Godolphin Doping Scandal "Unacceptable"

(Photo credit: BANAMINE)

The National carries the story that was splashed in aghast tones all over the UK's media yesterday and today - Godolphin trainer Mahmoud Al Zarooni, one of Godolphin's seven trainers, is in the spotlight after eleven of 45 horses in his care tested came up positive for anabolic steroids.

It's perhaps fair to say the news has shaken horse racing in general and Godolphin in particular.

The National's story is linked here. Gulf News also covered the news, devoting 222 words in its print edition to a cut down version of the story it has posted online. The text-only print story is nestled quietly in the gutter of page three of the sports section and not referred to elsewhere in the paper.

Amusingly, the lead picture story on that GN page carries the headline, "Dubai pair to be tested in trial for Epsom Derby" but that story, of course, refers to horses being tested in the field as opposed to being tested for drugs.

Chatting about it with pals, I got the reaction that this was the sort of thing you'd expect and I do confess to disagreeing strongly with that. Godolphin has a ferocious reputation in horse-racing. It's a remarkably successful stable - and a very big operation indeed. It burst onto the scene with a winning formula - its horses are wintered in Dubai and then start the UK racing season in April in top form. The stable's first win was at Dubais' Nad Al Sheba racetrack in 1992 - since then its horses have won over 200 group one and 2,000 other races globally.

Godolphin has handled the news impeccably, making a sensible statement available promptly and announcing  a complete internal review in conjunction with the sport's authority, the BHA.

Godolphin is the Victory Team of horse-racing - it's a contender in a high profile international sport that has become about Brand Dubai in the same way as the Victory Team did - and in the same fashion. Godolphin doesn't need to cheat - the stables' manager Simon Crisford referred to Sheikh Mohammed as finding the news "completely unacceptable" and "being appalled" in his statement and I truly believe he would be. The last thing in the world Godolphin and its owner wants or needs is this because it's actually about a reputation and a brand that are respectively much greater than any horse racing prize.

One thing's certain, though. Zarooni's for the high jump...

UAE Local Produce Is "Toxic" - Gulf News

(Photo credit: Masako 川o'-')♪)

I'll admit it, I'm confused.

For years now, Gulf News has gone on about how wonderful and safe local produce is. So much assurance has been offered, the cynic might even be inclined to wonder where, given all this smoke, the fire is...

For instance this piece linked right here is pretty typical of the very many examples of the genre, "Locally produced vegetables guarantee against food risks like E. coli".

The deadly E. coli outbreak that rocked world food markets once again confirms the importance and urgency of turning to local vegetables and fruits for consumption, Abu Dhabi Food Control Authority (ADFCA), said in a statement.

Well, that's alright then. I've no need to worry. If I might be inclined to have the odd wobble, worrying for instance if the unrestricted use of pesticides in local farming might be harmful, or perhaps the impact of the oil and diesel leaking out from those filthy, weeping pumps they use to extract the water from those fast-depleting aquifers, I just need to keep reading GN for stuff like this to keep me on the straight and narrow. Yes, "Nothing beats fresh taste of local produce"

Row upon row of succulent dates greet the eye while a few steps away fresh potatoes, onions and lettuce varieties are displayed for sale. For the erstwhile customer, finding the freshest produce has become even easier at the Al Mina Fruit and Vegetable Market ever since Abu Dhabi Municipality began implementing a range of measures to promote local produce.

I will not presume to cavil at the misuse of the word 'erstwhile', unless the customer in question had, indeed, passed away or otherwise become a customer no more. Safe to say, the assurances regarding locally grown produce stretch back over the years, this one from 2001 for instance.

Whatever, we are assured that "E. coli poses no threat to consumers in the UAE" and we know we can trust our media to properly filter and investigate any empty statements or baseless claims, whether they come from business or government. That's what the media is for, right?

So it was slightly disconcerting to read in yesterday's edition of The Newspaper That Seeks Only Truth that local salad greens are 'toxic'. Their word, not mine. The piece, linked here for your convenience, quotes academics whose research over the past five years (in the face of all those assurances) found 100% of samples of locally grown girgir (that's rocket to you an' me) contaminated by E. coli and salmonella. The bacterial infection is embedded in leaves and cannot be washed out, according to Dr Dennis Russell of the American University of Sharjah.

Dr Russell on leaves. Love it.

The good doktor points to unsanitary farming practices such as using raw manure as fertiliser and the bacterial contamination of the water supply (43% of wells here were found to be contaminated GN tells us in another story).

Gulf News' advice is "Do not eat jareer and other vegetables grown or stored with it in stores". The produce continues to be sold by supermarkets here.

So is it toxic, or not? For what it's worth, I've always gone on the assumption that it is and tend to avoid it at every opportunity or wash it to death. Blame all that reassurance...

