The movie "The Social Network" premiered in New York City this past Friday and will be widely distributed on October 1st. The screenplay was written by Aaron Sorkin and is based on Ben Mezrich's book, "The Accidental Billionaires: The Founding of Facebook A Tale of Sex, Money, Genius, and Betrayal."
According to the Wall Street Journal, Facebook tried to influence the narrative in "The Social Network." Last month, the New York Times stated that, "[b]ehind the scenes, however, Mr. Zuckerberg and his colleagues have been locked in a tense standoff with the filmmakers" regarding the content of the film." I don't blame Facebook for trying to persuade the filmmakers to create a film that puts its founder in the best possible light; however, Facebook needs to realize that trying to massage a message in the Social Media Age is very difficult. Instead of trying to ignore "The Social Network," Facebook should embrace and own the story of its founding with its warts, real and imagined.
In the movie, "Clear and Present Danger," the fictional president has a public relations problem on his hand because a close friend of his may have been involved in drug trafficking. Harrison Ford's character (Jack Ryan) advises the president something along the lines that he should tell the media that the friend in question was not just a friend but a close friend. This advice killed the story because the fictional president embraced and owned up to the relationship.
On December 2, 2009, and then again on December 10, 2009, I blogged how Tiger Woods should handle his public relations situation and provided David Letterman and Meredith Baxter as examples of great Social Media public relations. As the world knows, Woods did not listen to my advice. Woods allowed the situation to spiral out of control and he lost his family, hundreds of millions of dollars, and his ability to focus on his profession.
Facebook and Mark Zuckerberg should openly embrace and promote the movie, "The Social Network" because downplaying the movie and/or ignoring it enables others to own the narrative. Zuckerberg is extremely hypocritical because he wants everyone to share their private information but he refuses to reciprocate. If Zuckerberg held a press conference and publicly explained the entire situation regarding the founding of Facebook and was open and honest about all the lawsuits he has had to settle surrounding Facebook's founding the story would die a natural death because he would own the narrative.
I have read Ben Mezrich's book, "The Accidental Billionaries" and David Kilpratrick's "The Facebook Effect". Mezrich's book is a much more interesting account than Kilpatrick's. In addition, I watched Zuckerberg's recent Oprah appearance and Zuckerberg seemed uncomfortable when "The Social Network" was brought up.
The truth in how Facebook was started is most likely somewhere in between Mezrich's account and Kilpatrick's Facebook endorsed version. "The Social Network" has been made and Facebook and Zuckerberg's public relations team should embrace movie. Facebook's stance towards the movie is only going to encourage more people to want to see it.
The bottom line is that Facebook and Zuckerberg need to reevaluate their Social Media Public Relations strategy.
To learn how to create and execute a Social Media Public Relations and Crisis Management Plan and to understand the legal issues that may affect your plans you may contact me at http://www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
To inform about the legal, business, privacy, cyber security, and public policy issues that confront those who utilize digital platforms.
Showing posts with label Social Media Public Relations. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Social Media Public Relations. Show all posts
Tuesday, September 28, 2010
Saturday, May 1, 2010
Goldman Sachs, the Shitty Deal, and Social Media Public Relations
Goldman Sachs is the most respected name on Wall Street. The firm has no peers. If you ask any college or graduate business school finance major where they want to work a large majority would respond without question, Goldman Sachs.
In an article from the New York Times a couple years ago, the firm was nicknamed "Government Sachs" because so many of its employees end up working for the U.S. government. Some prominent Goldman alumni include: former Treasury Secretaries Henry Fowler, Robert Rubin, Hank Paulson, and current World Bank President Robert Zoellick, and former U.S. Senator Jon Corzine.
In general, Goldman Sachs senior executives shy away from publicity while working for the firm. This strategy has helped create a mystic about the company. Social media has forever changed the public relations game. Goldman Sachs' reputation was tarnished this past week in a manner that would not have been possible before the age of social media.
It is very rare for members of Congress to use foul language in any context during televised proceedings. However, Senator Carl Levin chastised Goldman Sachs because an employee of the firm had stated in an internal email that a collateralized debt obligation called Timberwolf I that Goldman was selling was a "shitty deal." Senator Levin persistently asked about and berated Goldman Sachs about the "shitty deal" numerous times throughout the hearings.
