International PR (Aug2014 Intake): Assignment 2

Word Count: 1503

1. Save the Children: Vision & Mission

The principle of the foundation, Save the Children, is in its name itself; saving children. This organization values not only the lives of children but the very existence of a child. Save the Children cherishes each and every child, and strives to fulfill the basic needs of every child. They see children as pioneers of the future generation, thus they aim to provide underprivileged children with a platform to nurture their abilities and talents in order to give them a fighting chance to reach their full potential in this world. They believe that by nurturing the future generation, they would be able to change the world for the better.

Save the Children takes all sorts of abuse towards children very seriously as they strive to keep them out of harm’s way, protecting their rights as children. They will always look after children who are in need and supply them with the proper health care that they need in order for them to grow and progress in life as a healthy and happy individual. They also aim to provide every child with an education so as to allow them to grow and progress with the proper knowledge and teachings (Save the Children 2014).  

2. Analysis: Save the Children’s Ebola Response in West Africa

2.1 Strategies and Tactics

            In response to the 2014 Ebola outbreak, Save the Children (STC) had employed multiple PR strategies and tactics to generate publicity and media visibility amongst affected and also non-affected parties (CDC 2014).

            One of the strategies utilised was the dissemination of information. This was done using the company’s official website via news releases and the company’s social media networks (Youtube, Facebook, Twitter and blogs). The sites are mainly used to provide updates on the development of the outbreak in West Africa, to educate the public and to provide a platform for engagement. On Youtube for instance, a web series called “War on Ebola” was developed, depicting children who were directly and indirectly impacted by the Ebola outbreak.

The sites are also used as a means to urge audiences to make a donation (Save the Children 2014 and McIntyre 2014). Besides that, the sites commonly discuss STC’s efforts in preventing the spread of the virus such as training of health workers.

            Apart from that, STC has partnerships with organisations such as UK’s Department for International Development (DFID), UK’s Ministry of Defence and the UN Security Council in order to have a wider audience reach in terms of providing aid and gaining recognition. Treatment centres were built for the sick, and orphaned children are cared for in interim care centres (Save the Children 2014).  

2.2 Standpoint and Frame of Issue

            STC acts as an advocate for the children affected by the Ebola outbreak. STC sites highlight the gravities of the issue and the depth of the impacts. They also urge the international community to make donations or volunteer their services. The sites frequently highlight the sacrifices made by health workers and experts. Thus, it could be deduced that their role as an advocate is to educate the public, to evoke precautionary measures and to persuade them to provide assistance.

2.3 Tone of NGO’s Voice                

            The tone taken by STC is one that is calm, empathetic and persuasive. STC illustrates the details of the Ebola outbreak in an affirmative and reassuring manner as could be observed in their heartfelt videos on Youtube. They were not at all aggressive, even when it came to encouraging their audiences to take action.

2.4 Media Response

            Major media outlets such as The Guardian and BBC have referred to STC as opinion leaders, experts and advocates of the Ebola outbreak (Weaver and Boseley 2014 and BBC 2014). These media outlets have cited facts and figures derived from STC in their articles (Karimi 2014). Besides that, the media is seen to portray STC as an important NGO with a stronger initiative than the government, as demonstrated by their efforts to build the Ebola Care Centre (Baker 2014).

2.5 News Impact on Stakeholders

            Worldwide news coupled with organisational efforts (STC included) exerts a degree of pressure and obligation on world leaders and the public to step up to the task of providing some form of aid in terms of finance, volunteers and experts. Besides that, the issue of children being orphaned and ostracized from their own community also exerts pressure on relevant parties to take immediate action.

2.6 Personal Reflection & Opinion

            Based on responses from the media and other stakeholders in regards to STC’s PR strategies, it can be deduced that STC has succeeded in advocating to the audience about the severity of the Ebola crisis. Even though the organisation has gained recognition and credibility for its deeds, the spread of the Ebola virus is still rampant in West Africa (BBC 2014). Thus, STC, the relevant authorities and the public needs to double up their efforts to increase the resources in West Africa to stop the disease from spreading any further.

3. Analysis: Save The Children advocate aid for children affected by Israel-Gaza conflict

3.1 Strategies and Tactics

With the lives of minors being greatly impacted by the Israel-Gaza conflict, Save the Children (STC) has taken up its rightful obligation of advocating aid for the affected children through varying approaches. Several communication channels were employed to reiterate the plight of the affected children and the efforts made by STC in providing medical aid and psychosocial support. These include news releases, a full-page advertisement in five national newspapers, detailing all 373 child casualties in Gaza and interviews that were frequently conducted with STC’s official spokesperson Osama Damo for the benefit of news organizations (Save the Children 2014 and The Huffington Post 2014).