The Emirates ID Card Confusion Continues

clarity matters"" (Photo credit: atinirdosh)

EIDA, the Emirates ID Authority, has established a remarkable track record of communication since its very inception. Many's the time I have posted about this deadline and that requirement being countered by that requirement and this deadline. Nothing has ever been terribly clear since the get go, if you don't mind me saying so.

And it remains oblique, opaque, obtuse and generally obfuscated. Today we have two reports in our newspapers. Well, news media - as one, Emirates 24x7, is not technically a paper anymore, having sublimed and become a being of pure energy.

Gulf News, then, is first to punch its grateful subscribers' eyeballs with a typically hard-hitting headline:

Millions of expat employees in UAE to save ID card costs biennially

The story, linked here for your viewing pleasure, is quite unequivocal:

"Millions of expatriate employees in the country can save the cost of over Dh200 for ID card renewal every two years, thanks to a new move by the Emirates Identity Authority (Emirates ID). Sponsors have to bear the costs of national ID cards of their expatriate employees, according to a top official."

And so on. It's quite clear, no beating around the bush. Our sponsors have to pay for our ID cards and take responsibility for the same - presumably extending to late renewal penalties (not cleared up in the story, but we can wait for clarity. God knows, we've waited since 2008.)

But what's this, in Emirates 24x7?

Rule to let sponsors bear expats' ID card cost under study: Eida

Hang on a cotton-pickin' moment there. 'Under study' doesn't mean 'new move', now does it? Emirates 24x7 goes on to add awful clarity to the assertion that this is no done deal but a 'move under the anvil' as Gulf News would have itself put it.

“We are considering the proposal to make it mandatory for sponsors to pay for the ID cards of their employee, but it has not been finalised. It is currently left for the companies to decide whether they want to pay the cost,” an Eida spokesperson told Emirates 24/7. No timeframe was, however, given on when the directive would be issued.

So has Gulf News jumped the gun, or Emirates 24x7 simply got it wrong? Or has EIDA told two different reporters two different things? Or perhaps told them both the same thing in terms so confusing they've come away with two different stories entirely?

We await, with a feeling of remorseless, crushing deja vu, clarification.

The Emirates A380 Door Problem - A Communications Lesson?

 (Photo credit: engineroomblog)

The Daily Mail is a massively popular newspaper in the UK and also boasts the world's top online news site, with over 100 million visits. It does what it does remarkably well, catchy attention-getting headlines combine with a tone of moral outrage that nicely captures the sentiments of the British 'man in the street'.

So 'terror at 27,000 feet' is a very Mail story - and that's precisely what it served up on February 15th with a story that a door 'blew open' on an Emirates A380. As the headline tells us: "Terror at 27,000ft: Crew plug gap in super jumbo jet door with blankets and pillows stuck together with gaffer tape after it 'blows open' during the flight."

The whole story's stood up on the testimony of British tourist David Reid and taken at face value, it's awful. Terrified crew hiding under their chairs, the atmosphere visible through the gap in the door, cabin pressure drop, freezing conditions and yet despite all this the pilot decided to carry on flying. Horrendous.

"...the door in business class came an inch and a half ajar, leaving a gaping hole, said Mr Reid"

It's only when you start to read the comments left by readers you might have a different perspective on the story that rings rather more factually than the story itself. They point out that the A380's doors can't actually open in-flight as they open inwards and are fixed by their shape 'like a plug' and that any pressure drop at this altitude would have caused the oxygen masks to automatically deploy which the images in the story clearly show has not been the case. They, reasonably, point out that a door open by a fraction at 27,000 feet would suck out any blankets being used to plug the gap and they also make the point that crew can't actually hide under their chairs - one of the more colourful lines in a pleasantly lurid story. Oh - and cold air wouldn't come into the cabin, air would escape. And so on.

As Crikey's Ben Sandilands points out, the "Emirates A380 door explosion story is rubbish." Notably, two Australian websites that gaily parroted the story have since taken it down.

The Mail's reader comments are remarkable for the fact they have been 'rated' by other readers using the Mail's comment rating system - the more sensible ones have been promoted by over two thousand people. And while thousands more have rated other comments criticising the story to the top of the comments pile, over five thousand 'liked' the story - and over ten thousand tweeted it.

Well, it's too good not to share, really, isn't it? Even if it is clearly bunkum.

In all, over 770 people commented on the story, of whom the majority (and the majority of 'upwards' rated comments) are negative about the story being told, correct its factual basis and criticise the Mail for the 'standard of journalism' it represents. The Mail has closed comments now.

The Mail's pieceis an excellent example of not letting the truth get in the way of a good story - Emirates' statement is pretty clear, although perhaps a little disjointed.

