BizCom in the News

Carnival Updates Guests with "Improvement" Plans

In a letter from CEO Gerry Cahill, Carnival tries to restore guests' confidence in the brand after several technical and other issues on ships during the past few months.In addition to this letter, Carnival has posted a video on YouTube and created a News and Updates page on Facebook.

In some respects, the letter is a confusing mess. Although the $300 million is more clearly explained in the video, this letter makes it sound as though Carnival is buying hotels: "$300 million to expand the availability of hotel services." Cudos to having some of the main point upfront ("Our goal is to drive continual improvement across all aspects of our customer experience"), but isn't much of the main point at the end, where Cahill thanks guests for their loyalty?

Also, the letter seems overly jargony for typical Carnival guests. The company just wants them to book another cruise, right? The encouragement could be clearer and more direct.

Discussion and Assignment Ideas:

• Compare Carnival's guest letter, video, and Facebook page. What differences do you see, and how do you account for them; for example, what are the audiences for each?
• Rewrite the Carnival letter. How can you improve the content, organization, and tone?

Victims' Families Don't Appreciate Theater Invitation

The Century Aurora theater in Colorado, where 12 people were killed and 58 injured, reopened a few months after the horrific shooting incident. To encourage people to return, the theater sent invitations to the victims’ families for a “special evening of remembrance,” with a movie showing.

The families didn’t appreciate the gesture. In a letter to the theater company, they called the invitation "disgusting" and "wholly offensive to the memory of our loved ones." Coming just two days after Christmas, the invitation stung even worse for some families.

To the Management of Cinemark USA, Inc.:

During the holiday we didn't think anyone or anything could make our grief worse but you, Cinemark, have managed to do just that by sending us an invitation two days after Christmas inviting us to attend the re-opening of your theater in Aurora where our loved ones were massacred.Thanks for making what is a very difficult holiday season that much more difficult. Timing is everything and yours is awful.

You (Cinemark) has shown, and continues to show, ZERO compassion to the families of the victims whose loved ones were killed in their theater. You, Cinemark, have never once reached out to the families to offer condolences.

This disgusting offer that you'd "like to invite you and a guest to a special evening of remembrance on Thursday, January 17 at 5 PM" followed by the showing of a movie and then telling us to be sure "to reserve our tickets" is wholly offensive to the memory of our loved ones.

Our family members will never be on this earth with us again and a movie ticket and some token words from people who didn't care enough to reach out to us, nor respond when we reached out to them to talk, is appalling.

You (Cinemark) refused our repeated invitations to speak parent to parent with no lawyers involved. Instead, we get invited to attend a "special evening of remembrance" at the very theater where our loved ones lay dead on the floor for over 15 hours. We would give anything to wipe the carnage of that night out of our minds' eye. Thank you for reminding us how your quest for profits has blinded your leadership and made you so callous as to be oblivious to our mental anguish.

We, the families, recognize your thinly veiled publicity ploy for what it is: A great opportunity for you to distance yourselves and divert public scrutiny from your culpability in this massacre.

After reading our response to your ridiculously offensive invitation, you now know why we will not be attending your re-opening celebration and will be using every social media tool at our disposal to ask the other victims to ask their friends and family to honor us by boycotting the killing field of our children.

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• What’s your view of the theater’s invitation: a nice gesture, an insensitive ploy to recoup revenue, or something else?
• What could have been a better approach for the theater?
• How well does the families’ letter express their perspective? What suggestions, if any, do you have for a revision?
• In the families' letter, they say that the theater has refused to meet with them. How, if at all, does this influence your perspective of the invitation?

Lego Comes Through for Little Boy

For two years, James Groccia, an 11-year-old boy with Asperger's Syndrome, saved up for his dream Lego train set, but it had been discontinued. James wrote a letter to Lego and received a nice response—and the set he wanted.

 

James's mother, Karen, described the boy's process for writing the letter:

"James was very concise about what he wanted to say. He planned it, and I just helped him organize his thoughts."

How about that. James hasn't even taken a Business Communication course.

Lego's response is very enthusiastic and obviously tailored to James:

Discussion Starters:

• James's letter is great—for an 11-year-old boy—but it could be improved to meet business writing principles. What could be changed? 
• Lego's letter isn't perfect either. What would you advise that Megan change in future letters?

News Corp's Reorganization Announcement

News Corp will split into two separate, public companies: one focused on entertainment and the other on publishing. The company also announced the closing of its tablet newspaper because of low readership.

In a press release, the company announced leadership changes of the publishing company (News Corporation), additional organization changes in the New York office, organizational changes in the London office, and plans for the separation of the publishing company from the entertainment company (Fox Group).

In an internal email,  Chairman Rupert Murdoch explained the changes, complimented the employees' work, and shared his personal mission for the company:

"Many of you know that a belief in the power of the written word has been in my bones for my entire life. It began as I listened to my father’s stories from his days as a war correspondent and, later, a successful publisher. It deepened when, starting in grammar school, I rolled up my sleeves and worked alongside fellow students to publish school journals. I witnessed the hunger people had for well-written, thoroughly observed stories ... stories that provide not just information, but insight. That hunger is alive and well today; my personal mission is to serve and satisfy the human need for insight as well as I possibly can."

Image source.

Discussion Starters:

• Read the company's press release in detail. How is it organized? What works well about the structure, and what could be improved?
• What is your reaction to Murdoch's email to employees? What are his most important messages, and how do you think employees might react?

Why We Should Stop Making Fun of Obama's Emails

During the presidential campaign, the Obama Administration was criticized for sending emails some called "creepy" and "desperate." Well, laugh no more! According to Bloomberg Businessweek, "Most of the $690 million Obama raised online came from fundraising emails."

With subject lines such as "Wow," "Hey," and "Join me for dinner?" the emails were crafted by a team of analysts experimenting with different approaches to see what garnered the most financial support. During the campaign, Obama's staff was secretive about the email strategy, but now we learn that 20 writers would draft as many as 18 variations of emails to test responses before sending out the winning version.

 

Amelia Showalter, the director of digital analytics, explains how the campaign changed emails based on results:

"We were so bad at predicting what would win that it only reinforced the need to constantly keep testing. Every time something really ugly won, it would shock me: giant-size fonts for links, plain-text links vs. pretty 'Donate' buttons. Eventually we got to thinking, 'How could we make things even less attractive?' That’s how we arrived at the ugly yellow highlighting on the sections we wanted to draw people’s eye to."

What can business writers learn from the analysis? Here are a few key points that may be adapted for work email:

• The most effective subject lines were similar "to what you might see in your in-box from other people," according to email director.
• Light profanity (e.g., "hell") got a strong reaction.
• Although the emails may have been "mildly irritating" to some, people did not unsubscribe, showing a lot of tolerance for a lot of messages.

Discussion Starters:

• Based on the previous criticism, are you surprised at the results of the email campaign? Why or why not?
• I'm not sure that business writers should use profanity in their email, but how could you interpret this finding and write subject lines for a professional work environment?
• Review a few of your own emails sent for business purposes. Given this analysis, what, if anything, would you change?