Campaigns were also initiated namely the ‘we #choosechildren’ and the ‘Gaza Ceasefire SMS’ campaign that lays emphasis on the urgency for militants to cease their fire through a series of Youtube videos along with a compilation of SMSes to garner petitioners as advocates and financial supporters for STC’s cause (Save the Children 2014 and Williams 2014).

Additionally, in part of STC’s bid in acquiring supporters for their cause, an unlikely alliance between STC and the United Nations (UN) also ensued (Save the Children 2014). This approach was deliberate in view of UN’s notoriety that would surely spawn a larger audience base for STC and deliver a stronger stance for its movement.

3.2 Standpoint and Frame of Issue

STC seemingly appears to stand on neutral ground with regards to the political conflict between Israel and Palestine. The assertion that was made by President of STC, Carolyn Miles: “Save the Children does not choose sides on conflict – we choose children” renders the NGO as politically impartial and is focussed on peace and the immediate humanitarian and long-term development of children and adults (Save the Children 2014).

3.3 Tone of NGO’s Voice

The tone set by the NGO takes on a rather affirmed, calm, cool and collected nature when delivered by Osama Damo, himself. Nevertheless, there are instances when several articles have demonstrated a tinge of hastiness and even aggression, all part and parcel of STC’s objective in spurring the public on to side with their campaign and movement.

3.4 Media Response

The media at large have responded favorably to STC’s proceedings, applauding the NGO’s full-page casualty-count advertisement, another testament that the mere usage of words may on occasion carry more weight than photographs and video footage (Sharman 2014). On the whole, the media commends STC for its movement and its undertakings as the NGO’s focal point is on the children in Gaza and not on the political contention between both countries.

3.5 Media Framing

With the media’s positive receptivity towards STC, it comes as no surprise that the media have accurately reported the issue and the NGO’s stance as it is. No attempts were made to conceal the brutality and violence against the innocent lives and more significantly, no editorial bias was present.

3.6 News Impact on Stakeholders

In effect, STC’s stakeholders along with the public are in recipient of the most crucial facet of the crisis at hand: information. Many were well informed by the media of the Israel-Gaza conflict and the efforts of the NGO in providing relief to the afflicted. In truth, the public is seen as being in favor of STC’s efforts, as proven in the responses collected from the ‘Gaza Ceasefire SMS’ campaign with a total of “180,000 SMS messages”; and the positive comments posted on STC’s Youtube and Facebook pages respectively (O’Conner 2012).

3.7 Personal Reflection & Opinion

It becomes fairly evident that STC had devised a myriad of strategies and tactics that were effective and compelling enough to incite a desired response from its stakeholders and the public at large. With STC’s exhaustive employment of communication channels, its frequent connection with the media and political impartiality, the NGO certainly has done much justice for the children affected by the Israel-Gaza conflict.

References

Baker, A., 2014. Liberia’s New Plan to Get Ebola Sufferers Into Isolation. [Online]

Available at: http://time.com/3484878/ebola-liberia-care-isolation-treatment-home/

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

BBC, 2014. Ebola crisis: Aid workers risking all to combat virus. [Online]

Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-29457546

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

BBC, 2014. Ebola crisis: WHO focuses on preventing regional spread. [Online]

Available at: http://www.bbc.com/news/world-africa-29648598

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Boseley , S. & Weaver, M., 2014. Ebola infecting five new people every hour in Sierra Leone, figures show. [Online]

Available at: http://www.theguardian.com/world/2014/oct/02/ebola-infecting-five-every-hour-sierra-leone

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

CDC, 2014. 2014 Ebola Outbreak in West Africa. [Online]

Available at: http://www.cdc.gov/vhf/ebola/outbreaks/2014-west-africa/index.html

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Karimi, F., 2014. Thousands of children orphaned by Ebola abandoned, stigmatized. [Online]

Available at: http://edition.cnn.com/2014/10/02/health/ebola-outbreak/

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

McIntyre, R., 2014. Liberia Ebola Response. [Online]

Available at: http://savethechildren.typepad.com/blog/2014/10/liberia-ebola-response.html

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

O'Connor, S. F., 2012. Save the Children: Gaza ceasefire SMS campaign. [Online]

Available at: http://sofii.org/case-study/save-the-children-gaza-ceasefire-sms-campaign

[Accessed 17 October 2014].