The Mail quotes Emirates as saying ‘We can confirm there was a whistling noise emanating from one of the doors on the A380 upper deck on flight EK384 between Bangkok and Hong Kong on Monday, February 11. At no point was the safety of the flight in jeopardy.’ 

That statement was later updated (and the Mail is at pains to make the fact it was later updated) to include, "At no time during the flight did one of the upper deck doors open. There was also no loss in cabin pressurisation at any time during the flight. The noise from the door was caused by a small dimensional difference between the inflated door seal and the door lower frame striker plate, when the door is in the closed position. This is currently under investigation in conjunction with Airbus. Emirates have now fixed the problem. The blankets were placed around the door to abate the whistling sound emanating from the door, not to prevent the door from opening. There was no point during the incident where the safety of the flight was in jeopardy. In addition, the green light next to the door does not represent that the door is open. It is an Attendant Indication Panel and is used for communication information for the Cabin Crew."

This statement is given right at the end of the story, after all the damage has been done. No matter how ringing the denial, the Mail's piece is structured to deliver its 'terrifying ordeal' sucker punch before any factual statement from Emirates is made.

It's not a nice situation to be in - and it is one I have been in more times than I care to recall - when you get those incoming calls from newspapers - particularly the UK press. You've got to get onto the story fast, finding out whatever facts you can internally before deciding quite what to do externally. You have to check your facts scrupulously - a burden the journalist (as you can see from the above) doesn't necessarily have to bear. And then you have to decide quite what you're going to say in response to the story. When you've got a newspaper that reaches 100 million people, 'no comment' is rarely going to be the solution. But then getting into a point by point argument isn't smart, either - you're never going to get your point by point rebuttal in the front of the story and you're not going to stop the story running, either. Even if it's clearly rubbish.

One of the interesting aspects of communications in the online age is the role of communities - the reader comments provide plenty of rebuttal of the factual basis for the story - the Internet is famously self-correcting. The other one is speed - you don't even have the luxury of a few hours and the burden on the communicator is consequently multiplied, get to the facts, check them, consult, decide on a response, craft that response and have a follow-up plan in place. As you're doing this, the journalist will be pressuring you as much as possible - not only do they want to break their story first, but a harried and panicking comms guy can often be a journalist's best friend.

The key is to try and make one definitive statement that is as crisp and monolithic as possible. This is always easier when the picture is clear and straightforward (and when your flow of information internally is fast and totally reliable) and when you are quite sure you have absolutely all of the facts.

And pick your fights - deal with the umbrella charge, don't get led into trying to nitpick your way through a story so full of holes your statement loses its authority in a tide of 'he said, she said' rebuttal.

How To Sell To UAE Bloggers

I'm doing quite a lot of 'how to'ing recently, am't I? Don't worry, this isn't a book post...

This advice doesn't come from someone that runs amazing professional 'blogger outreach' programs because I don't really do very much of that. It comes from the other end of the horse - the blogger at the receiving end end.

While it's lovely to find you have been added to the Cision media distribution list and positively feted by PR people, many of the approaches seem to miss some reasonably basic thinking when it comes to seeking the engagement of people with blogs, popular Twitter accounts or much-liked Facebook pages. So these pointers might be helpful for future approaches.

1) Bloggers are people too.
I almost fell into the trap of labelling this one 'bloggers are not journalists' but this misses the fact that journalists (no matter how it goes against the grain to admit this) are also people. Little I have to say about approaching bloggers doesn't also apply to approaching journalists.

So by saying we're people too, what do I mean? I mean, for instance, that it would be nice if the approach were individual to me rather than generic. Saying you enjoy my thought-provoking blog is all very nice, but that hardly tells me you actually give a hoot or have ever read anything I have written.

If you had, you'd be aware that I'm much more likely to bite you than let you pat me on the head.

I am naturally going to feel more interested in helping you out if you've been a regular reader/commenter on this blog. Even a few words referring to why you think this blog would be interested in your new perfume line for dogs - ideally linked to some content I have posted here - would let me know you've at least had a stab at mapping the relevance of what you do to what I do. Shared interest is good. Irrelevance is bad.

2) Bloggers aren't there to cover your products
I know, it's amazing isn't it? But the majority of what I write in this blog is peculiar to me and the world around me. Inviting me to the Armani hotel to attend the launch of a new range of bamboo shopping trolleys will not have me gushing and bright-eyed at the prospect of going to such a wonderful place. I have never written about bamboo shopping trolleys before and have exhibited no interest in these items in the past (although now I'm quite sure Klout will include it in my areas of expertise and I'll own the category in search).    I don't write about products or review products. Ten minutes spent browsing the blog would mark me as a non-target for shopping trolley launches.

