Tag: crisis management

Avoid Social Media Disasters

Posted on by Cliff Maroney

As PR and social media professionals who often share content on behalf of brands and company executives, we literally have their reputations in our hands…and on our dashboards.

That’s why every PR pro must guard against the unscrupulous. Recent Twitter hacks of major brands like Burger King, Jeep and Chrysler show that no one is immune.

With hackers growing more sophisticated by the day, no one can guarantee a 100% bulletproof social account. But we can avoid the kind of sloppiness that invites trouble. Hacks are not only embarrassing in professional circles,  but they can have reputation repercussions for companies and their brands.

Here are some tips for dealing with, and preventing social media mishaps.

Follow good password protocol. Passwords such as “hello123” and “love” are a temptation to mischief-makers. By regularly changing passwords, limiting the number of approved users, and safeguarding your personal email and social accounts, you can eliminate easy security loopholes. Also, never save passwords to your browser; it’s an invitation to hackers.

Be prepared. Have a written and approved set of steps for a social media hack or mistake so you can “nip an issue in the bud” and minimize any damage as quickly as possible. Build in redundancy. For example, make sure that automated tweets can be suspended quickly and easily in the event of a disaster or other breaking news.

Think before you delete. If a questionable update is posted, think before you rush to delete. Sometimes, a deleted tweet just calls greater attention to the situation. A simple correction could be all you need to fix the error; or, if you have caused offense, apologize promptly and sincerely.

Separate your personal and client streams and dashboards. It’s easy to make mistakes (e.g. auto-log in), which is all the more reason to separate your business and personal streams. This helps safeguard your Twitter worlds with an extra layer of security if one of your accounts be compromised, and it reduces the chances you’ll tweet about your wicked hangover on a client’s account.

Double-check vendors. If you use a subcontracter, make sure they’re buttoned up. Every entity contracted to deal with your brand needs written security and content guidelines.

Retractions And Reversals: Best And Worst of Apology PR

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw

This week has brought a fresh wave of public mea culpas and backpedalings – plenty of fodder for self-anointed apology PR experts.

Most proactive is the ad campaign mounted by JC Penney after the failure of its everyday low price strategy and store makeovers of last year. The spot, which is narrated in a warm, intimate female voiceover, addresses shoppers directly, admitting in heartfelt tones that the company didn’t listen to its customers and pledging to restore the “old” Penney.  It also made savvy use of social media, spreading the message with #JCPlistens hashtag and rewarding customers who say they will come return to the brand. Will the campaign pay off? It’s too early to tell, but I think the call-to-action (“We heard you. Now we’d like to see you.”) is a winner.

Less effective, at least in the moment, was the statement from PepsiCo’s Mountain Dew brand when a desperately-trying-to-be-edgy video ad sent its viewers over the edge.  After the outpouring of criticism for the video’s perceived racist and misogynist content, the brand pulled it with the statement, “We’re sorry if anyone was offended.” No responsibility, no sincerity. The initial apology was, well, flat, and the entire episode tasteless.

To be fair, the explanation offered by the rap artist who produced the video, Tyler, the Creator (that’s with a capital “C”) gave important context for the ad, but his response, which was posted by his manager, was drowned out in the backlash. Mountain Dew seemed to realized that its own statement was just a drop in the apology bucket and that it needed to step up. It followed with a promoted tweet. “Hey, guys, we made a big mistake and have removed the offensive video,” even adding the hashtag #fail.

Both could take a tip from the most successful brand walkback to date. In February, after iconic bourbon Maker’s Mark announced it would manage scarce supply by reducing the alcohol content of its famous whiskey, fans and brand-watchers revolted. Pundits called it brand suicide. Maker’s Mark initially defended its decision, but it quickly reversed course. The result seems to have made drinkers appreciate their favorite whiskey even more. After a brief hoarding binge, Maker’s Mark loyalists have forgiven the label, and they’re back by the barrelful.

Some have speculated that the whole thing was a PR ploy. Whatever the case, Maker’s Mark recent earnings were anything but watered down. The brand reported its best quarter ever, just in time for the bourbon-soaked Kentucky Derby weekend.

Sometimes you just have to show that you’re listening. There’s the proof.

PR Crisis Management Lessons From Behind The Headlines

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw

Hindsight – ahem – is always 20/20, particularly when it comes to reputation management. Yet, textbook crisis successes (and failures) aren’t always what they seem. Here’s my take on some recent examples of crisis handling by top brands.

