For a disgraced brand, the death penalty

This Sunday’s issue of the News of the World will be the last edition of the paper, News International chairman James Murdoch has said.
In the past few days, claims have been made that the paper authorised hacking into the mobile phones of murdered schoolgirl Milly Dowler and the families of 7/7 bombing victims.
Mr Murdoch said proceeds from the last edition would go to good causes.

via bbc.co.uk

I’ve often wondered if a commercial organization can disgrace itself so thoroughly that the only resort is capital punishment.

I don’t mean executing the people responsible. (Personal accountability is critical, of course, and consequences including prison should be on the table for illegal behaviour.) I mean death for the organization as an organization, and particularly for the brand.

The continued survival (even profitability) of, say, Goldman Sachs and the tobacco industry might make you think the answer is a sad no. (Or, if you’re a believer in maximizing profit at any cost to society, a happy no.)

But then along comes something like today’s news that News of the World is about to bite the dust, and it gives me some hope.

True, what the paper did pales in comparison to the lethal toll of a Bhopal disaster or the environmental catastrophe caused by the BP spill in the Gulf of Mexico. And you could certainly see this as a cynical bit of damage control by a company hoping to avoid further scrutiny.

But there’s some comfort in the fact that the public can become so disgusted with an organization’s conduct that its brand becomes toxic — not just to society, but to its owners.

Posted via email from Rob Cottingham’s posterous

← Snag a quick and easy HTML email template TabCloud: save and sync your Chrome and Firefox tabs →

2 Comments

Brian Lamb on 7 Jul 2011 at 11:34

I’m not the first to make this observation, but the top executives at News International keep their jobs (or, at least, the massive amounts of money they made), while people in the newsroom (not to mention people who work the presses, or clean the offices, etc…) — most of whom had nothing to do with the phone hacking — lose their jobs, and face looking for a new job stained with that toxic brand.

Yes, it is nice that people can still get so disgusted by ethical offences that dramatic action is needed. But yet again, the elites who benefited most from the transgressions seem poised to dump the consequences on others. How many times must that cycle be repeated?

Rob Cottingham on 7 Jul 2011 at 16:08

Thanks for that important coda, Brian. My bar for accountability for this kind of malfeasance is low enough that just killing a brand looks like startling progress to me.

Brian Lamb on 7 Jul 2011 at 11:34
I’m not the first to make this observation, but the top executives at News International keep their jobs (or, at least, the massive amounts of money they made), while people in the newsroom (not to mention people who work the presses, or clean the offices, etc…) — most of whom had nothing to do with the phone hacking — lose their jobs, and face looking for a new job stained with that toxic brand.
Yes, it is nice that people can still get so disgusted by ethical offences that dramatic action is needed. But yet again, the elites who benefited most from the transgressions seem poised to dump the consequences on others. How many times must that cycle be repeated?
Rob Cottingham on 7 Jul 2011 at 16:08
Thanks for that important coda, Brian. My bar for accountability for this kind of malfeasance is low enough that just killing a brand looks like startling progress to me.