Fashion and food bloggers are more susceptible to these types of invitation if they relate to fashion or food and if they are somehow interesting and/or innovative. Food product launches are not likely to cut it. Fashion bloggers are (sorry guys, but you are) incredibly spoiled and will need something out of the ordinary or a great relationship having been established.

3) Bloggers have day jobs
There are few people in the Middle East making money out of blogging to the extent they don't have to earn money by doing something conventional like, say, working. So a Tuesday afternoon event is likely to be out of the question - an all-day gig mid-week, even if it's exciting and deeply tempting, will likely not cut ze mustard. We have jobs to go to. That means if you want to organise an amazing all-day event targeting bloggers, you'll probably have to work on a Friday. Altogether now? Aaaahhh.

4) Slowly slowly catchee monkey
An individual approach that is contextual will be much more likely to reap rewards than scatter-gun event invites. A great example here is how Nokia's PR agency, d'Abo & Co, used my recent highly public Twitter meltdown with my HTC Android mobile (there's nothing like a mobile perma-crashing and telling you it's 'quietly brilliant' every time it staggers back to its feet to get a chap's goat) to slip a Nokia Lumia into my life. It was a risky strategy, they had to have had real confidence in that product - but, having the expectation I'd hate the Lumia I actually loved it and didn't mind saying so. I don't feel beholden to them for lending me a mobile, but I did think their timing and smart approach was very well managed. I don't mean to be difficult, but I am generally brand antithetic. Some bloggers I am sure will love brands. Love 'em to death. Positively fawn over  'em. Let me know when you find one, eh?

So it's a matter of monitoring conversations (blogs, Twitter, Facebook, whatever) and mapping out your influencers (who IS an influencer?) before making an approach that is generally, as with any conversation, led by a contribution of some sort. Give forward to earn a place at the table.

By the way, most UAE blogs have relatively small readerships.

5) Build a community by being a member of the community
What is an influencer? A Klout score? Number of followers? Number of comments? You need to establish some metrics to decide at what level of influence it's worthwhile bringing someone onside - because you'll need to invest in the relationship. It's not a one-hit thing, the key word is the R one - relationship. Approaching a person, inviting their involvement and engagement with you, facilitating that engagement and maintaining a respectful (ie not 'we're targeting product messages at you because we think people listen to you') dialogue. That way you can bring influencers on board, typically one by one, and maintain that conversation to the point where you actually could organise a tweetup or other event and people would be happy to come. That'll take time and investment, but it's so much more effective than pumping out generic materials in the hope that bloggers will slavishly act as botnets for your product messages.

That's my 2p worth. I genuinely hope marketers out there find it useful.

UAE BlackBerry 10s Need A Data Plan

BlackBerry Employees Count Down to BlackBerry 10 (Photo credit: Official BlackBerry Images)

There has been quite a lot of confusion globally about the new BlackBerry 10 smartphone and how you access BlackBerry services. In the good old days, your BB worked seamlessly and gave you access to roaming data and messaging - a key reason for its wild popularity in the Gulf. The new BB Z10 will NOT do that. You're going to need to join the riff-raff and subscribe to a data plan. If you try and use that puppy when you're roaming, heaven alone knows what the consequences will be, but standard roaming data rates with both Etisalat and Du are a whopping Dhs 1 per 30 kilobytes of data.

To put that in perspective - a Gigabyte is a thousand Megabytes and a Megabyte is a thousand Kilobytes. So 1 Gig of data at that rate would be around Dhs 33,000. Bargain, huh?

A smartphone will happily gorge its way through thirty kilobytes of data in about the time it takes a fly to hit a windscreen (What's the last thing to go through a fly's mind when it hits the windscreen? Its bum). I've got a 1 GB data plan and manage to keep a lid on it, but I'm by no means a heavy user. And I frequently find myself bobbing up towards the limit by the end of the month. Smartphones are constantly online, downloading this, checking that, updating the other. When you hit YouTube with a vengeance or start using them as a tethered wireless hotspot, the old byteometer starts whizzing around. It's why having a mobile that defaults automatically to WiFi is a godsend - particularly when all your apps decide they need to be updated at once, which happens every other day as far as I can see.

So to be clear, if you've bought the BB10, you're not covered by BIS any more - you need to get a data plan.

Luckily, both of the UAE's operators have BB10 ready plans, although Etisalat seems more ready than its rival - it offers four BB packages ranging from Dhs 49 to Dhs 299. The Dhs 49 package doesn't work with the Z10, so you'll need to start with the 'BlackBerry Complete' plan at Dhs 79. If you want roaming, the most expensive plan, the Dhs 299 'BlackBerry global' will give you 20 MB of roaming data. With roaming data speeds on offer of 2 Mbps, you're looking at using that abundant allowance of data in a little over a minute's access.

