Uber Responds to Shooting Incident

Uber is responding to a shooting incident with one of its drivers, who killed six people and wounded two in Kalamazoo, Michigan. The company's safety procedures are in question, but the incident had nothing to do with the shooter's role as an Uber driver, although this connection is how he's most identified in news reports. The company published the following short statement on its website.

In response to further questioning, Uber says the gunman passed its background checks, had no criminal record, and received customer ratings of 4.73 out of 5. He had been an Uber driver for almost a month and picked up more than 100 passengers.

Under "Details on Safety" on its website, Uber describes its driver-checking process. One criticism is that fingerprinting isn't required, as it is for taxi and limousine drivers. Also, unlike taxi drivers, there is little interaction with others. The founder of an app that lets Uber and Lyft drivers chat said, "I think taxi drivers traditionally have had fleets and lots, so at the beginning of the shift, you will go, check in with a dispatcher, hang out, have a coffee with other taxi drivers and then go out - rather than this completely dispersed Uber network, where you don't have to go anywhere, you just turn on the app in your car and drive for eight hours and never talk to any other driver."

But a member of Uber's Safety Advisory Board defending the company  practice: "As it stands right now, the system that Uber has is extremely safe, and the idea that simply by having someone look at someone that they could determine if they're about to have a psychotic episode is a faulty theory."

This news comes soon after Uber settled a lawsuit about safety claims.

Discussion Starters:

• What's your view of the link between Uber and the shooting? Is it unfair to the company or about time its safety practices are revealed (or something else)?
• How else, if at all, should Uber respond? What's the danger of responding too loudly in this case?

Apples Fights FBI's Demands

This is a pivotal moment in privacy for the country. Apple is under pressure from the Federal Bureau of Investigations and the Justice Department for access to phones belonging to shooters who killed 14 people in San Bernardino, California, late last year.

Tensions are high in this situation. The Justice Department said, "It is unfortunate that Apple continues to refuse to assist the department in obtaining access to the phone of one of the terrorists involved in a major terror attack on U.S. soil."

But Apple and civil liberties organizations argue that this could set a bad precedent against consumer privacy. The company would need to develop new technology that could be used in other situations. In a statement, CEO Tim Cook said, "The government suggests this tool could only be used once, on one phone. But that's simply not true. Once created, the technique could be used over and over again, on any number of devices."

A message to customers on Apple's website further explains the company's position:

The government would have us remove security features and add new capabilities to the operating system, allowing a passcode to be input electronically. This would make it easier to unlock an iPhone by "brute force," trying thousands or millions of combinations with the speed of a modern computer.

The implications of the government's demands are chilling. If the government can use the All Writs Act to make it easier to unlock your iPhone, it would have the power to reach into anyone's device to capture their data. The government could extend this breach of privacy and demand that Apple build surveillance software to intercept your messages, access your health records or financial data, track your location, or even access your phone's microphone or camera without your knowledge. 

Discussion Starters:

• What's your view? Should Apple meet the government's demands? What are the most convincing arguments on both sides?
• Read Cook's entire message to customers. How does he balance logical arguments, emotional appeal, and credibility?

Another IRS Data Breach

This is the second time the IRS has experienced a data breach. Hackers used social security information to create PINs for E-filing, which could allow them to capture tax refunds for 101,000 people.  

In a statement posted on its website, the IRS tries to deflect the issue: "Using personal data stolen elsewhere outside the IRS..."

 

Last year, hackers made away with $50 million in refund money. A federal investigative report concluded: "The Return Review Program Enhances the Identification of Fraud; However, System Security Needs Improvement." 

Discussion Starters: 

• How well does the IRS statement rebuild taxpayer confidence? 
• Read the 2015 report. Which principles from Chapter 10 are followed? Based on the report, should the IRS have done more in the past year? 

Madeleine Albright Explains Controversial Comment

Former Secretary of State Madeleine Albright made a comment about women during the New Hampshire primary that was not appreciated. To show her support for Hillary Clinton after she lost to Bernie Sanders, Albright said, "We can tell our story of how we climbed the ladder, and a lot of you younger women think it's done. It's not done. There's a special place in hell for women who don't help each other!" 

