Instant Replay: "Upon further review" on Paterno's Termination

Lots of great discussion generated by yesterday evening's late post about JoPa's termination at Penn State.  Just to be clear, I'm looking at this disaster from a public relations point of view in terms of how to handle (or not handle) a reputation crisis. I'm not for or against Penn State or anyone involved, except for the kids who may have been victimized (I'm for the kids!).


UPDATE (November 12, 2011) I continue to think this through. The more I reflect on this situation from a PR stand point, the more I have to think that firing Joe Paterno and everyone else was the right move (as I originally asserted). In spite of the need for due process to have time to work, there are just too many witnesses in too many separate incidents that make it unconscionable for Paterno or anyone else involved to not  contact the authorities and intervene on behalf of the alleged victims. Even if the allegations turn out to be false (unlikely given the number of separate incidents), grown men in positions of leadership should know better. They appeared to have acted not in the best interest of those who could not protect themselves. From a PR perspective, the University had to take action to begin to move past the crisis. I think the PR lessons below still apply. And I also think only time will tell us the truth (hopefully).


Just like instant replay in college football, this whole situation at Penn State is worthy of a review "from up in the booth."

Joe Paterno is no longer the head coach of the Penn State football team. Moral outrage abounds from pundits, students, fans, and detractors.

This one warrants and Official Time Out
Key developments like the one that unfolded last night are worthy of reflection and review. As I keep thinking about this situation, my PR mind keeps asking the question: Was it right to fire Joe Paterno? Or was it a knee jerk reaction forced upon Penn State at the hands of a ravenous media cycle?

Last night, I made the argument that the Penn State Board of Trustees pulled the trigger on the only action it could take with any credibility. Because none of the adults in this nightmare took appropriate action, the board was forced to take a "scorched" earth approach and boot the university president and Paterno.

A questionable call by PSU?

Rewind the tape: Still in question is why the Board did not relieve assistant Mike McQueary also. After all, he witnessed one of the alleged instances of pedophilia. By his own story, he did nothing to protect that poor child from the alleged actions of Jerry Sandusky. That is unacceptable. McQuery wasn't a geeky graduate assistant. He's a former giant college football player. He could have physically taken Jerry Sandusky out and removed the child from the alleged situation. But he says he didn't. Instead, he ran and called his daddy for advice.

Mike McQueary's comments are not fact. They are allegations. They have not been corroborated. We don't know of his motives. We don't know if he is telling the truth. The criminal justice system will have to figure this out. That will take time.

And this is why I'm taking another look at whether or not it was right to fire JoePa and the university president yesterday.

Nothing has been proven. It will take time for the system to sort the facts and make conclusions.

While I stand by the assertion that the Board of Trustees at Penn State did the only credible thing it could do yesterday, there is a part of my PR brain that believes it didn't have to come to last nights action...at least not yet.

The PSU Board's options were limited by it's delay in reacting

Rewind the tape: Penn State may have had other options had it jumped into action last weekend, immediately following Attorney General Linda Kelly's press conference outlining the indictment and allegations against Jerry Sandusky.

The fact of the matter is, it is true! You can indict a ham sandwich. An indictment is not a conviction. It is the first step in the legal process to provide a fair trial for individuals accuse of breaking the law.

As nasty and perverted as the information in that indictment actually is, Jerry Sandusky is innocent until proven guilty in these United States. That's hard for any of us to swallow, given the disgusting details laid out in the report. No one wants to try to defend Jerry Sandusky, but the reality is he is an American citizen and our rule of law demands he receive a fair trial.

The gravity and the appalling nature of the allegations led to an escalating media cycle, first in eastern PA, then spreading on every TV, laptop, iPad, and mobile device. By Tuesday morning, national papers were editorializing (and jumping to conclusions) that the indictment was fact, that Sandusky was guilty, and that Paterno must go. By that time, the media cycle had taken many Penn State's options off the table.

An Alternative Course???
But is it possible that had the Penn State leaders convened more quickly--say, within 24 hours of the initial story--that it could have taken action to mute the media outcry?

Suppose for instance that the Penn State leaders convened by phone or video conference Saturday. At that time, it may have been able to deliberate without the media pressure and realize that a major option could have been to suspend all involved in the debacle until the criminal justice system was allowed to run it's course.

Placing Paterno, the president, McQuery, and others on administrative leave, paid or un-paid, would have demonstrated serious action allowing the AG and others to do their jobs. Media scrutiny most likely would continue, but the University would have been perceived as taking responsible action in the face of a "worst case" scenario. It would have avoided looking like it was reacting to media rather than taking control of the situation. It could have bought time to allow the justice system to weigh the facts and help guide the ultimate disposition of the individuals involved.

It's likely JoPa still would have announced he would retire at the end of the season, but it may have avoided that dicey presser Wednesday evening and muted some of the perception that the University has a "look the other way" culture when it comes to protecting those who can't protect themselves.

And maybe this is all another reason why the president was let go, too.

Is there anything that could have been done to mute the media explosion? It's not likely, but it's interesting to ponder.

The Key PR Lessons
The lesson for crisis communications is four-fold.

1.  First, when trouble is on the horizon, develop a plan of action. Penn State obviously failed on this front when they had to know this was coming at some point.

2.  Second, when the crisis arises, the nature of the modern media cycle mandates that organizations act quickly. It took less than 72 hours for this situation to spin out of control for Penn State. With every day, viable reputation-preserving options were taken off the table.

3.  Third, when a crisis develops, take the bull by the horns. Be proactive. Self-report. Get ahead of the story. If you don't, other parties will set the stage and determine the narrative in a time and manner that is not controllable.

4. Finally, above all else, stay calm and help your primary decision makers remain calm. This is almost a paradox in an environment where quick action is required. Calmer heads are needed in a crisis. Someone has to inject an air of rationality and calmness into the discussion about what to do. It's this ability to keep cool under the pressure that so often determines outcomes in crisis situations.

After further review....
After further review, only time will tell if Penn State handled this the right way. Yesterday, it acted decisively in the midst of a media frenzy threatening to destroy the reputation of the institution. They did the only thing they could do.

If it turns out there isn't enough hard evidence to convict Jerry Sandusky (you know you want to say "HE'S GUILTY" but I really hope it's all not true--for the sake of the kids), they'll have another crisis on their hands.

Could one of college's greatest figures be tarnished, quite possibly, for nothing? Not likely.

But only time will tell.