departments, such as those at Colorado, Indiana, Kansas, North Carolina, Georgia, etc., etc. In most cases, the majority of people that look at the institution come through the athletic department window. Thus, athletics should NEVER be an island unto itself. The administration should closely oversee athletics and athletics pr/media/marketing. Otherwise, with big time programs, you become little more than minor league professional sports machines. At indiana, when the Bob Knight story (the one that led to his eventual dismissal) first broke, I took full control over the institution's response because there was much more at stake than the reputation of the basketball program.

Question from Andrew Mytelka, Chronicle of Higher Ed:
In your work, do you notice whether there's a difference in the exposure to blog- or email-based scrutiny between different types of colleges? Are bigger institutions bigger targets? Is there a public-private divide, with publics getting more attention because they are spending taxpayer money? Or is there no discernable pattern?

Christopher Simpson:
Good question, Andrew. Bigger institutions -- the large public research universities -- are the largest targets for special interest groups, particularly those will a national scope. But we also see small private institutions deluged by bloggers and email-based scrutiny, but generally ones that are local or local issue based. We worked on a crisis last spring at Westminster College that was no less challenging for them than the nightmare we faced at Indiana over Bob Knight. So I see not clear distinction in terms of "threat."

Question from Jeffrey Selingo, The Chronicle:
What should the routine be for a PR official at a big college every morning -- are there certain publications or blogs this person should definitely read?

Christopher Simpson:
Increasingly I believe the first thing is to take a stiff drink. Obviously I am kidding, but these jobs are getting more and more challenging with each passing day. Ideally, your IT team should prepare an electronic clips pkg each day. This includes all local media and any regional or national hits your institution recieved. Secondly, it should include key higher ed stories from around the country (find these on three, four or five key websites most of us monitor). Third, ensure that you or someone on your team is monitoring any "problem areas" that may surface on blogs or websites. The key today is to be proactive, strategic and quick.

Question from PR Consultant:
Following up on my earlier question -- and your helpful answer -- about types of blogs, how do you suggest responding to the rapid fire nature of the medium? Using the Bobby Knight example, what is the most effective way for a university to counter so many legitimate and not-so legit posts?

Christopher Simpson:
In the Bob Knight controversy, we had staff members registered on key opposing websites. Their job was not to defend the university's position, but to try to educate the open minded readers (often this is in single digits of course) of our reasons, actions, positions, etc., and then correct the blatant falsehoods. Blogs are like talk radio: you are not going to change the opinions of many listeners/readers, so be realistic about your expectations. But you can have an impact with the open minded readers/listeners, and that should be your goal.

Question from education marketing professional:
Do you think the "blue state"/"red state" polarization makes it harder for institutions not to take political sides? And, what are the consequences from a media standpoint of a President or CEO takeing a stand politically on an issue... say stem cell research or some other hot button topic?

Christopher Simpson:
I think all of us in higher ed can trace our polarization back to the 1994 takeover of the House of Reps by Republicans. From that point forward, members of Congress will tell you, politics became very partisan, poisionous and vicious -- more so than ever. It escallated during the Bush-Kerry campaign last year. Today, we work with many institutional boards that only vote along party lines.Tthat is a horrible way to run a major teaching or research institution. We advise presidents to avoid taking public stances on issues that are white hot, but not germane to the institution. We are about a multitude of ideas, not chosing sides. Partisanship is the number one problem and threat we see in higher ed today -- worse than budgets, enrollments, accountability, etc., etc.

Question from National Media Relations Consultant:
Would you ever recommend that an institution or department develop its own blog? If so, who should oversee?

Christopher Simpson:
Blogs can be wonderful communications tools, so I would certainly encourage you to consider one -- if it is an effective way to reach your key constituents, as mentioned earlier. And as with most communications venues, it should be run/controlled/managed or coordinated by your communications office. They are the keepers of the image/reputation, so they should -- at a minimum -- coordinate the blog.

Jeffrey Selingo (Moderator):
Well it's time for us to wrap up and let everyone get back to work. Thanks to Christopher Simpson for joining us today and sharing his thoughts. And thanks to everyone for participating.

Christopher Simpson:
In closing, remember to protect and enhance your institutional image and reputation, think "audience" first. Second, what is the most effective way to reach them and not only connect, but do so in a manner that strengthens their imgage of your campus/school/department,etc. And in crisis, react strategically, not tactically, and always very quickly. Watch the Chronicle and a host of websites and newsletters, ours included, to see current crises. Analyze how institutions handled, and learn from their successess -- and failures. And good luck.