The Lululemon Yoga Pants Recall. For sheer, on-the-spot crisis management skill, Lululemon wins, hands down. PR experts saw the voluntary recall of its (unintentionally) see-through yoga pants as a “lemons to lemonade” case. And it’s true that the brand’s agile moves gave new meaning to the word “transparency.”

Yes, Lululemon did seem to bend over backwards to be proactive and minimize the inconvenience to customers. It communicated the recall, its rationale, and the timeline of events proactively to press, analysts, and its customer base. It promised refunds or exchanges for defective pants bought after March 1 and pledged to improve quality by dedicating employees to work with vendors, tightening production specs, and posting its own staff at partner factories.

But a closer look shows the seams. Lululemon’s key supplier publicly denied that anyone from the company had even been in touch.  (Were supply chain communications aligned?) Worse, product loyalists saw CEO Christine Day‘s explanation of the fabric issue as…well, a stretch.  Hardcore lulu-lovers have complained of quality problems for months. Negative comments on fan sites are packed in tighter than a Sunday bikram class, signaling deeper problems for a brand whose health depends on its cult-like community of users.

“Pants-gate” was costly for Lululemon’s stock price and for its former product chief, who resigned as a result. The verdict? Sound strategy and good journalist relations are one thing, but Lululemon has more work to do to get back in shape.

Carnival Cruise Lines.  “Is Carnival haunted?” asks one PR community commenter.  It’s a fair question.

First there was the Costa Concordia disaster. Thirty-two passengers perished, the captain abandoned ship against orders, and the company’s reputation—and stock price—hit choppy waters. And there’s been a flood of incidents since.  In February, a fire disabled the Triumph, stranding travelers amidst food shortages and overflowing toilets for five long days. That’s years in crisis management time. The company’s billionaire owner, Mickey Arison, was photographed courtside at a Miami Heat game as #cruisefromhell was trending on Twitter.

Bad optics for sure. But Carnival did act quickly to steer its reputation back to normal. It was proactive with communications, issuing consistent updates on the shipboard situation through a specially created web page and its social media channels. It promptly made amends to passengers, issuing full credits and offering $500 towards a future voyage.

What many didn’t realize is that a sea evacuation of passengers would have been impractical and dangerous—something Carnival did manage to communicate in the press. And though I question the decision to drop-ship the CEO onboard (because it didn’t calm passengers and only exposed him to their ire), it was a bold move.

Some would say its reputation is sunk, but for me, that ship hasn’t sailed. Carnival is a huge family of brands and it has learned from the past. But it needs to do all it can to ensure a steady course for the coming high season.

Rutgers University. The Rutgers basketball crisis is only just beginning, but, so far, the university’s handling has been a losing proposition. Yet as the scandal widens into an FBI investigation, one relevant issue for communicators goes back to Rutgers’ own internal review into the behavior of former basketball coach Mike Rice and the decisions made as a result.

Allegations by a whistle-blower that Rice kicked, shoved, and verbally abused players triggered an inquiry conducted by key legal players late last year. But the investigation focused almost wholly on whether Rice’s conduct constituted a “hostile work environment.”  The conclusion?  It did not.  So, Rutgers followed its lawyers’ counsel and dealt with Rice’s behavior with suspension and anger management classes. Apparently it didn’t consult with PR or reputation specialists. Rutgers Athletic Director and its HR head completely missed the ramifications beyond the basketball court and the legal courtroom.

Five months later, all hell broke loose when the video rebounded into the court of public opinion. From here it looks like a rookie reputation management error and a very costly failure to anticipate two things:  the inevitability of the video’s release, and its powerful influence in today’s digital environment.

A version of this post originally appeared on MENGBlend.

Year-End PR Winners And Losers

Posted on by lauren

Year-end wouldn’t be year-end without the inevitable lists! In PR it’s instructive (and full of just a little schadenfrude) to reflect on those who burnished their PR image and those who bruised and battered it. Here’s our best shot at PR Winners and Losers. See what you think.

PR Winners

Chris Christie
Jersey’s often-mocked Republican governor scored major points at home after Hurricane Sandy. Gov. Christie threw himself into the relief efforts as soon as the storm hit the Garden State. His ability to blur party lines and work with President Obama days before the Presidential election helped him maintain the image of a focused leader during the disaster, which led to a huge spike in his most recent approval rating.