Goldman Sachs EVP and Chief Financial Officer David Vinair's testimony will forever live on in social media due to the interesting exchange that occurred between himself and Senator Levin. When Senator Levin grilled Vinair about the "shitty deal" internal Goldman Sachs email Vinair stated, "I think that is very unfortunate to have [that comment] on email." It sounded as though the entire audience was stunned by that statement and then a delayed laughter was heard in the background. Vinair later corrected himself but the damage had already been done.
As Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times has pointed out and last week's hearings clearly demonstrated there are so many conflicts of interest on Wall Street. These conflicts have been around for years. Lawyers are not allowed to have these types of conflicts so why are the "Masters of the Universe" allowed to have these types of conflicts?
These hearings come on the heels of last week's SEC fraud complaint against Goldman Sachs and one of its employees. In addition, President Obama and Congress are also currently battling over a financial regulatory overhaul. The Goldman Sachs testimony that I watched reminded me of the movie Wall Street and Gordon Gekko's "Greed is Good" speech because some of the Goldman Sachs employees who testified sounded as though they were about to utter Gekko's line that "greed for a lack of a better word is good. Greed is right. Greed works."
Goldman Sachs has weathered numerous scandals and controversies during its 140+ years in existence. Each time the firm has rebounded and come back stronger than ever. The company may be one of only a few brands that may be immune to the social media age. Even though the brand may not suffer in the long run, there will be employees who are scapegoated to protect the firm's image. Therefore, in the social media age, lawyers need to be well versed in not only the legal matters before them but how their clients may be perceived on social media. To learn more about this issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
In an article from the New York Times a couple years ago, the firm was nicknamed "Government Sachs" because so many of its employees end up working for the U.S. government. Some prominent Goldman alumni include: former Treasury Secretaries Henry Fowler, Robert Rubin, Hank Paulson, and current World Bank President Robert Zoellick, and former U.S. Senator Jon Corzine.
In general, Goldman Sachs senior executives shy away from publicity while working for the firm. This strategy has helped create a mystic about the company. Social media has forever changed the public relations game. Goldman Sachs' reputation was tarnished this past week in a manner that would not have been possible before the age of social media.
It is very rare for members of Congress to use foul language in any context during televised proceedings. However, Senator Carl Levin chastised Goldman Sachs because an employee of the firm had stated in an internal email that a collateralized debt obligation called Timberwolf I that Goldman was selling was a "shitty deal." Senator Levin persistently asked about and berated Goldman Sachs about the "shitty deal" numerous times throughout the hearings.
Goldman Sachs EVP and Chief Financial Officer David Vinair's testimony will forever live on in social media due to the interesting exchange that occurred between himself and Senator Levin. When Senator Levin grilled Vinair about the "shitty deal" internal Goldman Sachs email Vinair stated, "I think that is very unfortunate to have [that comment] on email." It sounded as though the entire audience was stunned by that statement and then a delayed laughter was heard in the background. Vinair later corrected himself but the damage had already been done.
As Gretchen Morgenson of the New York Times has pointed out and last week's hearings clearly demonstrated there are so many conflicts of interest on Wall Street. These conflicts have been around for years. Lawyers are not allowed to have these types of conflicts so why are the "Masters of the Universe" allowed to have these types of conflicts?
These hearings come on the heels of last week's SEC fraud complaint against Goldman Sachs and one of its employees. In addition, President Obama and Congress are also currently battling over a financial regulatory overhaul. The Goldman Sachs testimony that I watched reminded me of the movie Wall Street and Gordon Gekko's "Greed is Good" speech because some of the Goldman Sachs employees who testified sounded as though they were about to utter Gekko's line that "greed for a lack of a better word is good. Greed is right. Greed works."
Goldman Sachs has weathered numerous scandals and controversies during its 140+ years in existence. Each time the firm has rebounded and come back stronger than ever. The company may be one of only a few brands that may be immune to the social media age. Even though the brand may not suffer in the long run, there will be employees who are scapegoated to protect the firm's image. Therefore, in the social media age, lawyers need to be well versed in not only the legal matters before them but how their clients may be perceived on social media. To learn more about this issues you may contact me at www.shearlaw.com.
Copyright 2010 by the Law Office of Bradley S. Shear, LLC. All rights reserved.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)