CGM blog: A question of trust

26 May CGM blog: A question of trust

In life in general, and in public affairs in particular, honesty is the best policy.

You can argue morally that it is always the right thing to do but tactically it is also wise.

Judged by any standards, the Dominic Cummings/ Durham story has been badly managed badly by No 10 and left PM Boris Johnson bruised and bereft of that most important capital – trust.

In some ways with this story as with others, you pays yer money and takes yer choice.

Some will believe the affable-family-man-doing-what-we all-would line.

The majority, judging by the apparent response thus far, believe his actions to be, at best, hypocrisy, at worst, foolhardy that could have endangered lives – indeed a price others have paid for by losing their jobs.

Either way, lying and denying as a gut instinct is never a good look in managing a media crisis, not least in a credibility stakes game like politics.

Yet that was No 10’s knee-jerk response when the story broke on Friday evening. It was all a pack of lies and ministers were ordered to tweet so the following morning.

A colleague, head of comms at a large national organisation, messaged me instantly to emphasise the value of honesty and clarity from the outset.

As a former investigative journalist, I know this to be fact. We’re used to keeping our powder dry, substantiating facts and being legally sure footed.

The sucker follow-up story was the visit to Barnard Castle. Ouch.

Johnson’s tortuous defence of his key aide at a disastrous press conference on Sunday evening failed to calm the waters and left an unlikely alliance of angry Tory MPs, the clergy, members of SAGE, civil servants, even Tory supporting press like the Daily Mail, let alone the general public apoplectic with rage.

Cummings’ own eventual defence – though in large parts seemingly implausible – was at least more humane on Monday. There’s a big lesson in that.

Trouble is, this was FOUR days later. The damage had been done.

So what should have happened?

For starters, any decent, experienced PR agency knows you never deny and lie as gut instinct (or say ‘no comment’ and leave it there for that matter).

You issue a holding statement while you investigate the matter.

The next step is to ask truly tough questions of those involved to establish the facts to shape an accurate response and provide a clear steer that cannot be counteracted.

I’m not underestimating the difficulty of this given the virulence of this specific story but it needs to be done and delivered effectively. While saying sorry can be the hardest word – contrition as first not last response also goes a long way. It shouldn’t be drawn out.

And you certainly can’t suggest one law for you and another for others which is at the heart of this story.

Cummings’ actions stood in stark contrast to the ‘order not advice’ the public had been given, many of whom had far bigger sacrifices to make during the pandemic.

By the time this finally came on Monday evening the government’s trust-o-meter was flatlining. Legacy suggests it mightn’t return for Johnson.

Macmillan on the Profumo scandal, Major on cash-for-questions, Blair on Iraq – all failed to recover trust and none were as centrally involved as Johnson is here.

But before any of us point the dirty end of the stick at people in public life how many private businesses manage their own affairs in a similar manner – readily shooting messengers, blaming customers, making false claims that don’t add up and so forth which can wither confidence and credibility?

At the end of the day, we’re all human beings. We make mistakes.

It is how we correct them and learn from them that matters most.

CGM has many years’ experience of media crisis management and runs courses at the Media Centre in Worcester.