Gold Medal in Public Relations

by Sailing Through Life In My Boatshoes

The 2012 Olympics are rapidly approaching and I am looking forward to the swimming competitions and especially Michael Phelps. In 2008 Phelps dominated the Beijing Olympics. He was decorated as a great athlete until 2009 when a picture depicting Phelps smoking from a bong was released by World News. Soon after the  media, the sports world, and Phelps went into a panic. Phelps has been critically judged for his actions, but the way he responded to his crisis and handled the situation is admirable.

Joseph Walsh and Sheila M. McAllister-Spooner created a report that researched the strategies used to repair Phelps image called Analysis of the image repair discourse in the Michael Phelps controversy.

Photo from Flickr user gratibouar

 Walsh and Spooner used qualitative research methods to answer the question: was Phelps’ image restored after the campaign based by reactions from the media. They did a thorough search of print and online media during a 21-day period after the incident occurred on Feb. 1, 2009. The research focused on three topics: Phelps, Phelps’ sponsors, and organizations that govern Phelps as a swimmer. The main media Walsh and Spooner looked at were The New York Times, Sportsillustrated.com, ESPN.com, and America Online, and finally The Baltimore Sun since Phelps is from Baltimore. Walsh and Spooner planned on delving through these news sources to discover how the media and society felt about Phelps’ incident and how he recovered from it.

To measure the results, Walsh and Spooner used a theory of image restoration created by Brinson and Benoit in 1995 that states there are five strategies to image restoration: denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification. Walsh and Spooner found the following results and used Benoit five strategies to decipher the media coverage on Phelps’ recovery in both online and print.

Phelps’ Response

Phelps responded quickly to this controversy. He released a statement in which he apologized for his actions but also reminded fans of his young age all in one breath. Using Benoit five strategies, Walsh and Spooner found that Phelps used defensibility through his young age and corrective action by promising an incident like this would never occur again. Phelps acted professionally in this crisis. He apologized and responded quickly before things spun out of control for him.

Sponsors’ Responses

Walsh and Spooner found that Phelps’ sponsors, specifically Speedo and Omega, used bolstering and minimization strategies to defuse the controversy. Speedo bolstered Phelps’ image by exemplifying his impressive history, calling him “a great champion” even though Speedo clearly stated that it did not condone his behavior. Omega used the “reduce offensiveness” strategy by reminding fans of Phelps’ Olympic achievements and using that as his defining quality. It also made a distinct line between Phelps personal life, and the Olympic life Omega sponsored stating, “The current story in the press involves Michael Phelps’ private life and is, as far as Omega is concerned, a non issue.” While the sponsors did not approve of Phelps’ actions, each sponsor stayed committed to Phelps.

Organizational Responses

Organizations such as the International Olympic Committee, USA Swimming, and the United States Olympic Committee used the same bolstering and minimization strategies Phelps’ sponsors used. The USOC and USA Swimming both released statements that frowned upon Phelps’ actions but used words like “champion” and “role model” to bolster his image to fans.

Media Responses

The most surprising results from the study came from the media responses. The main strategy used by multiple media outlets was the minimization strategy. Phelps was lucky with the timing of his incident. During the same time, the sports world was consumed by stories of performance-enhancing drugs used by sports legends like Alex Rodriguez. SportsIllustrated.com and The Baltimore Sun both minimized Phelps’ action by stating their relief in the fact that it was marijuana and not performance-enhancing drugs. Pat Forde of ESPN.com also lessened Phelps’ actions by stating the impact he has had on swimming in the United States and stated, “What Phelps was doing should not brand him for the rest of his life.”

Limitations

Walsh and Spooner mention two big limitations to this study. The first being they did not use television in the examination. Phelps appeared on the Today Show and Dateline after his incident. Both of these appearances could have been used to measure the reaction to multimedia coverage. Second, the study had limitation with accessibility to statements made by Phelps to his sponsors in private. This would have been crucial information since his sponsors continued to do business with him after the crisis.

In conclusion, what Walsh and Spooner found from their research is valuable to all public relations firms who deal with clients who are surrounded by controversy: “respond quickly and honestly.” This is exactly what I have learned in my J452 class. It is inevitable to have a career in PR without some bumps in the road, but what truly defines you as a professional is how you respond to the crisis. Phelps did the right thing for himself and his sponsors by admitting his mistake quickly after the picture was released.  Although Phelps made a stupid mistake, we can all learn from how he responded.

Walsh, J., & McAllister-Spooner, S. M. (2011). Analysis of the image repair discourse in the Michael Phelps controversy. Public Relations Review, 32(2), 157-162. doi:0.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.001