Back in October, I resurrected the “Iron Reporter” to compare how two different publications covered Siemens’ high-speed train in Russia.

It was interesting to see the two reporters, Andrew E. Kramer from The New York Times and Paul Glader from The Wall Street Journal, take distinctly different paths in their storytelling.

Both pieces reflected the quality one would expect from two of the more prominent newspapers in the country.

But I did take a jab at Glader wondering why the Journal would “go through the trouble and expense to fly Mr. Glader from New York to Russia” for a story that appeared one month after the news was in the public domain.

I now have my answer.

Glader was good enough to drop me a line which provided the context.

It turns out that he had traveled to Russia on a personal vacation; i.e., his own dime, so the Journal did not fly him to Russia.

Instead, he wrote on the Siemens’ high-speed train as well as on St. Petersburg for the Times’ travel section to simply add to the learning experience during his travels.

In addition, the piece was earmarked for the Journal’s Marketplace section, not the front page where long-form narrative still lives.

This explains why the investment picture (global spend on the train biz) served as a major theme in the story. And why much of the “texture” from his journey on the infamous Red Arrow train didn’t make the final story aside from a quote from the Red Arrow’s captain.

Obviously, Ishmael’s Corner doesn’t benefit from an ombudsman (not in the 2010 budget) but I can still hear the ombudsman’s voice calling out my decision to highlight one of his Glader’s personal tweets as a bit of a cheap shot.

That was unfair and I apologize.

I’ve got the SlideShare religion.

Ironically, the use of slides, so often associated with mind-numbing - if not sleep-inducing - oral presentations, makes for a terrific storytelling platform for reading.

Earlier in the year, I posted on “Telling a Story Through Visual Means” that reverse-engineered a charticle in WIRED Magazine.

In a sense, SlideShare encompasses the same concept as a charticle, bringing together visuals and words to tell a story.

But unlike a charticle, SlideShare doesn’t require pure artistry (although artistry will certainly enhance the final product).

For business, the slide platform allows you to craft a story in a form that the reader can consume in a minute or two or three. The crisp pace of a SlideShare deck often comes from the actual type serving as the visual.

I would be remiss if I didn’t also highlight the benefits that come from SlideShare fitting under the social media umbrella. 

You can’t tag or follow a charticle.  

We’re putting greater emphasis on this communications vehicle for both our clients and ourselves. In fact, you can view the Agency’s credentials story which just went live on SlideShare.

Many thanks to our Singapore office, which did the heavy lifting on creating the credentials deck.

We believe it tells our story in a fashion that brings out our unique way of thinking and personality, deploying the techniques of storytelling - conversational, fun with language, etc. - that we’ve been evangelizing for some time.

Let us know what you think.

Sidenote: While there are hundreds, perhaps thousands, of outstanding stories on Slideshare, one in particular, “Shift Happens,” provided much of our inspiration. There’s a reason this deck has almost 1 million views.

Communications at its best serves as a company’s conscious, ensuring that the decisions and actions of the company align with the words being shared with the outside world.

At no time does this become more important than during a crisis.

Before going further, we should acknowledge the money factor. In the quest to serve shareholders, companies are striving to walk that fine line during a crisis of limiting liabilities while at the same time showing transparency for the given situation.

When I read the first BP letter I came away impressed with the straight-forward language and posted on the common-sense approach. BP seemed determined to show compassion with the price tag being a secondary factor:

Since the tragic accident on the Transocean Deepwater Horizon rig first occurred, we have been committed to doing everything possible to stop the flow of oil at the seabed, collect the oil on the surface and keep it away from the shore.  BP has taken full responsibility for dealing with the spill. 

As I’ve watched the debacle unravel and read more about BP, my view has changed. Communications, even flawless communications, accomplishes nothing in a crisis if the company’s behavior doesn’t align with the communications.

This hit home when the second BP letter in ad form arrived last week with the headline: “We Will Make This Right.”

Again, the vehicle makes use of the same straight-forward language:

BP has taken full responsibility for cleaning up the spill in the Gulf of Mexico.

Stopping the leak will be a major step, but only a start. We know that our responsibility goes much further.

The ad goes on to say all the right things but the actions don’t support the words.

People don’t trust the words.

After six weeks of the ”top kill” operation - might have found a better phrase, but I digress - the company conceded failure and has moved on to Plan B.

Furthermore, BP estimated the daily spill at 5,000 barrels when it later turned out to be 12,000 - 19,000 barrels polluting the waters each day.

It makes for a situation in which BP has zero credibility.

The rebuilding of BP’s credibility and ultimately its reputation can only start through the right actions.

Which brings us back to the point that a company’s actions must align with the communications during a crisis in order to be credible.

Hopefully, the senior communication professionals at BP have a seat at the table to do just this.

Otherwise, they have no chance to do their jobs.

The typical product review has a happy ending.

By that, I mean the end of a review usually calls out one product as the best choice.

In spite of the “happily every after” - at least for one company - you don’t associate the product review genre with storytelling.

Instead, these articles strive to clinically attach a value to different features and functions with the objective of helping potential buyers make their decisions.

That’s why a recent review by David Pogue in The New York Times caught my attention.

Anyone who touches the consumer electronics space knows Pogue and his gift for humor. His comparison of Windows Vista to the Mac OS back in 2006 - “I’m going to prove that Microsoft did not steal ideas from Mac OS 10″ - remains a classic and must-watch video:

But it’s interesting to see his quest for levity play out in a print product review called “Big Sensor, Tiny Camera, Nice Results” (don’t think Pogue wrote the headline; perhaps a byproduct of the SEO jockeys).

