Preview Newsletter
Puliafito EOD (8/3)
-
Crisis of the Week: USC Struggles With Med School Dean Drug Reports
Aug 3, 2017 | The Wall Street Journal
By Ben DiPietro
The University of Southern California is in the midst of a crisis following revelations in the Los Angeles Times the head of the university’s Keck School of Medicine, Carmen Puliafito, was consuming illegal drugs, including in his office and in a hotel room where a woman he was with overdosed. Mr. Puliafito resigned his position in March, three weeks after the hotel overdose incident, but remained on the faculty until the university in July moved to fire him and ban him from campus. -
KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE EXCLUSIVE: USC Scandal Shows Drawbacks of Holding Back Information
Aug 3, 2017 | Crisis Response Pro
By Thom Weidlich
The University of Southern California is embroiled in a crisis that once again reminds us how much institutions would rather duck and weave than address a problem head-on. This leads to the all-too-common drip-drip-drip release of information that should have been gushed out in the first place. In the current and lurid situation, USC went from “no comment” to “nothing to see here” to “wow, we really could have done better.”
Traditional Media Coverage
-
Crisis of the Week: USC Struggles With Med School Dean Drug Reports
Aug 3, 2017 | The Wall Street Journal
By Ben DiPietro
This is a weekly commentary by external experts.
The University of Southern California is in the midst of a crisis following revelations in the Los Angeles Times the head of the university’s Keck School of Medicine, Carmen Puliafito, was consuming illegal drugs, including in his office and in a hotel room where a woman he was with overdosed. Mr. Puliafito resigned his position in March, three weeks after the hotel overdose incident, but remained on the faculty until the university in July moved to fire him and ban him from campus.
One day after the story broke, USC President Max Nikias released a letter to the university community saying the university is “distressed and disturbed” by the allegations while expressing concern for Mr. Puliafito and suggesting he seek treatment. USC followed that with four more communications—two from Mr. Nikias and two from Provost Michael Quick—including one from Mr. Nikias in which he stated the university is “outraged and disgusted” by Mr. Puliafito’s actions and in which it hired a former federal prosecutor to conduct an independent investigation and one in which he said the university could have done better in this situation. Mr. Nikias sent another note acknowledging it had concerns with Dr. Puliafito before the latest incident came to light. Mr. Puliafito has not commented other than to tell the L.A. Times he resigned of his own accord.
The experts break down how the university is handling the communication aspects of this crisis.
Nick Kalm, president, Reputation Partners: “On the positive side, USC repeatedly stressed it was ‘taking the matter very seriously,’ adhering to its ‘core values’ and balancing the desire for action with respect for individual due process and privacy rights. The university initially expressed concern about Dr. Puliafito’s wellbeing but three days later said it was ‘outraged and disgusted’ by his behavior. This 180-degree messaging turn confuses and concerns.
“Announcing an investigation by a credible third party, as the university did three days after the first story broke, was wise. But they should have done so more immediately and committed to publicly sharing its findings to restore trust. Indeed, a bigger problem than the messaging was timing. USC dismissed numerous, crucial opportunities to be included in the initial story where the most significant damage was done. Sadly, this is one of the most common errors in crisis communications. Your best opportunity to contain reputational damage comes before a negative story is published.
“USC repeatedly rebuffed efforts by the Los Angeles Times’ reporters to solicit pre-publication comment. This should have signaled a highly damaging story was coming and action needed to be taken beforehand. Instead, by all appearances, the university did nothing. The university compounded its error by releasing nearly a half-dozen statements addressing the same issue from two different members of the administration over a week after the first story broke. This only helped keep the story in the news.
“From here, not only should USC implement the findings of the investigation, it should take a critical look at how it handles its crisis communications. As Mr. Nikias notes, it ‘could have done better.’”
Adele Cehrs, chief executive, Epic PR Group: “In an emotionally charged situation like the Carmen Puliafito scandal it’s challenging to get clients to see the long-term implications of their statements. There are two paths you can take: either a factual or emotional play. Taken simultaneously the two paths cancel each other out.
“In his initial letter President Nikias goes emotional, stressing his concern for Dr. Puliafito and his family. However, everyone has read the LA Times article and the homily about the evils of drug use feels insincere. It’s tough to convince clients to stay silent when they want to prove their innocence but getting emotional too soon makes even people with a [good] reputation like Mr. Nikias look guilty.
“Mr. Quick’s follow-up memo attempts a factual approach. He boasts about how ‘swiftly’ the university moved in dealing with Puliafito–only to turn around and say that the school must ‘follow its established processes in a deliberative and careful manner.’ He rambles lengthily about values, as if to vaccinate the school against Dr. Puliafito’s decadent behavior.
“Mr. Nikias’ July 26 letter is as close as this communication stream gets to a mea culpa and an apology. Again, there is too much self-serving talk of feelings and values. And then comes the bombshell: Mr. Nikias’ letter of July 28 in which Dr. Puliafito’s erratic behavior has actually been reported several times over the past decade. Finally, we are provided with a timeline of what the university knew, and when. This should have been provided in the first or second communication. At this point, it feels like the aftermath of a failed cover-up.”