Gloria Steinem, a leader of the feminist movement also got in hot water when interviewed by Bill Maher. The New York Times reports, 

"When you're young, you're thinking: ‘Where are the boys? The boys are with Bernie,' " Ms. Steinem said.

Realizing that this was potentially offensive, Mr. Maher recoiled. "Oh. Now if I said that, ‘They're for Bernie because that's where the boys are,' you'd swat me."

But Ms. Steinem laughed it off, replying, "How well do you know me?"

Albright wrote an op-ed for The New York Times to apologize and further explain her comment: "I HAVE spent much of my career as a diplomat. It is an occupation in which words and context matter a great deal. So one might assume I know better than to tell a large number of women to go to hell." She went on to explain the excitement of the moment, some history, and her view of having a female president: 

"The battle for gender equality is still being waged, and it will be easier if we have a woman who prioritizes these issues in the Oval Office and if the gender balance among elected officials reflects that of our country. When women are empowered to make decisions, society benefits. They will raise issues, pass bills and put money into projects that men might overlook or oppose."

Discussion Starters: 

• What's your reaction to both comments? Do you find them offensive? 
• Read Albright's op-ed. How well does she explain herself and apologize? She doesn't say "I'm sorry" or "I apologize."  

Marriott Movie Is a Big Hit

With 3.6 million views and counting, Marriott's movie short, "Two Bellman Two," is a testament to engaging audiences with innovative content. According to Skift, this second Marriott movie tops the first, which was shot within one LA property. This one targets the luxury traveler and sells the destination: 

"In Dubai, Marriott is now emphasizing the destination to sell the hotel by highlighting the wide panoramic vistas across the desert and sea, along with scenes of various tourist activities ranging from sand dune surfing to water jetpacking."

According to Skift, "All in all, Marriott has developed something with this movie franchise that transcends all of that. They have created two winning brand identities that establish JW Marriott in an entirely different consumer market landscape."

The movie site is about about the movies; we see no promotional information or links to Marriott properties at all. 

Marriott Content Studio is behind the innovative films. A look inside the company shows a central control center, M Live, with "nine screens, showing everything from the social media campaigns of Marriott's 19 brands to real-time booking information to Marriott's editorial calendar." Swivel seats are for different departments within the company. According to David Beebe, Marriott's Emmy-winning vice president of global creative, 

"This is a tool for everybody to use in the building. It's customer-first thinking. That's why a lot of brands can't achieve what we're doing. They think, ‘I can't do that because someone over there is not going to like it.' It gets very internal-political."

Discussion Starters: 

• What are the potential downsides of a company venturing into this type of creative marketing? 
• Read more about the Content Studio and the analytics: how is the company measuring success? 

Chipotle Practices Transparency

Chipotle is working hard to improve its food safety procedures and its image. After several reported E. coli outbreaks, the company announced a four-hour closing of its 1,900 stores to retrain its employees. The meeting was live-tweeted via @ChipotleTweets.

Chipotle also announced a local grower initiative to help farmers meet the company's new food safety demands, which can be tough on small farmers. The initiative includes education and training, financial assistance, and opportunities for add new farmers with greenhouses and other technologies.

In a fully developed section of its website, Chipotle outlines new plans for food safety for suppliers and in restaurants.

The good news for Chipotle is that the Center for Disease Control (CDC) declared the outbreak over as of February 1. Chipotle CEO Steve Ells is, of course, confident about a comeback, but he's not alone. Shake Shack CEO Randy Garutti expressed his confidence in the company's future as have analysts such as Darren Tristano, executive vice president of industry research firm Technomic: "Consumers have a surprisingly short memory. I would be surprised if it's still affecting them by mid-next year."

Discussion Starters:

• How do you assess Chipotle's messaging? Analyze its website and social media presence. Consider the audience analysis, communication objectives, messaging, organization, tone, and so on. 
• What's your prediction for Chipotle's future?