Du's plans seem a great deal more sketchy - at least the way they're presented online makes it look that way. And Du's roaming data is via its roaming data daily bundle - a one-time charge of Dhs50 which is valid for 24 hours and buys between 3 and 8 MB of data, depending where you are. Which is even less than Etisalat and a pretty useless amount of data.

At least Etisalat has started sending warning messages out when you hit your data plan limit, but the chances are we can look forward to puzzled UAE BlackBerry users wondering why their lovely new BB Z10 smartphone is suddenly gobbling credits like a PacMan on crack. There's an argument the operators should be louder and clearer on the new arrangement, communicating it effectively to consumers before they make the decision to buy the new handset.

But that would be far too sensible, wouldn't it?

(This post is thanks to Gerald Donovan, who originally brought this issue to light)

Viral and Virality

virus (Photo credit: twenty_questions)

It has been quite a week for things viral around here - I posted the other day about Gerald Donovan's amazing interactive 360 degree Burj Khalifa panorama of Dubai and my professional involvement with the campaign to get it 'out there'.

Like many of my colleagues, I have always had contempt for ad agency people who announce they are setting out to create 'viral content' because they are almost certainly doomed to failure. The harder you try to create something with that quality, the more likely you are to find yourself naked in a crowded square holding something dead in your hand with small children jeering at you. In a cold wind.

There are also some burning questions inherent in the use of the term. How many/how fast is 'viral'? What makes viral things viral? What is the 'quality' of viral? The answer to the latter is 'Nobody knows' - a cat falling off a desk, Justin Beiber, Gerald's pano - these are all different types of viral. You can set out to create a piece of content that people will really, really want to share and watch it die the death of the neglected, while at the same time a puppy being scared by a hoover being switched on spreads across the Internet like nightshade falling across the earth in a one minute motion-capture. It's almost unguessable.

One man who knows more than most about how to create great, engaging content is Matthew Inman. He's the chap behind that most humorous of websites, The Oatmeal. His presentation on going viral, given at South by Southwest two years ago makes impressive watching. It contains learnings and is very, very funny. Which is as good as you can get, really. The whole thing's an hour, but you can drop the Q&A and not miss much, to be honest. It's linked here for your viewing pleasure.

You'll perhaps note that The Oatmeal doesn't really set out to be 'viral' as such, but Inman does create a constant flow of solid, amusing and shareable content. He has a wide (millions) viewership and enormous followings on Twitter and Facebook, both platforms he uses to extend the reach of The Oatmeal and draw readers to the content he's posting on The Oatmeal itself. Although he doesn't use, or need, the likes of Reddit anymore, he used them heavily to establish the site, participating in those communities to seed content among aggressive sharers by being one of them.

But his stuff wouldn't have got anywhere if it hadn't been distinctive, unusual and highly entertaining - shareable and willingly adopted (at least initially) by those communities of sharers.

If you have amazing content and a strong, well-implemented strategy you can improve your chances, but it's still pretty hit and miss. Even I, as stunning as I find Mr. D's work (and I have watched his images 'go viral' in the past - he does seem to have a 'nose' for it), had a wobble or two early this week.

If you're building a property online (A website, a campaign or a brand), there's no substitute for building audiences and communities organically. And that means not one flash in the pan event, but a constant flow of high quality, relevant, engaging content. It's a long road - but there's no panacea. Whatever the guy with the ponytail from the agency claims he can do with 'a viral'...

Old Gems - Why I Hate PR Bunnies

 (Photo credit: Wikipedia)

I stumbled across an abandoned project from 2006/2007, back when we were starting to wake up to the changes being wrought in the digital world around us. Before I started this blog, I was playing with a Wiki called Orientations, which I used to dump various bits and pieces into, like the frustrated writer I was.

I had kept a number of articles and so on I had written for various magazines, which reminded me that I had written a column in Communicate under the pseudonym of Mike Gruff. Mike was another frustrated writer project, which involved me assuming the persona of a misanthropic old journalist ranting against the world around him and playing it for laughs.

The following piece remains one of my favourite Gruff moments but one, sadly that Communicate's editor, Chris Wright, got cold feet on. He seemed to think admitting to murder in an article might lead to some sort of consequences. So it never ran. Now, five years on, it can see the light of day!!!

I hope you enjoy it as much as I enjoyed writing it!

__________________________________________________________

I hate PR bunnies. In Europe, you can spot them because of the backpack. All PR bunnies wear those little backpacks. This is a sound piece of information, as it allows the discerning journo to avoid them like the plague before they come leaping up to you, filled with the certitude of youth and overflowing with corporate messaging that they feel the urgent need to deliver to the nearest sap with a pair of ears.

In the Middle East, they’re not so easy to spot, although the sight of studded leather handbags and big hairdos is beginning to make me nervous. The trouble isn’t really the women, though. The male PR bunny is much harder to pinpoint here. They tend to wear suits. This is cheating. In Europe they’re more likely to wear polo shirts with a company logo or ‘I’m Keith and I want to be your best friend’ badges. Suits can creep up on you more easily.

