Did bad PR sink CNN's CEO?

Comms lessons from "The Meltdown at CNN"

A couple years ago, a colleague asked at an all-hands meeting, “Can bad press take down a company?” My answer was no — if a company is fundamentally sound, then it can weather bad press and even deliberate attacks. Look at the big airlines and social media companies: they’re under fire all the time, yet their planes keep flying and their feeds keep scrolling. On the other hand, if a company is fundamentally unstable, then bad press can absolutely hasten an already-destined demise.

The same goes for CEOs.

We saw this play out over the past week, with a devastating profile of CNN CEO Chris Licht in The Atlantic that immediately sparked a frenzy of chaos and commentary, culminating only days later in Licht’s ouster.¹ It all happened, like Hemingway’s description of going bankrupt, “gradually, then suddenly.”

As with most crises, we should remember that everyone involved did their best, no one has the full picture, and all of us make mistakes. I have no dunks to give. What I’ll offer is a clinical analysis of the PR of it all, with 3 reminders, 5 pain multipliers, and 7 safety protocols for doing press.

Here’s what the CNN disaster can teach us about managing a profile piece and how it might go wrong.

3 Reminders

While it’s true that bad comms can deliver the KO in an already losing fight, don’t think of PR as the reason Licht went down. It’s important to understand that:

1. The Atlantic article wasn’t the instigator, it was an indicator. It didn’t create Licht’s problems, it revealed them. The article gave people permission to say out loud the things they had been thinking all along. As a CNN reporter told Shawn McCreesh, “The events of the past several days have seemed to some like that moment that comes halfway through a Pakula flick when you realize everybody really is out to get the guy.”
   

2. Narratives can kill. The real sting of the article came not from breaking a story or exposing any meaningful new information at all — it came from taking existing information and weaving it into a coherent narrative. While there were many disparate data points about disappointment over Licht’s tenure, The Atlantic article assembled them into a clear narrative of failure. And, as cognitive psychologists have shown, people make decisions based on narratives, not data.
   

3. Even the worst press doesn’t take down a CEO on its own. A fire requires fuel, heat, and oxygen — The Atlantic brought heat to the situation, but it only ignited when combined with the dry tinder of already strained relationships and the oxygen of intense media interest. That’s a recipe for ashes.

5 Pain Multipliers

Bad press doesn’t always do damage. Hit pieces can even be helpful for rallying supporters (Coinbase is an example of using an external attack to galvanize their base). 

In Licht’s case though, the bad press was not only bad but catastrophic, due to these 5 pain multipliers:

1. The calls came from inside the house: Just as internal bleeding is worse than external bleeding, criticism is more damaging when it’s coming from within. Licht couldn’t stem the criticism and leaks coming from inside CNN, inside Warner, and inside the media industry. On top of that, Licht’s efforts to assuage his employees came far too late. As one employee told Brian Stelter: “It’s very frustrating that we learn more about Licht’s motivations from interviews than we do from internal communication.”
   

2. Details trump descriptions: In the Atlantic article, the positives about Licht took the form of forgettable generic descriptions (bromides about the mission of journalism), while the negatives came with specific and vivid details (Licht picking up a metal pole in the gym while saying, “Zucker couldn’t do this shit!”? I mean, what??) The details are what people remember.
   

3. Media drama attracts media attention: That’s why, as Axios’s Sara Fischer pointed out, Succession got a massive amount of coverage relative to its viewership numbers — reporters were obsessed with the show.

   

   The Licht drama got insanely outsized coverage for the same reason: there’s nothing the media loves more than media about the media.

   

   Media by media about media for media

4. Amplification by association: The people involved in the CNN drama all had big name recognition or big platforms or both, which dramatically amplified the reach and resonance of every story about it. When someone criticizes you or me, it’s whatever. When someone criticizes Chris Licht, it’s Jake Tapper.
   

5. Pun fact: People retain information better when there’s a pun. They’re cognitively catchy. An academic paper even concluded, “Puns constrain and limit the information that can fit in the final line of a joke and thus make recall easier.” Unfortunately for Licht, his name invited a good pun, and the press. Ran. With. It. “Licht’s Out,” “Out Like a Licht,” “Licht is licked,” and so on — it was a field day unlike any since the era of Anthony Weiner headlines. A line like, “Licht faces criticism for his editorial decisions” leaves room for rebuttal. But “Licht’s Out” is a mic drop.

7 Safety Protocols of Doing Press

Maybe you’re reading all this and thinking, “Sign me up for that!” OK... well, it is possible for profile pieces to be positive, even defining — recall the iconic “Tomorrow’s Advance Man” profile of Marc Andreessen in The New Yorker. But proceed with extreme caution.