Save the Children, 2014. About Us. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org/site/c.8rKLIXMGIpI4E/b.6146405/k.C7E9/About_Us.htm

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Save the Children, 2014. Ebola Response in West Africa. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org/site/c.8rKLIXMGIpI4E/b.9208421/k.244F/Ebola_Response_in_West_Africa.htm

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Save the Children, 2014. Gaza and Israel Conflict: Stop Killing Children. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org.uk/donate/actions/gaza-and-israel-conflict-stop-killing-children

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Save the Children, 2014. Helping Children Survive the Deadly Ebola Outbreak in Africa. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org/site/c.8rKLIXMGIpI4E/b.9187887/k.9CB7/Helping_Children_Survive_the_Deadly_Ebola_Outbreak_in_Africa.htm

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Save the Children, 2014. West Bank and Gaza Strip. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org/site/c.8rKLIXMGIpI4E/b.6153151/k.5AE1/West_Bank_and_Gaza_Strip.htm

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Save the Children, 2014. Who We Are. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org/site/c.8rKLIXMGIpI4E/b.6146355/k.24E9/Who_We_Are.htm

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Sharman, A., 2014. Campaign: Save the Children publishes names of 373 children killed in Israel-Gaza conflict. [Online]

Available at: http://www.civilsociety.co.uk/fundraising/indepth/case_studies/content/17965/campaign_save_the_children_publishes_names_of_373_children_killed_in_israel-gaza_conflict?topic=&print=1

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

The Huffington Post UK, 2014. Gaza Strip Child Deaths Listed By Save The Children In Full-Page Advert. [Online]

Available at: http://www.huffingtonpost.co.uk/2014/08/06/save-the-children-gaza-strip_n_5653426.html

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Uenuma, F., 2014. Children Have Paid the Heaviest Price in Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. [Online]

Available at: http://www.savethechildren.org/site/apps/nlnet/content2.aspx?c=8rKLIXMGIpI4E&b=8943305&ct=14146463&notoc=1

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Williams, E., 2014. How Save The Children is asking for help in Gaza. [Online]

Available at: http://www.creativereview.co.uk/cr-blog/2014/august/how-save-the-children-is-asking-for-help-in-gaza

[Accessed 13 October 2014].

Financial PR (Aug2014 Intake): Assignment 2

Word Count: 1341

Apple All Out of Steve Jobs’ Juju

Tucked away in the southern portion of the San Francisco Bay Area of Northern California is Apple Inc.’s base of operations. An 850,000 square feet modernity, the company headquarters boast a throng executive wing radiating nervous energy, with handlers scurrying to anticipate the whims of the late Apple’s temperamental co-founder. It is here where devout employees are seen toiling away amid their nine-to-five in standard-issue dreary cubicles where projects commence, tight deadlines are met and solitary confinement is a self-imposed employee regular. Such was the modus operandi at Apple’s command post where the working stiff laboriously attempted to keep up with Steve Jobs' high standards of zero tolerance for mediocrity, or to put it bluntly, anything shorter than an A-game.

Known by all, feared by many; Jobs was a force to be reckoned with even among other tech counterparts all through Silicon Valley. Inasmuch as the egalitarian workplace of shared responsibility and equal contribution holds sway with a majority of tech enterprises – such as Hewlett-Packard’s informal employee-employer communication, Intel’s scorn for hierarchal privileges and Google’s unprecedented employee autonomy – Jobs, by contrast, was a notorious micromanager who kept the hierarchal faith and persistently demanded for excellence (Kahney, 2008).

Anyone and everyone from within the company would bear testimony to that, recounting numerous occasions when products, prior to its release had to earn the overbearing Steve Jobs stamp of approval albeit its miniscule detail, like the number of screws on a Mac’s bottom case and the curve of a monitor’s computer (Lappin, 2012). Naturally, most corporations have done away with the archaic prototype of the red-faced, tyrannical boss but at Apple however, Jobs was infamously known as the inveterate stick man; arrogant, dictatorial, mean-spirited and with all aspects considered, always donned in mid-blue Levis and a black turtleneck.

Even so, amidst “the mercurialness; the tantrums; the hours-long, dictator-like speeches; the famous, desperate, and transparent hogging of credit; and […] the charismatic-leader complex,” as Moisescot (2012) relates, pundits and tech journalists are hailing him as “a genius” and “the greatest CEO of his generation,” with heavy implications that Apple’s success is by and large, a derivative of Jobs' brilliance, passion and aggressiveness (Tate, 2011). And who could deny? Reporters call it “the greatest corporate comeback story of all time” and with good reason, when Jobs fortuitously reached a key milestone in restoring the company back from near bankruptcy before rebuilding it into the largest tech company in the world (Shontell, 2011 and Ong, 2011).