The review goes old school with the lead ‘graph:

Centuries ago, a young boy in Japan was preparing for a long journey. “You will need much drinking water,” said his master. “Construct a barrel that will catch the rain.”

You can almost sense David Carradine flashing back to his Grasshopper days, an allusion that keeps as the story unwinds:

After a quick run to his local Pagoda Depot for supplies, the boy built a large barrel, open at the top. When it rained, the barrel filled quickly.

“Good,” said the master. “Now pack it up.”

“But master,” the boy protested. “This barrel is much too big and heavy to take on my journey — it might not even qualify as carry-on! I need a much smaller, lighter container!”

Nice turn of a phrase, “Pagoda Depot.”

Sensing that an allegory is taking shape:

“A wise observation,” said the master.

“And yet,” said the boy, “a smaller container means a smaller opening, and it won’t catch nearly as much rain.”

And now, the payoff with Pogue intersecting Grasshopper with today’s digital dilemma:

The master nodded again. “Excellent, my son,” he said. “Now you understand the trade-off between digital S.L.R. cameras and pocket cameras. The S.L.R. is big and heavy, but it has a huge sensor that collects much light; you can get sharp photos even at twilight. The pocket camera has a tiny sensor that’s blurry in low light, but at least you won’t slip a disk trying to carry it around.”

The rest of the review offers the obligatory compare and contrast of several cameras.

Of course, every story must have an end.

Naturally, Pogue ties back to the drinking water quandary:

In the end, the boy began to cross Japan with only a tiny water flask on his back.

The master was aghast. “But you will die of thirst, my son!”

The boy smiled as he continued walking. “I’m not too worried about it, old man. Technology has a way of making all things possible.

Right. There’s no way a Japanese boy is going to call Kwai Chang Caine an “old man.”

But the boy saying “please don’t worry master” doesn’t quite have the same verve.

Like all master storytellers, Pogue expects us to suspend belief.

I’m OK with this for a product review that shakes up the status quo. 

The communications controlled by a company during a crisis - not the media coverage - provide the best indicator of competency (or lack thereof).

If you can’t get the communications under your control right, you have zero chance of winning over others to carry your story forward.

That’s why I characterized Toyota’s crisis communications as amateur hour. The company’s first open letter to customers hit the proverbial pothole and set a tone that’s still present.

Quick digression -

My original Toyota post was republished on MediaBistro where, if you scroll down, you’ll see my mom and dad posted a comment disagreeing with my take. I guess unconditional love only goes so far.

Back to the topic at hand -

On the other end of the spectrum, check out the BP letter that addresses the oil spill crisis.

I realize a number of publications ranging from Slate to Advertising Age pummeled BP for poor communications when the crisis first hit. While I agree that BP should have been more prepared and quicker out of the gate, the letter shows they’re on the right path.

Rather than allow the legal team to vet every syllable, BP articulates what they’re doing with open and straight-forward language. It’s clear that someone at or near the top decided that common sense should rule the day.

Now, before all the Mother Jones subscribers pile on, I’m not nominating BP for company of year. This is a communications exercise. Time will tell if the company’s behavior aligns with the words.

Moving on.

The contrast between how BP and Toyota start their respective letters illustrates the difference in mentality.

Toyota First Sentence: For more than 50 years, Toyota has provided you with safe, reliable, quality vehicles and first-rate service.

BP First Sentence: Since the tragic accident on the Transocean Deepwater Horizon rig first occurred, we have been committed to doing everything possible to stop the flow of oil at the seabed, collect the oil on the surface and keep it away from the shore.

Toyota squanders its opener with a walk down nostalgia lane and a narrative that seems out of a sales brochure penned by an intern. No, I take that back. I don’t want to insult our interns.

BP establishes street cred right off the get-go, “Since the tragic accident,” then crisply lays out its actions.

I can imagine Toyota arguing about an adjective like “tragic” in their war room. By the time copy was finalized, it would say “the unfortunate incident.”

To the next line:

Toyota Second Sentence: I am truly sorry for the concern our recalls have caused and want you to know we’re doing everything we can - as fast as we can - to make things right.

BP Second Sentence: BP has taken full responsibility for dealing with the spill.

This is rich.

Toyota isn’t sorry for the recall or the accidents. The company is “truly sorry” FOR THE CONCERN. This is the type of language gamesmanship that comes from legal owning final sign-off on the copy.

But you don’t need a linguist to translate “BP has taken full responsibility.”

This accountability from BP also accentuates the sign-off with two websites dedicated to the crisis (in contrast with Toyota blending its Recall Center into the main site) and toll-free numbers proactively asking for input:

We will continue to keep everyone fully informed about the events as they unfold. For current information on the spill and response plan, please use the following websites:

To make spill-related claims: (800) 440-0858

www.bp.com/gulfofmexicoresponse

www.deepwaterhorizonresponse.com

For assistance or information, please call the following 24/7 hotlines:

To report oil on the shoreline: (866) 448-5816

To report impacted wildlife: (866) 557-1401

No question, this was a professional job in which BP management got out of the way and allowed the communicators to perform.

Now, if BP’s management would only agree to that media training session. The Guardian interviewed BP CEO Tony Hayward who offered:

“The Gulf of Mexico is a very big ocean. The amount of volume of oil and dispersant we are putting into it is tiny in relation to the total water volume.”

Not good.

Related side note: Our curated “Toyota Crisis PR Resource” is still available. If you have thoughts or content for the page, by all means send them our way.