Why did martha stewart go to jail

Case Studies

The Rise and Fall and the Rise of Queen Martha

How would you characterize Martha Stewart’s initial public relations response to the charges against her?

Stewart’s initial response to the charges was by being quiet and letting her attorneys respond to the public. I would characterize this response as reputation management which enables one to push down the negative sides associated with charges and largely helped Stewart to avoid losing her reputation she had worked so hard to build by maybe uttering or answering the reporter’s questions.

What key public relation principles did Martha Stewart violate?

The key public relations violated by Martha were her good name and the way she communicated to the public. Despite her being famous and loved by people the charges and conviction could not in any way clear her name and be the way she was before. Being a well known personnel her silence in front of reporters and to the whole world watching did not send a good signal, since the world and the nation needs to know how she reacted to the charges for them also to react in a particular way.

Had you been advising her, what public relation strategy and tactics would you have recommended? How “vocal” should she have been?

If I was advising her, I would recommend that she be as vocal as she could if this could make the public to trust her again. Although the silence served as a better weapon for her at long last, it did not for the public who were left with tones of questions as to why a person who was in the public eye could not make a single statement regarding the charges

How important, from a public relations perspective, was a decision to go to jail early?

Her decision to go to jail early was to convince the public that this setback could not put her down, that the law was law and had to be respected and that she had to get it over with and make a comeback to her career.

What public relations strategy should Stewart adopt now?

I think she should move on with her career but at best knowing what the public needs and how to meet such needs in an accountable and transparent manner.

Should she acknowledge that she made mistakes?

Acknowledging her mistakes now will be bad for her as the public will hate her for not owning up to her mistakes before and thus she should be consistent with denying the previous charges and claiming her innocence.

Crushing the CrackBerry

How would you describe RIM’s business response to increased mobile device competition?

The RIM did not actually respond to the increased mobile competition. Instead of doing more research and inquires on why people would choose the newly introduced iphone, they decided to keep everything the same and how they do things. To make the matters worse they introduced an unfinished product to the market and this was a tough blow to the company.

How would you describe its public relation reaction?

The RIM managers and the company at large despite the evidence that the company was collapsing, they continued to act as if this was not the case. They introduced different mechanisms to cope in the competitive markets such as use of comedians and the cartoon superheroes. All of which were a wrong move depending on the situation.

What’s your reaction to its attempts at comedic public relations responses to competitive pressures?

The use of comedic public relation to me seems to be a very huge mistake and a joke to the public. it displays the inability of company to differentiate what is important between a company’s name and its products. The use of comedians and the cartoons makes the company appears to have lost its focus of the target customers or become desperate due to the competitive market. It also displays another uncalculated move, of giving a solution to a problem which does not even exist or to a different problem requiring a different solution.

What would be your overall public relations strategy if you were RIM’s public relations director?

for one I would ensure that all upcoming all existing issues are taken serious and acted upon. The sitting back and assuming that they have it all, made the RIM be badly hit by the introduction of iphone. This would mean that I will keep the needs of customers at hand and always work at meeting them at all times. I will also ensure that I acknowledge all mistakes and situations rather than justifying them as in the case of comedic relations and engage the consumers and other investors on what they need rather than imposing it on them.

Doing The Right Thing By Making a "Hurd" Decision

What other options did Hewlett-Packard have in dealing with Mark Hurd?

The Hewlett-Packard had other options in dealing with Hurd. First they would have decided, due to his performance that they would retain him in the company by minimally punishing him internally in that every action he undertook was under scrutiny and made accountable to everything and at the same time make sure that the scandal he was in did not reach the public.

The company could also have decided to let Hurd go but not by admitting that he had been involved in a scandal which could have put the company’s reputation in jeopardy but by giving other excuses such as Hurd finding a better business opportunity.

Do you think the board did the right thing?

I think the Hewlett-Packard did the right thing. This is because to establish a strong organizational culture, a strong organizational ethics should exist and the sanctions stipulated in the codes of conduct should be applicable to all. By doing this, Hewlett-Packard boosted its reputation in terms of doing what is right despite the huge negative consequences involved. Trust and confidence by other organizations, investors and the public was also boosted.

Had HP decided to slap its CEO on the wrists for his infraction, what might have been the outcome for the company?

If HP did take the action of giving a minimal punishment to the CEO, of course the prosperity of the company would have continued as Hurd had taken the HP company at greater levels during his presiding years. It is however not certain for how long this would not have leaked to the public and thus the prosperity would turn to destruction. The company’s name would be tarnished and investors and the public will lose confidence, trust and respect to such a company which cannot live up to the expected codes of conduct by punishing whoever goes against them regardless of their employment position.