In Tightening Race, Arguments About Wall Street

Hillary Clinton and Bernie Sanders debated last night in an elevated argument about policies and finances. In January, for the first time, the Sanders campaign raised more than Clinton's, which her finance director said was, "a very loud wake-up call." Clinton also won the Iowa caucus, but by a small margin. As a result, the tone of the debate changed.

In this clip, the reporter asks about Clinton's record, and Sanders avoids the question to discuss his view on "big banks."

As Sanders campaigns for equity, he shuns contributions from financial services companies: "I am very proud to be the only candidate up here who does not have super PAC, who's not raising huge sums from Wall Street and special interests." He questioned Clinton's contributions from companies, such as Goldman Sachs, which paid her $675,000 for three speeches, and gave examples of inequity:

He said that when a "kid gets caught with marijuana, that kid has a police record." But when "a Wall Street executive destroys the economy" and pays a $5 billion settlement, he has no criminal record.

Wall Street has been a popular topic on both the Republican and Democratic campaigns. Ted Cruz was recently criticized for accepting money from Goldman Sachs without disclosing it.

Discussion Starters:

• Assess the candidates' arguments about Wall Street. What's your opinion on the power of Wall Street?
• Who do you think won the debate? What were the highlights?  

"Why I Left My Sorority" Video

The Chronicle of Higher Education interviewed Alex Purdy, a student at Syracuse University who posted a video, "Why I Left My Sorority." Purdy explains her decision without calling out her particular sorority, but gives some damning examples, such as sisters "body shaming" other sisters. She says the biggest problem is "the overwhelming lack of compassion for one another." Purdy is also careful to say that this reflects only her experience and may not represent all sororities.

In the interview, Purdy says she worked on the video for more than six months and had been worried about how people would react. Since then, the video, with the hashtag #sororityrevamp, has received more than 100,000 views, and Purdy has appeared on the Today show.

Most Twitter comments are positive, complimenting Purdy for raising the conversation. Some expressed gratitude for their own sorority, which they say is a kind, compassionate place.

Dani Weatherford, executive director of the National Panhellenic Conference, provided this statement for The Washington Post:

We share in Alex's call for a thoughtful dialogue regarding how to best shape the modern sorority experience. Our member organizations set high standards, and a conversation about living up to them is one that we always welcome.

We also know that for millions of women, sorority membership has been and continues to be transformational and life-changing. We know from research that sorority women are not only more likely to graduate, but to graduate on time and to report a positive sense of engagement in their personal and professional lives.

For us, Alex's story is a reminder that our work must continue as we seek to enhance a sorority experience more than 100 years strong that's rooted in creating opportunities for service, leadership and scholarship. 

Discussion Starters:

• What examples do you hear of logical argument, emotional appeal, and credibility?
• How does she organize the video? Do you find this structure helpful to her argument, or does it detract from her points?
• How do you assess Purdy's own credibility? What makes her credible, and what might diminish her credibility?

Coca-Cola's Campaign Misfires

The company describes the campaign "Taste the Feeling" as more focused on product than the previous slogan "Open Happiness." Chief Marketing Officer Marcos de Quinto explains, "We've found over time that the more we position Coca-Cola as an icon, the smaller we become. The bigness of Coca-Cola resides in the fact that it's a simple pleasure-so the humbler we are, the bigger we are. We want to help remind people why they love the product as much as they love the brand."

New 60-second spots show people enjoying the product, and a series of print ads are described as "Norman Rockwell meets Instagram." 

That's all fine, but the company also launched a GIF maker for people to create their own ads, and we can guess what happened next. People created ads about divorce, foot fetishes, and predictably, bodily functions.

The company responded with this statement:

"Our intention is to invite people to share their feelings in fun and uplifting ways as they discover our new ‘Taste the Feeling' campaign. While the vast majority have used ‘GIF The Feeling' in positive ways, it's unfortunate to see that some people have chosen to use our campaign to do just the opposite." 