Lydia Callis, Bloomberg’s Sign Language Interpreter
How often does the “hearing” public pay attention to sign language interpreters? The answer was ‘not often’ until Lydia Callis signed for Mayor Bloomberg during his post-Sandy addresses. Her enthusiasm and clear sympathy made her stand out, earning her an inspired skit on SNL and rocketing her to internet stardom. She also put sign language interpreting into the zeitgeist.

Hillary Clinton
Who knew that a photo of Hillary Clinton checking her phone would redefine the Secretary of State? The ‘Texts from Hillary’ Tumblr began as a fun way to portray the former presidential candidate, as ‘Hillary’ and ‘Humor’ aren’t often synonymous. The site launched popular memes, which Clinton chose to embrace, and her farewell video and latest “selfie” taken with Meryl Streep just confirmed her appeal with multiple audiences. Welcome to the world of memes, Hillary! We hope you’re here to stay!

PR Losers

McDonald’s
When McDonald’s turned to social media to hear their patrons’ #McDStories, they could have never anticipated the can of worms they were opening. McDonald’s diners used the hashtag to air their grievances about the chain, instead of share their success stories. The twitter campaign promptly ended once it was deemed a #McFail.

Penn State
It’s sad to see an institution like Penn State fall from its pedestal, but that’s what happened when the school was caught in a child molestation scandal. Although assistant football coach Jerry Sandusky was found guilty of the awful crimes, the school was burned when the Freeh report revealed that the late head coach Joe Paterno and the administration covered up the situation. As a result, the school took a major hit to its reputation and football program.

Donald Trump
Of course, no PR list would be complete without “The Donald.” Trump claimed he had a “game-changer” in the Presidential election by challenging Obama to release his private records in exchange for a $5 million charitable donation. Celebrities took to the twittersphere mocking the mogul’s cry for attention and Trump’s offer became a joke. But, we were still talking about Trump, so maybe he belongs on both lists!

Can you think of other great PR moments? Any that should be left in the dust? Feel free to leave them in the comments!

8 Ways To Manage Negative PR

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw

It’s hard to predict, and even harder to handle appropriately. It may come in the form of a Google Alert, a phone call inviting comment, or an email from a customer or colleague. You, or your company, is being criticized in public.

Some say there’s no such thing as negative publicity, but most businesses who’ve been on the receiving end of harsh coverage or public criticism would disagree. Yet the way you handle a negative story can make all the difference. Here’s how to respond without fanning the flames of a negative situation.

First, weigh your response. Don’t hide. In most cases, a failure to react will only validate the criticisms, so an appropriate response is usually advisable. Yet there are exceptions. If the accusation isn’t credible (a rumor or Internet troll), there’s no need to dignify it. In a high-stakes situation where the facts aren’t yet clear, respond by saying so, and pledge to get to the truth as quickly as possible.

Don’t overreact. It’s easy to be emotional and use inflammatory or defensive language when attacked, especially if things get personal.  Recently a client drafted a lengthy post on his business site refuting “slanderous accusations” resulting from an intellectual property dispute. We convinced him that the post might raise more questions than it answered, particularly for customers with no knowledge of the situation. It pays to seek objective advice.

Ask for equal time. Most legitimate websites or news sources will let you have your say in response to a negative story. Where facts or details are wrong, insist on your right to set the record straight. Don’t threaten or bully; appeal instead to the journalist or blogger’s sense of accuracy. No one wants to get it wrong.

Use facts and figures and cite third-party sources. A convincing response is usually one that invokes objective facts or statistics. Where possible, quote third parties. Past recognition, company ratings and recommendations, or even satisfied customers will help you state your case.

Let your advocates defend you. If you have trusted customers or partners who are willing to be quoted or post comments in your defense, by all means, let them. The essence of reputation is what others say about you in public.

If appropriate, apologize. If your company has made an error, offer a prompt and sincere apology. Avoid weasel words like, “We’re sorry if anyone was offended.” Take responsibility, and more importantly, take steps to fix the situation or make amends.

Generate positive content where possible. Once the storm passes, help “push down” negative or unflattering stories or comments with fresh, positive, and highly searchable content. Step up your blogging; offer to guest post on an industry site; get quoted in a trade publication or site.