PR bunnies are like mad tape loops, a sort of messaging Teletubbie. Believe me, the last thing an ageing, bitter and hung-over hack needs in the morning is that megawatt Prozac smile and a dose of relentless positivity delivered in American corporatespeak. “Hey! Mike! Great! Cool! So, what do you think of this new paradigm in self-eclipsing product development? We think it’s a really profound move!”

I’ve killed one, you know. Somebody will get the smell from the liftshaft one day and they’ll find the body. It was all too much and a red mist descended. Nobody was looking and the press pack was heavy with useless verbiage and CDs full of dumb pictures. I swung and it was over in a second, hardly an ‘eek’ before I found myself dragging a body into the darkness. I was late into the press conference, but I just got the usual raised eyebrows from the suits and heard someone mutter, “Typical. They’re never on time.”

Like they own you.

Nobody ever missed the bunny. I doubt they ever will. Until, like I say, someone gets the smell.

You’d have thought someone would actually train them to have some kind of empathy with the people they’re supposed to be working with. Journalism’s not a difficult thing to understand. We want news and hard facts. So that means it has to be new or different and it has to be based on some kind of fact. No amount of rabid corporate messaging can disguise the complete absence of news and fact in a story and any half-decent journalist can see through the blurt instantly. That doesn’t stop bunnies evangelising the empty, which is why I suppose they can be so annoying. The other thing that’s irritating is that their need always seems to come before ours. We’re looking for a story, they’re looking for an interview or a bum on a seat at an event. So we get approached with “You must interview my client. He’s really interesting!”

There’s rarely any quality of thought to the approach. It’s programmatic…

10 Journalist response: “Why?”
20 Big Smile™ “Because he’s interesting!”
30 GOTO 10

The fact that a journalist wants news, information and insight is totally secondary to bunny culture PR. The bunny’s job is to impress the client and deliver willing, sheep-like press to do the client’s bidding. The fact that most journalists are not comfortable to play this role appears to escape bunnies, I truly believe this is because they use a special skin-thickening cream that they apply at night. I have also, incidentally, sometimes wondered if PR bunnies get their vitamin B12 in the same scatologically nocturnal way as real rabbits. I fervently hope that they do.

The other essence of bunny culture is the need to pretend to the client that they really, really get on with journalists. I once had the extreme pleasure of a bunny introducing me to a client like I was an old family friend and turning to the client with a “Sorry, but who on earth IS this person?” Yes, I know it was naughty. But let’s face it, not as bad as the lift shaft.

Don’t get me wrong. There are good and even great PRs out there. People that know a news story when they see one, sell good information that’s well packaged and thought through and that have taken the trouble to actually understand the proposition they’re pushing, the media they’re dealing with and that work hard to be professional, pleasant and helpful rather than pushy, insistent and relentlessly mindless. They’re a pleasure to deal with, at least in part because they’re so hard to spot in that sea of twitching, whiskery noses and floppy ears.

Sharjah Water Disruption - A Lesson In Communication?

(Photo credit: Wikipedia)

Many, many years ago I was on a business trip to Austria when some loon or another decided to dump a dhow-load of dead cows into the Gulf off Sharjah. The resulting flotsam got caught up in the intake of Sharjah's main desalination plant, causing a shutdown and an Emirate-wide water shortage.

I arrived back clutching a couple of bottles of nice German sekt to find our water tanks draining fast. Soon enough, we'd run dry. Three increasingly dirty days later I decided enough was enough and popped to our local 'cold store' where I bought several cases of Masafi. These filled the bath quite nicely, thank you, and we popped a bottle of cold sekt and enjoyed a little taste of the life everyone at home believes for some reason we live every day - we bathed in spring water and drank champagne.

I'd better get the bubbly in, because it's all apparently set to happen again. Khaleej Times broke the story three days ago (Gulf News ran it as a NIB today) - from next week (November 28th to be precise), Sharjah's main desalination plant at Al Layyah will undergo maintenance with six days of 'disruption' to the water supply. Interestingly, the GN story refers to a message  circulated to residents by SEWA (The Sharjah Electricity and Water Authority), which is news to me. It also refers to the 'Al Liya desalination plant', which is one of those problems we face with place names here - the Al Layyah plant, Sharjah's central power station and desalination plant, is located in the Al Layyah area, near Sharjah port. It's also the main centre for bottling Sharjah's Zulal branded water (although there's a new plant in Dhaid which bottles groundwater, thereby confusing anyone who wonders if Zulal is desalinated water or spring water. It's actually both, it would seem!).

