Eric,
Here are some points of analysis and approach based on what I've read so far. A major caveat of course is that I don't know what the full facts and circumstances are. As Bob Marley once lamented in song, crisis management strategy is a lot harder if you actually did shoot the sheriff.
I'm going on the presumption that Gretzky is not directly involved in any illegal activity -- even if he may have tried to remedy the situation ex post facto. In any event, this seems a lot more nuanced than the say-it-ain't-so-Joe storyline that the media seems to be whipping up.
So, that said, here's my considered opinion:
1. Understand your adversary. The sports press corps and law enforcement are now in symbiosis. The press is motivated by a classic fall-from-grace scandal and law enforcement gets huge, uncritical publicity. Law enforcement leaks and ready-made outrage in the press will coordinate the crisis -- unless they are confronted.
2. Build your fort. Gretzky's "I wasn't involved" message will work only in the very near term, as a brief stopgap. In fact, it will actually work as an inducement and justification for more intensive press scrutiny in coming days.
It seems to me that there are two strong positions that can be asserted. The first is that the tenor and approach of the press corps right now is malicious and irresponsible. There is a legal proceeding and the facts will come out. But badgering Gretzky's wife and child, mocking her career, injecting jokes and derision into news coverage, pestering Olympic hockey players, and fomenting a general circus -- all are reprehensible and that argument should be made loudly by Gretzky himself. Give the press corps a stern dressing down -- believe me, the public will accept that and will view
future coverage with a much more critical eye.
Second, billions of dollars are legally wagered each year in this country on sports and dozens of other things. Much of that gambling is sponsored by the very governments that now seek to disgrace Gretzky. Gambling is a choice that sports fans (and, yes, reporters) make and whether Gretzky, or anyone else, participates should be up to them alone. The Back-biting from the press is plain, blue-nosed sanctimony and they should be called on it. Many of the same sports pages that are deriding Gretzky are at the same time publishing bookmaking lines, horse-race results and lottery outcomes. I would recommend that a surrogate spokesman for Gretzky press this case.
3. Appeal to the public. Gretzky's integrity and goodwill with fans is beyond compare. And those fans are not as aghast and mortified by gambling as the press might wish them to be. The argument that Gretzky should make is not the promotion of gambling but instead against the demonization and public disgrace of people who engage in it. This sort of puritanical bloodlust has been going on long enough in the Fourth Estate and the public would rally to Gretzky's message if he made it in a heartfelt, compelling way. He should tell Barbara Walters or Bob Costas or George Vescey to take their manufactured piety and, well, stick it in the parrot cage.
4. Tactically, he should speak out with a written essay directly to the public followed by a series of interviews. He needs to understand the rhetorical points to the letter. While I doubt he's an expert in individual Liberty or media ethics, the fight is already at the gates and he needs to seize control of it as quickly as he can. Given a choice between a rational outlook on personal freedom or the faux morality of the press and state, the public will take liberty.
5. Major caveat: if there was criminal harm done to people as part of the activity (say, with gambling collections or fraud committed by fixing games) that needs to be acknowledged and regretted. But as far as I can tell Gretzky wasn't involved in the enterprise or any related crimes.
Here are some additional considerations:
One of the first things that happens in a crisis is that friends and allies will move quickly to the sidelines -- especially if you fail to make a cogent stand. It's impressive that a number of people have spoken out for Gretzky and a few reporters are giving him the benefit of the doubt -- but that's only temporary and based solely on his enormous gravitas. That support will evaporate quickly if Gretzky doesn't build a strong position that can be articulated and firmly asserted.
The early stages of a crisis can seem like a swarm from all directions -- witness the press scrum at the Olympics yesterday. But usually there are just a few primary attackers -- one or two news outlets that are leading the pack and (often because of) exclusive or advance information from the adversary (in this case NJ law enforcement). Identifying those parties and confronting them first is an essential step, even as you are taking incoming fire from other sources.
There's likely to be strong resistance from Gretzky's legal advisors to any sort of assertive PR approach. I think he can build a strong position even without getting into the legal particulars but typically the legal team considers even that too great a risk. Gretzky himself needs to make a choice between giving priority to the legal or the PR strategy. I'd argue that his reputation and legacy take precedence over the legal machinations.
There's often an instinct that there's a magic bullet solution to the crisis -- a simple statement, or silence, or posture that will make everything go away. But that's an illusion. Gretzky is in an ongoing fight and his reputation is going to suffer. He must accept that. The problem is not going to go away. The question is how to minimize the damage and fight for control of how it is perceived. Gretzky must lead that effort himself and be willing to endure some slings and arrows.
A defensive posture, or inaction for that matter, will leave control of the situation entirely up to the adversaries. They will always seek to maximize the crisis -- or, put another way, maximize their own role in "exposing" it. The idea or fear that the adversaries will only be provoked to greater harm if you make a firm stand is also a fallacy: they are already doing that and will continue unless and until confronted.
Success or survival in a crisis is not assured. Taking a firm approach is not a guarantee that you will prevail. But defeat and disgrace is certain if you are not assertive. Also, no matter what he does there will be second-guessing and criticism from some quarters. The press itself, when confronted, will squawk like hose-down day at the monkey house. Gretzky must walk through that resistance, with unwavering assurance. Again, this is not a publicity tour -- it is about stopping attackers who are bent on disgracing your hard-earned reputation. And at the end of the day, it is what the public thinks that counts -- not the county DA and not the newspaper columnist guild.
The alternative approach -- which will almost certainly be recommended any day now by some of my colleagues in PR (and the press itself) -- will be to apologize, admit all, cry on camera and throw himself on the mercy of the public. That strategy will fail. The stain on his reputation will become deep and permanent almost immediately. The two prevailing public attitudes will be pity and scorn.
Also, notice the difference between what bloggers, readers, average fans are thinking and what the press and legal authorities are arguing. That is the crucial breach or leverage point and an effective strategy would take the fight to that ground in the battle for perception.
Interesting. Looks like it's time for Wayne to play some offense.
05:49 PM
![[TypeKey Profile Page]](http://www.ericmcerlain.com/offwingopinion/nav-commenters.gif)