With Jobs at the helm, Apple had much to gloat about, especially with a string of innovative product hits and a host of other recommendable triumphs, including the company’s financial performance that details a substantial $65.2 billion in net sales, an increase of $22.3 billion (52%) as well as $14.0 billion in net profit for the fiscal year of 2010, ended September 25, 2010. A comprehensive analysis of its financial report reveals the company’s earnings for the four quarters for the year 2010: $3.38 billion, $3.07 billion, $3.25 billion and $4.31 billion, all of which have routinely exceeded Apple’s expectations quarter-after-quarter, hitting beyond its earning estimates.

It comes as no surprise then that the magnitude of Jobs’ hand at Apple’s salvation had indelibly burned a connection into the minds of many that Apple + Jobs = Good while Apple – Jobs = Bad (Rigby, 2014). A facet that would have in due time worked against Jobs’ successor, Tim Cook, who has finally emerged from the shadow of Apple’s legendary founder and earned his own stripes, after Jobs’ long battle of pancreatic cancer in 2011.

But to find oneself in the limelight would also mean to be subjected to incessant scrutiny and for the case of the newly instated Alabaman CEO, critics have certainly pulled out all the stops to hash over Cook’s management of the company, claiming that “he isn’t running the company like Steve Jobs would have run it” and that his lack of imagination or rather “bold ability to conjure up mind-blowing products” might threaten the company’s meteoric growth rate (Reed, 2014 and Kelly, 2012). The public’s concerns were aplenty, the pressure was downright intense and for many, the narrative was clear: Cook will burn his way through Jobs’ legacy and Apple was well on its way to becoming the next Nokia or Sony (Rigby, 2014).

Even so, such presumptions have inherently shown signs of discrepancies when the numbers seem to run otherwise. Apple’s annual report for the fiscal year of 2011, ended September 24, 2011 uncovers another compelling success on its own with net sales of $108.2 billion, an increase of $43.0 billion (66%) and a $25.9 billion in net profit in comparison to its former year, with its quarterly earnings of $6.00 billion, $5.99 billion, $7.31 billion and $6.62 billion, respectively. But the accomplishments do not simply end there. The years ensuing had seen Apple making headway as it acquired a market capitalization of $620 billion, the highest nominal market capitalization ever reached by a publicly traded company, surpassing the record set by Microsoft in 1999 (Satell, 2012).

Many have in turn shifted ground on the former skepticism for the new CEO and ascribed the recent success to Cook’s efforts such as that of Goldman Sachs research analyst Bill Shope who professes the unlikely remarkable condition of the company and his assertion that “by any quantitative measure, so far [Cook’s] performance is phenomenal” (Lashinsky, 2012). But there are others who remain adamant, hinting over the idea that the only rationale behind Apple’s 2011 success was that Cook was still reaping the profits that Jobs have sown, prior to his demise. Once Steve Jobs' lingering juju runs out however, the future of the company is highly questionable.

What seems to be clear for now is that Cook is certainly behaving like his own man, putting his trademark on Apple, including several measures that paint a distinct deviation from the Steve Jobs company playbook. Lashinsky (2012) expounds Apple’s newest approach in “[being] slightly more open and considerably more corporate,” a stark contrast from Jobs who intended to grow the company solely from within. Collaboration and procurement swiftly became Cook’s maxim and in no time, the company had acquired Beats Electronics, followed by plans of a partnership with IBM and a team up with other big retailers such as Whole Foods Market and Walgreens and credit-card firms, MasterCard and Visa for its new payment system (The Economist, 2014).

My two cents worth on this case in point however, is that there certainly is more to the story than a mere collaborative effort. From an analyst’s point of view, such strides could all just have been a deliberate strategy in sustaining Apple’s growth and favor among its clientele, especially when Cook lacked the one outstanding quality that Jobs possessed: the innovation mindset.

In truth, this particular openness and manner of bringing external corporations into the Apple fold, to expand the company’s expertise may show favorable prospects in the near future. But that alone is not enough for the continual growth of the company, especially when advances of corporate partnerships and acquisitions might not be the quick fix to other pressing issues such as the stiffening competition from rivals Microsoft, Google, Samsung, Amazon and Facebook; or the recurring episodes of the company’s reported flat profit of $13.1 billion for three consecutive first quarters, in the years 2012, 2013 and 2014, that undeniably had a hand in the decline of the company’s share price (BBC, 2014).