Discussion Starters: 

• Should Coca-Cola have predicted the results? A writer on Digiday thinks so. 
• Assess the company's statement. How well does it work in response to the failed GIF maker?
• Besides this failure, what's your view of the "Taste the Feeling" videos and pictures? 

Communications About Flint's Water

Flint, Michigan, is battling issues about contaminated water from aging lead pipes. Messages from the governor's office reveal conflicting strategies for dealing with the situation.

The "Flint Water" page of the Department of Environmental Quality shows a short statement from Governor Rick Snyder: "We are working closely with Genesee County and the Flint community, taking actions to immediately improve the water situation in Flint. Currently, we are focused on water testing, lead testing for children, and ensuring every home has water filters. We are also at work on long-term solutions, including follow-up care for affected residents." Before this statement, the site had a graphic claiming that the water was safe for bathing (shown here); it has since been removed. Now, an extensive list of resources appears under "Contamination Investigation."

The governor has released 274 pages of emails related to the investigation; some show officials debating responsibility for the problems.

As the controversy continues, Governor Snyder is actively communicating. On Twitter, as @onetoughnerd (!), Snyder is posting updates and links to videos and audio "townhall" calls. In the description of his State of the State address on YouTube, Snyder posted this message:

On Tuesday Jan. 19, Governor Snyder delivered a very different State of the State address.

He focused on Flint, a proud city in which residents are unable to drink the water that comes into their homes.

He acknowledged that this is unacceptable. It's a problem that we will fix, and fix quickly.

He spoke directly to the people of Flint, but also to everyone in our state and people across the country.

Discussion Starters:

• What are the governor's communication objectives at this point? Identify three or four for the public as his primary audience. 
• Assess his recent messages. How well is he meeting these objectives?
• What's your view of his Twitter handle?

Apple Reports Disappointing Results

On its Q1 earnings call, Apple reported slow iPhone growth and missed revenue targets. The Wall Street Journal summarizes results: "Apple said iPhone sales grew at the slowest pace since its introduction in 2007 for its first fiscal quarter ending in December." Business Insider, similarly, reports, "Apple's holiday-quarter revenue of $75.9 billion missed analyst expectations as well as the company's own guidance."

Of course, Apple's press release paints a different picture:

The Company posted record quarterly revenue of $75.9 billion and record quarterly net income of $18.4 billion, or $3.28 per diluted share. These results compare to revenue of $74.6 billion and net income of $18 billion, or $3.06 per diluted share, in the year-ago quarter. Gross margin was 40.1 percent compared to 39.9 percent in the year-ago quarter. International sales accounted for 66 percent of the quarter's revenue.

Our team delivered Apple's biggest quarter ever, thanks to the world's most innovative products and all-time record sales of iPhone, Apple Watch and Apple TV," said Tim Cook, Apple's CEO. "The growth of our Services business accelerated during the quarter to produce record results, and our installed base recently crossed a major milestone of one billion active devices."

Tim Cook did admit that the iPhone is increasingly expensive overseas because of foreign exchange rates.

Analysts don't seem too worried about the company's future. Of 14 analysts, 12 remain "bullish," while only two are "neutral."

Discussion Starters:

• Listen to the Q1 earnings call. How does the company handle the news?
• How well does Apple's press release summarize the results? Should anything else have been said in the release?

Marriott CEO Interview at Davos

Marriott CEO Arne Sorenson told Bloomberg TV at Davos that he's optimistic about the hotel outlook for 2016. 

 

Sorenson uses logical arguments to explain his perspective on rates and bookings despite weak performance in the stock market. Referring to industry data, he makes a convincing case that Marriott will see similar revenue in 2016. 

In discussing the Starwood acquisition, Sorenson explains the purchase of equity (and a lower price today than what was announced) and describes plans for the integration mid-2016. He also talks about more potential M&A activity for other hotel companies.

Discussion Starters: 

• What examples of logical arguments do you identify in Sorenson's interview?
• What data does he use to support his points? 
• Sorenson is realistic. Identify at least three examples of reservations and qualifiers you hear him use. How do these help or hurt his position? 

