PR may have averted the “Cartoon Crisis”

The events surrounding the controversial cartoons of the Prophet Mohammed that were published in Danish Newspaper, Jyllands-Posten, reminded of a conversation I had at an event that was hosted by Saudi Aramco. I was told that, “Islam is like the Apple Computer, a wonderful product with terrible marketing.”

Since then, things have changed. Apple is a niche brand thanks to effective marketing. Islam has admittedly been damaged by the violence from the protest but at least Islamic leaders are making an effort to improve their marketing communications. What is surprising is the fact that we now have a new party that this saying should be applied to. The West has been particularly bad at selling its point of view in the Islamic world and the Danish government’s initial handling of the incident was a clear sign of bad public relations.

How is it possible that Denmark, a country that has been sympathetic to Islamic causes in the Middle East become such an intense object of hatred overnight? I believe that, had public relations been applied earlier, none of this would have happened.

Let’s look at the facts:
• 30 September 2005: The cartoons were published
• 14 October 2005: First demonstrations in Copenhagen
• 19 October 2005: 11 Ambassadors from Muslim countries request a meeting with Danish Prime Minister, Anders Fogh Rasmussen to discuss action against the Jyllands-Posten
• November – December 2005: Delegation of Danish Muslims travel to the Middle East to conduct meetings with religious leaders.
• 29 December 2005: Foreign Ministers from the League of Arab States criticise the Danish Prime Minister’s handling of the situation
• 1 January 2006: Danish Prime Minister emphasise the importance of freedom of expression, religious freedom and mutual respect in his New Year address to the nation.

Why did it take four months for the Danish government to react from the moment the 11 ambassadors requested a meeting with the Prime Minister to discuss the issue?

Many have argued that this was simply an issue of freedom of the press, a sacred right in Western societies. The Danish government had no legal right to do anything about the cartoons and one could argue that it would have been political suicide for the Danish Prime Minister to be seen to be trampling of the freedom of the press.

While this argument may be legally sound, it’s come at a cost. Danish businesses are losing an estimated US $ 1.5 billion a day thanks to a boycott of Danish products in the Islamic world and Danish citizens are in danger in countries that Denmark has traditionally been friendly too.

I believe the Danish government could have used effective Public Relations to defuse tensions with the Islamic Community without sacrificing or infringing on freedom of the press. Clearly someone should have realised that when 11 ambassadors request to see a Prime Minister over a single issue that the issue has gone beyond the realms of domestic politics.

What could the Danish government have done in the four months? They could have:

• Distanced the Danish state and people from the cartoons in the Jyllands-Posten. – A statement by the Prime Minister describing the cartoons as offensive and tasteless, early into the incident would have placated the Islamic community without infringing of press freedom.

• Engaged the media in the Islamic World to sell Denmark’s commitment to the well being of the Islamic World. – The Islamic world would be friendlier towards Denmark if it saw Denmark as being benevolent. Instead, Denmark’s generosity in the Middle East, in particular towards the Palestinian community was ignored.

• Distance the Muslim Community from its more radical elements. – The Danish government could have waged a media campaign to discredit extremist Islamicist and the Far Right political parties in Denmark. Instead, it did nothing and we have violence against Danish citizens in the Islamic World as well as Far Right violence against Muslims in Denmark.

• Engage Denmark’s Muslim community by setting up “Dialogue Sessions” between the government and community leaders. – This would remove the argument that Western states are insensitive to the needs of the Islamic Community.

So while the more radical Islamic leaders from Denmark were gathering support for their cause, the Danish government did nothing and the initial public relations victory went to the protestors.

Undoubtedly, hindsight is luxury that the Danish government did not have. But what can governments and companies do when faced with a potentially difficult situation? They should:

• Be aware of the publics involved in the dispute and the way in which they need to be communicated to - Surely, the involvement of 11 ambassadors and the League of Arab States should have been signs that was a larger public at stake? Communications efforts were based to domestic audience rather than an international one.

• Be aware of the issues that need to be addressed and address them – Was this merely a freedom of the press issue or did European-Middle East relations and feelings of marginalisation amongst Denmark’s Muslims come into play? How did protestors start linking George Bush and Israel to Denmark when Denmark’s approach to the Palestinian issue has differed from the US and Israel?

• Be seen to communicate clearly and quickly – There was no effort to communicate with the publics involved and early attempts by the government and newspaper descended into gibberish about the semantics of the word apology. The communications appeared as arrogant to the Muslim community and feeble to those defending freedom of the press.

Copyright Tang Li (c)