Ask yourself, is this an opportunity? Sometimes public criticism is actually a gift in disguise. It can be a chance to correct a problem or improve a product or service offering. If appropriate, thank your critic and take advantage of the opening to tout the fix.

This post was originally published on October 31, 2012 by MENGBlend.

Lessons Learned From Football’s Replacement Referee Debacle

Posted on by lauren

By guest blogger George Drucker

No, it wasn’t a touchdown. And the lack of professionalism among the “replacement” referees caused one of the greatest uproars in the history of sports. It could have led to a major crisis in public confidence for the NFL.

Professionalism can never be taken for granted. It applies to referees . . . and it applies to public relations practitioners, particularly when the pressure’s on.

Here are some ways that maintaining professionalism in high-stress situations can dial back the tension, save a relationship and increase your value to a client or colleague. Please consider them or chances are you’ll just fumble away the opportunity to neutralize or negate an escalating situation.

Reflect before you react.
Allow the heat of the moment to simmer down while you think about every possible scenario and its possible consequences before moving forward.

Don’t go on the defensive.
If you’re wrong, that means with an apology. Most people appreciate contrition. Those who accept and “fess up” to responsibility tend to be more readily forgiven.

Think about who will “quarterback” the situation.
Who responds in a negative situation can be as important as the information and messages conveyed. The Commissioner of the NFL had greater impact and credibility than the head of referees.

Consider a team “shake-up”
Although no one member may be at fault for a certain snafu, sometimes fresh faces produce positive change.

Please share with us any ways that you have scored big by applying some cool-headed professionalism to a heated situation.

6 Myths of Crisis Management PR

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw

In the past several weeks, brands from Burger King and Penn State to Chick-fil-A and CelebBoutique have grappled with serious reputational threats.  These days, it’s almost routine for communications pros to be managing some kind of potential crisis situation along with proactive PR programs.

Yet true “crisis management” is probably a misnomer.  Though there are principles that apply to many situations, much of the analysis and advice from people like me comes in hindsight.  Armchair reputation managers sometimes forget that the conventional wisdom isn’t always relevant in the heat of the moment.  Here, then, are my favorite crisis management myths and misperceptions.

Myth #1. The Tylenol case is still the industry standard.
With respect to Johnson & Johnson and Burson-Marsteller, this 1982 crisis management “classic” is badly outdated and likely exaggerated.  As a victim of a frightening attack, the company faced a sympathetic press and public. And while it deserves credit for the fast introduction of tamperproof packaging months later (under FDA mandate), and for an extraordinary reintroduction of the brand, the immediate response was a poor prescription for today’s damage-control experts. For example, it took the company eight days to respond to the first signs of crisis, an eternity in today’s compressed media environment.

Myth #2. A business crisis, by definition, is impossible to predict.
Not always. In fact, most crises grow out of foreseeable ills, and many have happened before. Or they may be simmering situations left untreated or concealed, like the Penn State child sex abuse scandal. A study by the Institute for Crisis Management showed that sixty-five percent of business crises from 1990 to 2009 were “smoldering” or slow-burn situations, as opposed to thirty-five percent that were sudden events. A random catastrophe like the Tylenol poisonings is truly rare, accounting for roughly seven to eight percent of crises, as opposed to product defects, lawsuits, mismanagement, and other theoretically foreseeable happenings.

Myth #3. Any crisis is manageable with advance planning and preparation.
There’s not really a handbook for handling a business calamity. We sometimes preach advance planning and preparation as if they can prevent or preempt the damage, but often these measures can only shorten the window of negative scrutiny or moderate the tone of the resulting media coverage and chatter, at best. As basic as it may sound, sometimes the most important measure is the communications protocol. Who will lead? How many are involved in decisions and statement review? Who speaks to the press? These are basic questions that can be decided in advance.

Myth #4.  You should never stonewall media inquiries.
Professional communicators warn against ignoring journalists in a crisis because they’ll write the story with or without you, and because it can harm media relations for the future. But we’ve all done it. When you don’t have the proper information or cannot legally share it, it’s better not to engage at all. You’ll take the heat, but staying silent can avoid worsening the situation when the facts aren’t yet clear.

Myth #5.  In a crisis, always get the top guy involved.
This is where some inexperienced handlers jump the gun. Many negative situations are better handled by a corporate officer with enough seniority to be authoritative but not enough to jeopardize the CEO office or distract from other critical business. And where relevant, local market managers with community roots are nearly always preferable to home-office execs. CEO involvement is usually best reserved for the most acute situations such as those involving loss of life.