T-Mobile Letter: "Binge On!"

T-Mobile announced "Binge On," a new program for consumers to "stretch their data bucket." The service allows customers to watch videos at lower resolutions (which the company says doesn't matter on small screens) and not count the time against their high-resolution data minutes. In addition, consumers can watch videos from partner sites for free. 

Not all responses to Binge On have been positive. The Electronic Frontier Foundation (EFF) has questioned whether the program affects streaming in addition to bandwith. In a video tweet response, CEO John Legere shot back a response including the F-bomb. Legere later apologized. 

In a letter to customers, Legere clarifies that the service is "opt-in" (a big concern) and explains the program in more detail. This paragraph is an example of Legere's usual, casual style:

But there is suddenly a LOT of confusion about Binge On. I keep hearing from customers that they love it – but have recently heard from some others (many of whom have never even tried Binge On, and simply have a different agenda) that they don't like it. Well you know what? That is completely OK too.

My sister sent me the letter and didn't appreciate the casual tone or the "creepy" picture of the CEO. She also noted that the letter isn't dated, so it's unclear when all of this happened. 

Consumers can find more information on T-Mobile's FAQs about Binge On.

Discussion Starters: 

• What's your view of Legere's writing style? Partly, it fits with the T-Mobile image, but is it too much for customers? 
• Could T-Mobile have avoided some of the controversy with clearer communications during the rollout? What do you think happened, and how could the messaging have been handled differently? 

Another Call for Hope in Obama's Last SOTU

President Obama's presidency came full circle in his last State of the Union (SOTU) address. The speech was not without humor. The president began by promising to keep it short, so people could get back to Iowa for more campaigning.  (Transcript)

As expected, the president highlighted accomplishments from his administration and laid out plans for the future. The speech sounded optimistic, which of course, was the theme of his first presidential campaign. He ended this way:

That's the America I know. That's the country we love. Clear- eyed, big-hearted, undaunted by challenge, optimistic that unarmed truth and unconditional love will have the final word. That's what makes me so hopeful about our future.

I believe in change because I believe in you, the American people. And that's why I stand here, as confident as I have ever been, that the state of our Union is strong.

The audience reaction is typical and always baffles me: Republicans don't support anything a Democratic president says, and the opposite happens when we have a Republican president. It's strange to me when the President makes some points that, surely, everyone agrees with. Early on, he says, "First, how do we give everyone a fair shot at opportunity and security in this new economy?" The camera is on Marco Rubio, who sits stoically in non-response. Doesn't he support opportunity for everyone?

As usual, major newspapers showed their political bent in reporting on the SOTU. The Wall Street Journal ran a secondary headline on the front page with the title, "GOP Candidates Contrast Obama's Speech With Their Own Aims." The Journal showed additional stories under the "Politics" heading further down on the site, shown here.

In contrast, The New York Times ran the story as the main headline of the day with the title, "Obama Offers Hopeful Vision While Noting Nation's Fears," and ran more stories, including opinions, with positive titles about the speech.  

Discussion Starters: 

• What do you consider to be the highlights of President Obama's speech?
• Look at the audience's reactions. What's your view of the convention I mention above: how does the non-response serve each side? 

ESPN Forgets to Identify Social Media Ads

The Federal Trade Commission's guidelines are clear: when people are paid to write social media posts that relationship must be disclosed. This applies to company employees. Two incidents this week show companies skirting those rules. 

ESPN employees tweeted about Dominos, but didn't disclose their relationship to ESPN. By law, the tweets should include #ad or #spon to identify a sponsored ad.

ESPN responded to a request by Deadspin, calling the tweets an "error": 

ESPN says this is all a mistake and that future tweets associated with Domino's ad buy with the network will be compliant with federal law. Which is fine, though we're still skeptical that New Year's Eve means either college football or pizza-and so were the millions of fans who didn't tune in for this year's college football playoff games.

