BLOG: You have the right to remain silent...
Thursday, September 15, 2005
When is it too late to take responsibility?
If you compare the relative success of the Tylenol vs. Exxon Valdez incidents, the guy who steps up the fastest wins. The one who holds back will be the fall guy forever. Hurricane Katrina communications are a case in point.This is another take on “controlling the message by being first with the message.” In the communication fiascos following Hurricane Katrina, an angry mayor and a petulant governor trumped the news over the federal government’s various spokespersons. The mayor and governor complained loudly and emotionally about lack of federal support. The feds said they were doing all they could, but didn’t say what that was.
As the news media pointed out, visible federal actions did not match their words.
There’s no need in this blog to go into what did or did not happen, who is or is not to blame. The point is it took two weeks for someone to take responsibility for misfires. Now the president has said, and I paraphrase, “to the extent that the federal government failed, I take full responsibility.” In a well choreographed dance, the governor and mayor followed suit. All this followed the replacement and subsequent resignation of FEMA Director Mike Brown.
The president said it first, but is it too late? (I keep hearing Brenda Lee's version of “I’m Sorry, So Sorry” playing in the background.)
Is it too late for anyone to be credible? I think so. I think long-term damage has been done to the federal response program, and the governor and mayor will try to keep the blame focused on the feds because the governor and mayor face re-election. Ahh, what I wouldn’t give for a statesman, not just a politician.
What is the public perception? Who believes what? Who believes whom? What do you think? And let’s keep partisan politics out of this. Just look at the communication skills, or lack thereof.
Comments:
I believe that Bush is trying to stop or slow the incessant criticism by taking blame at this point. I suppose it's all he can do at this point to slow the critical tide, aside from appointing an independent research commission (vs. saying he will be leading the investigation himself). Perhaps I'm jumping the gun, but I think that one of the findings will be that those chosen by the president to lead FEMA better be highly experienced in emergency services vs. being a political appointment. Will he be able to reach that conculsion if the White House is leading the investigation?
This post has been removed by a blog administrator.
It's interesting to me that this is the first major example we've seen of the Rove-driven media machine miss an opportunity to glorify the president and attack the liberals. They tried, but it was too late...so stepping up to the plate and taking responsibility is simply their next strategy. It's still part of a bigger messaging initiative, I'm sure, but for once they missed the boat early on and had to scramble to repair the damage.
I think that it’s never late for the President to take responsibility because there are many benefits when seen in the big picture. Having been through some of my own challenges in life, I have learned the benefits outweigh the risks. When the President took responsibility for the failed federal effort, he acknowledges the choices he’s made, accepts that he cannot blame others (outside the federal government), tears down the mask for defense or rationale for why others are responsible, recognizes that he’s his own best cheerleader, it even helps his own health and emotional well being, allows for an honest inventory of his strengths, abilities, talents, virtues, and positive points. He can also let go of blame and anger toward those in the past who did the best they could. There could be many other points to be made along these lines. On the other hand, if he had failed to take responsibility he would have risked becoming dependent on others for recognition, approval, affirmation and acceptance. Not to mention having his presidency become increasingly vulnerable. If the President believed in not accepting responsibility, then we could have said he believed in saying “it’s not my fault.”
Here it is four days after the President apologized and took responsibility. Was it too late? Well, the CNN/USA Today/Gallup poll shows it did NOTHING to help his approval rating.
It felt disingenuous to me. I criticized the president's "handlers" for having him do this now, because it felt very much like a front to minimize damage from the criticism his office was taking... as opposed to a legitimate apology and effort to take blame. PR-wise his office can now say he demonstrated leadership and responsibility by apologizing, but I believe for many in the public it is perceived as too little too late for him to get much mileage out of it...