Myth # 6.  Media and message training can save the day.
In my experience media training is helpful but often overrated, and, more importantly, it’s not often possible when a crisis is fresh. No PR professional or crisis manager will negate the importance of a blueprint for damage control and response. Yet, John Weber of Dezenhall Resources summed up the intangible and chaotic aspects of crisis PR when he said, “Given the choice between a good plan and a good leader, I’d take a good leader every time.”

This post was originally published on MENGBlend.

Armstrong’s Crisis PR Is In Fighting Form

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw

As evidence that he used performance-enhancing substances has gained traction over the years, cyclist Lance Armstrong always managed to stay out in front, avoiding major reputation damage.

Until now. But even now, he may be down, but he’s not out. As he threw in the towel, announcing that he’d no longer contest the US Anti-Doping Agency’s charges, Armstrong attacked. When news of the decision hit, his take on the matter, in the form of a passionate and angry personal statement, was widely shared on social media platforms. If nothing else, team Armstrong’s handling of the situation looks like championship crisis management.

The USADA’s announcement this morning that he will be stripped of his seven Tour de France titles and be banned from the sport are a big part of the story, but so is Armstrong’s aggressive defense. “Enough is enough,” is how he explains his decision. Armstrong’s statement admits no guilt; in fact, he continues to defend his reputation and harshly criticizes the agency for what he sees as a witch-hunt.

Not only is the statement well-articulated, but the no-contest move is probably the closest thing to a winning strategy for Armstrong. He and his advisers must know that. If he were to fight the Agency’s charges, the evidence against him would be presented in open court. And by all accounts, that evidence is overwhelming – USADA claims to have incriminating blood samples, and ten eyewitnesses, including former teammates, are prepared to testify against him.

A public hearing would be devastating for Armstrong’s reputation as an elite athlete, cancer beater, and American hero, and it would threaten the anti-cancer mission of his Livestrong Foundation.

A quick glance at public comments  on the social web indicates Armstrong still has plenty of fans and defenders. So, while admitting defeat may not be much of a victory, as a communications strategy and crisis management case, it may be as good as it gets.

Can Penn State’s Reputation Be Saved?

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw

Among the casualties of the Penn State sexual abuse coverup were the personal reputations of university officials, including the late football coach and sports icon Joe Paterno. Paterno, Spanier, Curley, Schultz and others will be forever linked to the efforts to minimize and conceal shocking crimes against children. (Who can forget the email in which Spanier calls the decision not to inform police a “humane” approach?)

But what about Penn State, the institution? Can it be redeemed? I was surprised to read many online comments, even in the wake of the Freeh report, that shrugged off the scandal and its impact on the school’s enrollment, alumni giving, and academic standing.

I’m not so sure. You can’t blame an entire university for what happened, but where Penn State lost the PR game, in my view, wasn’t just when its leadership failed to report and prevent crimes against children. That was a moral failing.

Where the university erred in PR terms was when news of the Grand Jury charges broke. It had an opportunity to get ahead of the story and at least be a part of the investigation, rather than the unwilling subject of it. The legal crisis had been in the making for three years, an eternity in issues management terms. Yet it wasn’t until the damage was done that the school tried to get control of the situation, and by then it was far too late.

So, what should the university do now? Here are some useful steps to consider:

New leadership. The school has a new president who seems committed to moving forward in a transparent way. But its housecleaning should go further, to the coaching staff and most importantly, the Board of Directors.

Open communications. The Freeh report was funded and commissioned by Penn State’s Board of Directors, which is a strong first step to communicating openly and letting the chips fall where they may. But the very fact of its funding wasn’t sufficiently communicated, in my view. PSU needs to redouble its efforts to show its commitment to getting at the truth.

Athletic program reform. Whether PSU football will be suspended is up to the NCAA, but it’s a fair question and one that should be seriously considered. I tend to agree with those who think a suspension would only serve to punish the innocent, but the program needs to be restructured, possibly by folding the athletic department into the university at large, along the lines of the Vanderbilt example.

Reparations. A “sudden death” suspension would have a real impact on the school and would show it’s serious about consequences, yet it doesn’t make amends. There will be civil damages paid to victims, but that’s reactive. The school needs to establish a formal program to compensate victims. Only a serious, long-term reparations program, along the lines of the BP fund or even the 9/11 victims’ fund, will demonstrate that PSU, as an institution and a community, is committed to never letting such a thing happen again.

