Download CASE III-D

Exxon’s Whipping Cream on a Pile of Manure
Exxon’s Whipping Cream on a Pile of Manure
JOANN M. VALENTI
Brigham Young University
In March 1989 over 10 million gallons of Alaskan crude oil spilled into Prince William Sound when the Exxon tanker
Valdez hit a reef. Ultimately, miles of coastline were fouled, thousands of birds, fish and marine mammals died and a
legacy to exploiting natural resources was born. It took ten days for the company to run a full page ad, called “An open
letter to the public,” in 165 daily newspapers plus a handful of major magazines. According to Exxon’s New York
media relations manager Sara Johnson, the ads, which cost the company $1.8 million, were intended to offer an apology
for the environmental disaster. Johnson explained to St. Petersburg Times reporter Ken Otterbourg that Exxon
wanted the public to know that “we’re concerned” and that “we’ll be there for the duration.”
Few “bought” the apology. Exxon brought media specialists in to field phone calls and sent top executives on the
television talk show rounds. The media blitz failed to satisfactorily explain what had happened and what was being
done. Buddy Davis’ editorial for the New York Times Regional Newspaper group in late April typified media and
public response:
“Standard Oil of New Jersey was the granddaddy and is known today as Exxon. Aside from stealing consumers blind as a
monopoly in the early years, the company played it awfully cozy with the German Nazis in the 1930s and spent $55 million in
attempts to buy the Italian government in the 1960s and 1970s. Otherwise, Exxon seems to have been a fairly decent low-profile
citizen until the Exxon Valdez crunched into Alaskan shoals last month.”
During the height of the crisis, the company released twelve video news releases (VNRs) with stunning aerials of
Alaskan scenery and shots of majestic ships. The voice-over exclaims, “It’s cruise time in Alaska, and business is
booming . . . none of the cruise lines are skipping (the port called Valdez).” The spots offered testimony from tourists
not at all unhappy about their Valdez vacations and shots of whales and seals without crude oil on them with the “news”
that concerns about the spill “seem to (have) abated.”
Exxon public affairs manager Jim Morakis reported to Technology Review writer Susan E. Davis that between 27
to 30 million viewers saw at least one of the dozen VNRs with the embedded Exxon messages. Even though sending
reporters to Alaska to cover the story ate into tight news budgets, some networks refused to air the Exxon VNRs, among
them CNN news producer Eric Scholl.
Micro Issues:
1. Was the Exxon VNR series intended to inform the public or was it an attempt to deflect attention away from
controversy?
2. An estimated 81 million viewers learned how to buy dolphin-safe tuna from a VNR produced by StarKist. What
difference does it make when public relations releases environmental or medical news as opposed to military or
corporate information?
3. As part of an estimated $11 million PR campaign, citizens for a Free Kuwait spent over $600,000 to produce proKuwait videos for American television networks during the Iraqi occupation and war. Is the amount of money spent
to produce a VNR a story? A factor in its use?
Middle-range Issues:
1. Newspapers have relied on press releases from PR for decades. Has this practice of inter-reliance between print
media and PR resulted in reduced credibility for the press? What are the ethical considerations in news media use
of public relations releases?
2. PR professionals worry their clients will object to a visible logo or VNR-sponsored ID because viewers will
confuse the news release with infomercials. What is the difference between a VNR and an infomercial? Who
should be responsible for making sure the audience understands different media formats?
3. During presidential elections, television audiences are exposed to VNRs from virtually all of the major candidates.
Try to recall what you saw during the 1992 and 1996 campaigns. What effect does it have on the voting process
when campaign staffers produce what you see about election contenders?
1
Exxon’s Whipping Cream on a Pile of Manure
Macro Issues:
1. What is the relationship between credibility and ethical behavior?
2. Where is the line between news and propaganda? Does creating a story in-house assure that it is objective? Does
accepting a VNR from an interested source assure that it is propaganda?
3. What are the ethics of advocacy in communication?
2