Al Layyah is one of (as far as I can find out) four desalination plants in Sharjah - there are also plants in Khor Fakkan, Kalba and Hamriya. The GN piece refers to disruption in "Al Khan, Al Majaz, the Corniche, Khalid Lagoon and other areas", which is typically - and infuriatingly, obtuse. What are those 'other areas'? If last time is anything to go by, pretty much all of Sharjah. Why didn't the papers think to question the announcement and get better quality information into our hands? This type of question is the route to madness, of course. The answer is 'because'.

Of course, the best thing to do is go to SEWA's website which will have all the information concerned consumers will need, won't it? No, of course it won't. It'll have a piece on how SEWA has, apparently, briefed Credit Suisse on its future expansion plans. While I am pleased for both Credit Suisse and SEWA, it's not the information I'm after. The delightfully 1990s retro feel website contains absolutely no reference to the 'planned disruption' at all, in fact.

So all we know is there is to be  'planned disruption', that supply will not be cut off but that we are being urged to stockpile water while we can. Oh, and that "after the completion of the work, water supply would be better than before."

We are all mushrooms.

Update - I didn't think of this at the time of this post, but Sarah did. Of all the times in the year to pick for this 'scheduled disruption', they've picked National Day weekend, a holiday weekend when load on the system is going to go through the roof. Nice...

A Tale Of Two Revolutions

Photo credit: Wikipedia

They are the best of times, they are the worst of times.

The Industrial Revolution changed the world and brought us to the world we have today. The compelling combination of innovation and communications transformed society, at first in the United Kingdom, where it had its roots, but then spreading to America, Europe and the rest of the world. The confluence of mechanisation, improvements in transport and communications and entrepeneurialism transformed agrarian societies and created industrial powerhouses that brought wealth and opportunity - and created poverty and appalling illnesses, too. It tore society apart and remade it. Constantly.

In the latter C18th and into the C19th, that revolution built cities as it emptied rural communities. The old ways had changed and people, from legislators down to the common man, had to find ways of adapting to the furious pace of change our world was suddenly pitched into. Life would never be the same again, from our views on community, family and morality through to the expectations we had of our rights and place in society.

Sound familiar?

Imagine, then, a country that took one look at the industrial revolution and threw up its hands in horror at the very prospect of change. Oh no, not for us these naughty steam engines, looms and ironclads! We'd rather stay tilling the land! These countries would arguably be the ones that would subsequently fall to the inevitable rush for empire - because an entrepeneurial revolution sustained by free market economics will inevitably cause expansion into new markets. And the sheer force of the explosion will open those markets by hook or by crook. As it did in the C18th, as Europe's powers jostled to dominate smaller, less able countries who were still in 'the dark ages' compared to these new, brash economies.

An alternative model might be to try and cherry pick from the revolution. We want the steam engine and the mill, but we'd rather not have looms if that's all the same to you. And we'll take canals, but pass on the roads. The trouble with this is that innovation revolutions are integrated - any part of the set of available innovations that is not embraced and made competitive will create a market opportunity for the expanding revolutionaries.

And so it is with the Internet Protocol in the UAE. And although the Internet is the core technology of our new revolution, it is merely a road network. The producers of raw materials, the refiners and manufacturers need hauliers to find their markets, but once the canals and roads are built, that's about it. You can build roads and charge tolls, but you can't own the traffic or the goods that pass over the roads.

Critically, you can't dictate to road users what they must pay to use your road if you are competing with other transport networks - the market then defines price. So when you have a Microsoft retiring Messenger and replacing it with Skype, the global VoIP provider whose website is blocked in the UAE, you face a very clear choice - one you have failed to face,  but known about, for years now. Do you reject the revolution (an attitude that has long been your inclination) or do you accept that you have no choice but to compete in the newly transformed environment or inevitably fail?

Both of the UAE's telcos now work on wholly IP based infrastructure. And yet we pay Dhs1.50 for a text message. That's the most expensive 160 bytes of data imaginable. Extrapolate that to a 1Gbyte month and you'd be shelling out about nine million dirhams ($2.5 million) for a normal data package. You can see how WhatsApp starts to look attractive, can't you?

Telcos have no choice but to adapt to the IP (and by that I mean VoIP) era. Their revenue models will have to change, they'll have to lean up and cut staff. I watched thousands of jobs go in the years I worked with Jordan Telecom going through just such a transformation. It's not pretty, but that's revolutions for you. They'll have to find new ways of creating products and services relevant in an IP world. I'd say the solution lies in transactional commerce over IP networks, but hell I'm just a PR guy what would I know?

Right now, we're busy sitting on a chair squawking 'go back' at the waves. But they're waves of innovation and they're inexorable...