Third parties. Penn State should bring on an independent third party to oversee claims resolution and, most importantly, to undertake a long-term education program like those run by The National Center For Missing and Exploited Children or Prevent Child Abuse America. Independence and moral authority are critical in any partner organization.

Money and sports. Arthur Caplan decries the “pernicious and corrupting influence of big time college sports” due to the huge sums of money they bring in, and he’s not alone.

The business of football and men’s basketball at many of our most visible universities is so huge — from the sale of sports paraphernalia, to TV and media rights, to gambling to stadiums filled with luxury boxes and corporate sponsors — that it is laughable to think that administration, legal staff or faculty would not think their primary duty is to protect those programs at any price.

Caplan makes a compelling case, but it’s not realistic to think that college sports – and the big dollars they generate – will go away any time soon. Better for Penn State to take smaller, but steady steps, towards reputation rehabilitation.

JetBlue’s Response to Pilot Breakdown: Light On Crisis PR Strategy?

Posted on by Dorothy Crenshaw


All airlines are prone to rough PR weather, but JetBlue seems to have more than its share. Maybe it’s because during a time of rapidly deteriorating expectations, many of us still expect more of JetBlue. It’s that rare industry bird, the customer-friendly airline. An oxymoron.

So when it goes off-course, that’s news. There was the 2007 Valentine’s Day Massacre in which ice storms forced it to ground flights at the last minute. Hundreds of passengers were stranded, and then-CEO Dave Neeleman’s national apology tour helped repair the reputation damage. In 2011, it faced the PR fallout caused by  flight attendant Stephen Slater’s famous exit. Both were serious incidents, but Slater’s actions, at least, had elements of humor, and the airline’s response was measured.

There’s nothing funny about what happened this week. A JetBlue pilot suffered a mental breakdown and had to be restrained by crew and passengers in mid-flight. Though the plane made a safe unscheduled landing, it was clear that JetBlue’s own captain had posed a security threat to all onboard. He shouted incoherently about “Jesus, September 11, Iraq, Iran and terrorists” and banged on the cockpit door demanding entry after a quick-thinking copilot locked him out.

JetBlue’s crisis response succeeded in that it got the mechanics right. Its blog referred to a “medical situation” on the flight and reported the safe landing in Texas (though with few details.) It responded in real time to questions and comments on Facebook and Twitter as the story unfolded, and CEO Dave Barger gave a live exclusive interview to Matt Lauer on NBC’s “Today” one day later.

But the messaging was a bit off. Immediately after the incident the airline seemed to minimize it. Meanwhile, as the real story of the pilot’s breakdown emerged from passengers, the media accounts grew. “This Is Your Captain Freaking,” blared The New York Post. Web comments piled up. Boldfaced names like @piersmorgan piled on.
JetBlue scrambled to do all the right things for the passengers on the plane, offering refunds, vouchers, and personal outreach to passengers on Tuesday.

And though Barger’s candor and accessibility were admirable, he spent most of his airtime defending the Captain, personally vouching for his record as a “consummate professional,” and praising the crew who helped at 35,000 feet. It’s understandable, and the heroism of the copilot and passengers is a good story (as is JetBlue’s status as the first airline to bulletproof cockpit doors.) But the first rule of crisis management is to accept responsibility and acknowledge the seriousness of the loss or risk.

In defending the pilot so vigorously, rather than stressing how seriously it takes the situation, Barger veered a bit from the crisis playbook. Freakish though the incident was, the airline should take responsibility for the situation and call it for what it was, a grave security threat. It then needs to commit to a full investigation of the incident. It has done all three, but under pressure, and after Barger’s “consummate professional” quote was picked up by media.

Barger might take a lesson from the Neeleman era. After the 2007 crisis, JetBlue pioneered a “Customer Bill of Rights” to ensure that such a massive grounding of flights wouldn’t happen again. It showed real leadership within the industry when it could have hidden behind tough weather and unanticipated events.

The case of the erratic captain has shone a light on mental health standards for all airline pilots and possible gaps in FAA screening measures. Maybe JetBlue should lead once again by pressing for a full review of those measures, on top of its own investigation into the captain’s record and its screening process for stressed employees. Then it can take credit for teamwork, training, and, yes, those reinforced cockpit doors.