Yet, a couple of days later, an ESPN journalist tweeted another advertisement. The company has argued that journalists aren't paid endorsers, and a Wall Street Journal article explains, "the issue of whether [ESPN's] roster of pundits and anchors are journalists guided by traditional editorial strictures or entertainers allowed to hawk products has been a thorny one for some time." However, Deadspin argues that Schefter and Mortensen are clearly "personalities," and the connection to the brand is clear.

This issue isn't new. The FTC admonished Cole Han for promotions on Pinterest, and I'm sure others have been caught. 

Discussion Starters:

• We could argue that identifying ads is just a technicality. Some accuse the FTC of being too snarky about social media posts. What's your opinion on the issue? 
• Would a hashtag identifying the posts as ad change your perspective on the post? How do you think fans would be influenced either way?

Thai Ads Pull at Heartstrings

A Wall Street Journal article highlights Thai commercials so emotional that people daring each other not to cry has become a "digital spectator sport." A YouTube description for one video reads, "You Too Will Cry After Watching This... 95% People Cry." The commercials have inspired videos of people watching them, trying not to cry. A video of "Deadlox" garnered more than 256,000 views.

Thanonchai Sornsriwichai creates short films (between 3 and 10 minutes) to sell insurance, phones, food, and other goods. The videos are mini-movies with a dramatic story. In "Silence of Love," a daughter with an angry father tries to commit suicide. The message is to "Remember to care for those who care for you"; in other words, buy life insurance. 

With 27 million views, another ad for life insurance, "Unsung Hero," is Thanonchai's highest ranking.

Using pathos or emotional appeals to persuade is nothing new, but this video genre is gaining traction. Advertisers say these film shorts compete with TV ads and capitalize on social media. An executive at Ogilvy & Mather in Bangkok calls them "media events." Of course, videos about the videos increase the number of viewers, and tagging the no-cry challenge onto a film makes it go viral.

Discussion Starters:

• Describe the value of using pathos in a persuasive argument. What aspects do these films use effectively?

• On the other hand, what are the risks? For example, could people feel duped at the end? How do advertisers avoid this potential reaction?

Ted Cruz's Daughters as Monkeys: "Fair Game"?

The Washington Post has retracted a cartoon depicting presidential candidate Ted Cruz's children as monkeys. 

The cartoonist, Pulitzer Prize winner Ann Telnaes, defended her cartoon:

There is an unspoken rule in editorial cartooning that a politician's children are off-limits. People don't get to choose their family members so obviously it's unfair to ridicule kids for their parent's behavior while in office or on the campaign trail- besides, they're children. There are plenty of adults in the political world who act childish, so there is no need for an editorial cartoonist to target actual children.

I've kept to that rule, except when the children are adults themselves or  choose to indulge in grown-up activities (as the Bush twins did during the George W Bush presidency). But when a politician uses his children as political props, as Ted Cruz recently did in his Christmas parody video in which his eldest daughter read (with her father's dramatic flourish) a passage of an edited Christmas classic, then I figure they are fair game.

However, The Post editor Fred Hiatt disagreed: 

It's generally been the policy of our editorial section to leave children out of it. I failed to look at this cartoon before it was published. I understand why Ann thought an exception to the policy was warranted in this case, but I do not agree.

The controversy may have given Cruz's campaign a nice Christmas jolt: so far, his family video has been watched more than 1.7 million times. 

Is any publicity good publicity? That hasn't always held true on social media, but in this case, it's working in the candidate's favor. 

And because it's Christmas, I'm reminded of Mike Huckabee's video in 2007. Some didn't appreciate the rather obvious window-pane-as-cross. 

Discussion Starters: 

• What's your view? Was the cartoonist justified in including Cruz's children? 
• Was The Washington Post editor right? Should he have defied the cartoonist's position? 

Behind the Scenes of Caitlyn Jenner's Announcement

It's hard enough for companies to announce organizational changes, but Caitlyn Jenner had a real challenge ahead of her. An interesting New York Times article describes the publicist and process behind Caitlyn Jenner's announcement that she is transgender and planned to transition.