Be that as it may, Apple still is a notable corporation for what it is worth, with no shortage of valuable assets. For any leading company however, achieving a meager percentage of profit growth would require more than just mediocre products that stem from existing ideas, it demands for breakthroughs and right about now, the pipeline is looking pretty dry. One should not forget that Apple is no longer personified as the underdog that Jobs took the long journey back with to monetary restoration. The Cupertino Company happens to be the most valuable in the world by stock-market valuation and if anything, Cook has got to start channeling his inner innovative mojo, maintain the corporate status and ultimately honor one of Jobs’ dying requests: “Do what’s best for Apple” (Lashinsky, 2012).

Reference List:

1.     Apple Inc., 2010. Annual report 2010. [Online] Available at: <http://investor.apple.com/secfiling.cfm?filingid=1193125-10-238044&cik=320193> [Accessed 9 October 2014].

2.     Apple Inc., 2011. Annual report 2011. [Online] Available at: <http://files.shareholder.com/downloads/AAPL/3519626739x0x688718/D5835A0B-E2FB-427E-93A5-0A863B4EFA0B/AAPL_10K_FY11_10.26.11.pdf> [Accessed 9 October 2014].

3.     BBC. (Monday 27^th January 2014). Apple shares plunge after reporting flat earnings. BBC, [online]. Available at: <http://www.bbc.com/news/business-25922503> [Accessed 10 October 2014]. 

4.     Kahney, L., 2008. How Apple Got Everything Right By Doing Everything Wrong, Wired, [online] Available at: <http://archive.wired.com/techbiz/it/magazine/16-04/bz_apple?currentPage=all> [Accessed 7 October 2014].

5.     Kelly, H. (Thursday 4^th October 2012). How Apple has changed under Tim Cook. CNN, [online]. Available at: <http://edition.cnn.com/2012/10/04/tech/innovation/apple-tim-cook/index.html> [Accessed 9 October 2014].

6.     Lappin, J., 2012. Steve Jobs Thought Bigger, Tim Cook Thinks Smaller, Forbes, [online] Available at: <http://www.forbes.com/sites/joanlappin/2012/11/28/steve-jobs-thought-bigger-tim-cook-thinks-smaller/> [Accessed 7 October 2014].

7.     Lashinsky, A., 2012. How Tim Cook is changing Apple, Fortune, [online] Available at: <http://fortune.com/2012/05/24/how-tim-cook-is-changing-apple/> [Accessed 8 October 2014]. 

8.     Moisescot, R., 2012. Steve at Work. [online] Available at: <http://allaboutstevejobs.com/persona/steveatwork.php> [Accessed 7 October 2014].

9.     Ong, J., 2011. Apple market capitalization tops $300 billion. [online] Available at: <http://appleinsider.com/articles/11/01/03/apple_market_capitalization_tops_300_billion> [Accessed 8 October 2014].

10.  Reed, B., (2014). The single most important thing Steve Jobs told Tim Cook before he passed away. [Online] 7^th July 2014. Available from: bgr.com

http://bgr.com/2014/07/07/tim-cook-vs-steve-jobs-2/. [Accessed 9 October 2014].

11.  Rigby, R., 2014. Apple’s Tim Cook: Martyr or Visionary? [online] Available at: <http://www.managementtoday.co.uk/news/1313403/> [Accessed 9 October 2014].

12.  Satell, G., 2013. Why Apple’s Future Is Uncertain, Forbes, [online] Available at: <http://www.forbes.com/sites/gregsatell/2013/04/24/why-apples-future-is-uncertain/> [Accessed 9 October 2014].

13.  Shontell, A., 2011. The Amazing Story of How Steve Jobs Took Apple From Near Bankruptcy To Billions in 13 Years. [online] Available at: <http://www.businessinsider.com/how-steve-jobs-took-apple-from-near-bankruptcy-to-billions-in-13-years-2011-1?IR=T&op=1> [Accessed 8 October 2014].

14.  Tate, R., (2011). What Everyone Is Too Polite to Say About Steve Jobs. [Online] 7^th October 2011. Available from: gawker.com

http://gawker.com/5847344/what-everyone-is-too-polite-to-say-about-steve-jobs. [Accessed 8 October 2014].

15.  The Economist. (Saturday 13^th September 2014). Reluctant reformation. The Economist, [online]. Available at: <http://www.economist.com/news/business/21616967-apple-becoming-very-different-company-and-not-just-because-its-newly-unveiled> [Accessed 10 October 2014].