Peter LaMotte, senior vice president, Chernoff Newman: “USC is in a crisis of trust. The behavior of its former dean will undoubtedly have ramifications that will affect more than just current faculty and students. How it communicates during this crisis is as important as the actual actions it takes.
“At the onset the university and its leadership were quick to respond to the controversy with a well-executed crisis response. The president of the university reported the facts as he knew them, showed empathy toward those involved and spoke to the strong leadership currently in place. Yet, only one day later the provost sent a letter to faculty that provided no substantive information, spoke to what they couldn’t share and ended with self-promotion of values.
Two days later the president issued a new, substantive message again confused with a second, different one by the provost on the same day. The president, as of now, was the last one to address the issue with another detailed message to the community and public. So many varying, uneven messages in such a short amount of time makes the university appear reactive and not in control of the situation. The fewer messages an entity in crisis can deliver with the most consistent and important information available, the stronger it will look. Since the university is in a crisis of trust, it needs to start showing it has both leadership and control.”
-
KNOWLEDGE EXCHANGE EXCLUSIVE: USC Scandal Shows Drawbacks of Holding Back Information
Aug 3, 2017 | Crisis Response Pro
By Thom Weidlich
The University of Southern California is embroiled in a crisis that once again reminds us how much institutions would rather duck and weave than address a problem head-on. This leads to the all-too-common drip-drip-drip release of information that should have been gushed out in the first place. In the current and lurid situation, USC went from “no comment” to “nothing to see here” to “wow, we really could have done better.”
On July 17 the Los Angeles Times reported that the former dean of USC’s Keck School of Medicine was a drug abuser who partied with a younger “circle of criminals,” including in his campus office, all captured in photos and on video. Three weeks before he resigned as dean in March 2016 (he stayed on staff and continued to see patients), Carmen Puliafito was found by police in a Pasadena hotel room with a 21-year-old prostitute who had overdosed (but recovered). Neither that incident nor the drug abuse had been reported before.
Explosive stuff. USC’s response? It refused to comment for the article — despite having months to do so.
The Los Angeles university did give a statement to the Times July 17 after the story was published. It now said that Puliafito, an eye surgeon hired as dean in 2007, was on leave and no longer seeing patients.
A more detailed statement the next day — a letter to the community over the signature of President C. L. Max Nikias — oozed concern for Puliafito. Nikias focused on the scourge of drug abuse, even among professionals. He made no mention of whether Puliafito would be permanently removed from the faculty.
Already, university leadership was criticized for its lackluster response to the crisis. On July 19, Provost Michael W. Quick responded with a memorandum reassuring faculty that the school has “made what we felt were the best decisions we could make, as swiftly as could be done in a prudent and thoughtful manner, and given the information that we had at any given time.”
Privacy Concerns
Nikias (pictured) and Quick noted that they were constrained in what they could do and say by procedural and privacy concerns.
But clearly the criticisms chafed. On July 21, Nikias issued “an important update” that was completely different in tone from his first letter. “We are outraged and disgusted by this individual’s behavior,” he wrote.
In a July 21 update to faculty, Provost Quick finally said the administration had initiated proceedings to terminate Puliafito’s employment. President Nikias again wrote a letter on July 26 to the school community, this time focusing on “troubling media coverage” that said USC had not responded properly to the crisis. He admitted the school “could have done better to recognize the signs and severity of [Puliafito’s] issues.”
On July 28, Nikias released another statement, his longest yet. “We understand there is frustration that the university has not clearly articulated its response around the former medical school dean’s behavior,” he wrote.
That was putting it mildly. A part-time teacher at the medical school told The New York Times, “What’s most upsetting is the sense that this was covered up for a very long time, that people knew about what was happening and nobody dealt with it.”
Indeed, in the president’s July 28 missive he was now prepared to “clear up some misperceptions.” He disclosed — 11 days after the original bombshell story — that the school had received complaints about Puliafito’s behavior (not drug use) over the ten years he had been associated with USC. He resigned as dean and was put on sabbatical in March 2016 after complaints he ignored his leadership duties.
911 Tape
For our purposes, the question is why the school wasn’t better prepared to comment to the Los Angeles Times. The newspaper had sent USC a list of questions and the 911 tape from the hotel incident in March, Nikias disclosed (it had received a tip about the incident even earlier).
To be fair, Nikias said it was only during the week the L.A. Times story appeared that the school had “first-hand evidence of Dr. Puliafito’s egregious behavior” and began the process of terminating him and stripping him of his tenure.
The administration acted when it had all the information, he said. But the first statement, dripping with concern about the ex-dean’s welfare, didn’t reveal that the school was aware of these allegations going back to at least March. USC knew the Los Angeles Times was working on the article. (Yes, privacy concerns were an issue.)
Nikias admitted the school hadn’t planned for a crisis scenario that involved “dealing with employee behavior outside the workplace that may be improper or illegal and has the capacity to affect USC.”
He has now established a task force to address that. Yes, it’s time to write a crisis communications plan for that scenario.
Traditional Media Coverage
Add recipients
Suggested