The allure of media coverage, especially that of the elusive Big Profile Piece, can impair your judgment. If you do pursue coverage, make sure to follow these basic safety protocols.

1. Evaluate the go/no-go
   Before agreeing to any interview, consider each of the below.

   • Objectives: What do you hope to achieve? What’s the optimal outcome and the unacceptable outcome, and the likelihood of each? Is press the right channel for this, or should you choose a different tactic?

   • News cycle: Where’s the news cycle for you or your company? Are you on the upswing or are you primed for a takedown? Where do you stand relative to current events and the media mood?

   • Readiness: Are you and the company ready for this level of scrutiny? Are you disciplined and prepared enough for this reporter?

   • Reporter selection: Is this the right reporter based on their beat, interests, opinions, and style? Do they appear to have strong views on an issue that would put them at odds with you? Do you have a trusted relationship with them?

   • Backup plan: How bad would it be, and what would you do, if this went poorly? (Just in case, here’s a crisis comms playbook and a guide to apologizing.)

   • Recent exposure: Have you been overexposed? When someone has already done a ton of press, as Licht had, each subsequent article has to dig deeper to find something new to report, and that leads to the kinds of spelunking expeditions that can end badly.
     
     If you still want to proceed, then make sure that you…
     

2. Know your desired narrative

   • What does the business need you to say as its public advocate?

   • What are your key messages, and who are you trying to reach?
     

3. Choose the right timing

   • Timing is crucial. The wrong timing can put you in a bad news cycle, make your messaging seem irrelevant or out of touch, and introduce a host of risks. If you’re on a downward trajectory, a poorly timed article can even put you in free fall.

   • For Licht, the article was written early in his tenure, before he had a firm foundation as CEO. That made it very risky: if the profile went off the road, as it did, there would be no list of accomplishments or established record to fall back on.
     

4. Give the right amount of access

   • Decide the extent of access you’ll grant to the reporter. How much time do they get with you? Can they join internal meetings? Will you connect them with others to interview about you? Some reporters will ask to come to your office or home; in what physical surroundings will you be spending time with them?

   • In Licht’s case, there was no reason his gym routine should’ve made it into a story about his leadership of CNN. If a reporter wants to watch you work out at 6 a.m., and you’re not a professional athlete or CEO of a fitness company, that’s a hard pass. To paraphrase the subject himself, “Zucker wouldn’t do this shit.”
     

5. Set a reasonable time frame

   • Plan for a long profile piece to take months, not weeks. Giving it 2-6 months is reasonable.

   • But reporting that goes on too long starts to become an outstanding liability on your reputational balance sheet. Max Tani at Semafor told me that CNN PR was originally hoping for the Atlantic profile to be published around the relaunch of the morning show last November. If it had, the fallout wouldn’t have been so bad. But Licht and his team kept the window open for another 7 months! Even in ideal circumstances, that’s just leaving too much time for things to go off the rails.

     

6. Expect wedding crashers

   • An article about you is likely to include quotes from other people, like industry experts, business partners, or colleagues. So be aware that your perspective won’t be the only one represented.

   • If you’re looking to tell your side of the story because you can’t trust those around you, then understand that those people will work their way into the story anyway — and they may well hijack it, overshadowing or altering the narrative you wanted. Anticipate what they might say and plan accordingly.
     

7. Establish clear boundaries

   • Over-communicate with the reporter. Be collaborative but firm with red lines, and set expectations upfront for what the piece will look like. Document all your agreements in writing.

   • The ground rules should include what’s on the record, on background, or off the record (here’s how). Licht’s “gym scene” should never have happened at all, but it certainly should never have been on the record.

   • A comms person should be staffing each interview and intervening when needed (which Licht did have), then following up to clarify points, offer additional information, or help with fact checking. They should also be tracking the general direction and status of the reporting (which Licht did not seem to have).

   • If it’s not working out, be prepared to walk away. Yes that would suck and you would lose credibility, but remind yourself it’s better to take a small l now than take a big L when the thing runs in print. With the Atlantic profile, apparently Warner CEO David Zaslav declined at the last minute to go on the record, which must have irritated the reporter, but was better than making a public statement he’d later regret.

In conclusion

Don’t treat the Licht disaster like you’re a spectator, study it like you’re watching tape because this is an incredible case study packed with comms lessons. Maintain boundaries. Keep your insiders close. Watch the clock. Read the room. Never take a reporter to the gym.

Above all, remember that not all press is good press. The more you’re willing to give up for coverage, the more likely you are to make a mistake.

What initially looks like a spotlight might be a flame — and if you can’t resist its draw, then consider that you might be a moth.

1. If you need to catch up, I recommend the analyses from Dylan Byers, Oliver Darcy, Ben Mullin, Max Tani, Brian Stelter, and Shawn McCreesh.