Alan Nierob managed her announcement but prefers to stay out of the limelight himself. What's useful for business communicators is to understand his decision process: what was the best way for Jenner to announce her transition? Here are the options described in the Times article:

• "Keeping Up With the Kardashians": At the time, Jenner was on this E! television show, but Neirob worried it would look too "self-serving," and they questioned the loyalty of the family and network to represent the story well.
• Interview with NBCUniversal: Nierob rejected this plan as too corporate and seemingly financially motivated.
• Interview with Diane Sawyer of ABC News: Nierob trusted Sawyer and ultimately chose this as one of the options. 
• Interview with Vanity Fair: This was Neirob's additional plan for people to understand Jenner's life and to see glamorous photos. 

Reporters seem to respect Nierob's work. Here's a great description of an alternative to saying "no comment," which typically doesn't go over well. This is Nierob's response to questions about Mel Gibson's "blaming Jews for all the world's wars"(!): 

"What I remember," said Jeff Jensen, a reporter for Entertainment Weekly assigned to write about Mr. Gibson's saga, "is that Alan respected our inquiry without participating. It was like: ‘I know this is a story, I know you have a job to do, and I wish you well, but I can't help, and Mel won't comment.' It was incredibly gracious and professional. He did his job for his client while showing respect for mine."

Discussion Starters: 

• How could an interview with NBCUniversal look "corporate"? Explain how this might be perceived and how it could reflect negatively on Jenner. 
• What if Jenner had described her transition on the Kardashian show? Describe potential positive and negative outcomes. 
• Why is "no comment" a poor response to a reporter's question? What alternatives could work better? 

Apology for "Should Be Shot" Comment

The University of Iowa president Bruce Harreld has apologized for using the expression "should be shot," in this case, referring to faculty who are unprepared. An email exchange between the president and a librarian shows a respectful interaction but indicates a reluctant apology. 

The librarian, Lisa Gardinier, initiated a long email, calling his use of the term "flippant" and "horrifying and unacceptable" given "the tense atmosphere of racist law enforcement violence." She also criticized his "rambling, unfocused" talk-a bit harsh, in my view, but I don't have to listen to him.

 

Clearly, Harreld isn't happy to hear from Gardinier, but starting a sentence with "frankly," could indicate the opposite. It's like saying "honestly"; what's the alternative? 

Later, Harreld denied saying "they should be shot" but admitted saying, "I have learned the hard way that if I ever walk into a classroom without a teaching plan, I should be shot."

As usual, this criticism is not in isolation. People were unhappy with Harreld's appointment because of his business background and questions about the hiring process. 

Discussion Starters: 

• Read the entire email exchange, starting with Gardinier's first email. How does she successfully explain her argument? Where does her email fall short?
• Should Harreld have apologized sooner and more clearly? Why or why not? 
• What's your view of the expression "should be shot"? Should it be avoided, or is it just a harmless expression?
• Does the use of "they" or "I" make a difference?

Kimpton Updates Rewards Members

Kimpton Hotels has emailed Inner Circle members to provide an update on the rewards program. Sent by the senior director of guest marketing, the email seems to respond to unanswered questions. With a conversational style, Maggie Lane promises more communication:

We know things have been a bit quiet on our end. There's been a lot of hard work behind the scenes. Our team has also been listening and we know you want more information. We get it.

Her conversational style is also evident in the email closing:

That's all I got for now. I wish you a delightful, eggnog-fueled holiday season and New Year with your loved ones.

The approach is interesting and may be a reaction to the news of Marriott's acquisition of Starwood. Much of that news has been about the great opportunities for Marriott Rewards and Starwood Preferred Guest members. IHG's acquisition of Kimpton was announced in December 2014 and hasn't gotten much press since then.

Discussion Starters: 

• Using principles from Chapter 4 in the textbook, analyze Kimpton's audience for this email. Who are Inner Circle members, what do we know about them, and so on?
• Assess the conversational style, particularly the word choice. How do you think the audience might react?