Fakhreddine

Image via Wikipedia

I flew to Jordan this week to speak and also gave a workshop on digital communications at the MediaME Digital Summit. In my humble opinion, MediaME - together with ArabNet and Click - is one of the region's critical digital events and this year's conference featured some great speakers (present company etc etc) and much thought-provoking opinion and debate.

It was slightly odd to be back in Jordan after having hit the 'go' button on the Middle East print edition of Olives (A Violent Romance) - somehow the book has become solid, concrete now. The King's Highway (the road from the airport to Amman, but also the Kingdom's core arterial route from Amman to Aqaba) is being rebuilt and is apparently to become a privatised toll route. The new airport will be ready by summer next year. And Amman nightclub Nai has been refurbished and rebranded. Just as well, after the incidents recounted in Olives! Did I mention you can now buy Olives as a printed book at amazon.com, BTW? I did? Ah, okay then...

During the workshop at MediaME, I used this silly wee blog as an example of SEO, pointing out how mad it was that I 'owned' Amman's delightful Fakhreddine restaurant on Google. If you Google 'Fakhreddine Amman' you don't get the restaurant itself (as you rightly should - it's a must visit if you're staying in Amman and want to eat some of the best Arab food the Levant can dish up), but you do get me.

This is not a good thing. It's a compelling reason for the restaurant to invest some money in SEO and grabbing back its ownership of its brand.

I got a comment from the audience - "Actually, we're their agency and if you Google just 'Fakhreddine' you get our client!

No you don't. You get Fakhr Al Din, various Fakhreddines, the restaurant in Broumana (Lebanon) and me. You don't get Amman's famous Lebanese/Arabic/Levantine (delete as your preference dictates) restaurant Fakhreddine. If you Google 'Fakhreddine restaurant' you get Fakhreddine Broumana, London and me in that order. You don't get Fakhreddine Amman. And that's mad, because the place is famous and generally celebrated for its excellence.

I wish I'd stopped the workshop to look it up then and there. If Amman's Fakhreddine had a website (if it does, I can't find it), I'd do a post specifically to right the wrong and redirect hungry Googlers to the right place, because I really do appreciate and support this most excellent of restaurants and wish it nothing but the very best.

But it does, like so many Middle Eastern businesses, need to get smarter about its online presence and search parameters.

When Sorry Doesn't Wash: NewsCorp and BP compared.

What have News Corp and BP got in common?

The UK's newspapers all carried advertisements from media mogul Rupert Murdoch's News Corporation headed 'We are sorry' this week. Which is an interesting response to the whole phone hacking furore (phonegate, if you likes your clichés). Murdoch himself has given but one interview on the whole debacle, to the Wall Street Journal, which he happens to own.

He has not responded to any other media. He has not said one word himself, but has relied on this advertisement to do the job for him. This is nice, as it avoids him actually having to say the words. It's different, you know, actually saying you are sorry rather than getting an ad agency to write up some 'sorry' copy.

It's a lesson BP learned (or perhaps didn't) over deep sea oil spill screwupgate. They spent $50 million on a glib 'sorry' ad campaign that backlashed harder than a snapped high-tension cable. Although CEO Tony Hayward actually appears in the video, something that Murdoch has failed to do in addressing the increasingly serious tumult around his company's journalistic ethics, Hayward didn't actually say sorry. Really, truly, sorry. Using advertising tactics to put out reassuring images isn't saying sorry. Talking about how you're making it all better isn't sorry. Saying 'We really, really screwed up and we recognise that' in person - now that's saying sorry.

You can't apologise by proxy and expect to be taken seriously.

And that's the key to the Murdoch ads. How many people think he truly is sorry? And how many think he just bought space rather than get out there and express true, humble, real contrition? And if he's not sorry after all - what's going to change moving forwards?

Google+ -- Information Overload?

Parental Guidance Warning. This video is icky.

It's like a helter skelter, this social media business. And there are times when you might just want to get off before your head explodes.

Google+ has finally pitched me into information overload. I'm dealing with too many streams of information and it's becoming uncomfortable. I know I'm an unusually 'connnected' person: quite apart from the Twitter, Facebook, Blogger triangle, I handle reasonably large volumes of email and follow a lot of blogs and sites. I'm rarely truly offline. It's one reason I find it funny when my bank tells me they tried to get in touch with me but couldn't. I mean, there are people who actively try to avoid me and find it hard. It got so bad that when we returned from getting stuck under the Tikkipukkapokka, or whatever it was called, Icelandic ash cloud, I actually gave interviews to media amused that I had been caught offline in a totally analogue rural lighthouse.

Apart from the radio shows, conferences and other presentations and workshops I do, I'm also spending most of my days managing one aspect or another of online communications. Online stuff has come to dominate my working life as we have started to transition from 'traditional' public relations practice to integrate more and more online thinking into our communications work with clients. When you add stuff like GeekFest which, despite my best efforts to be UNinvolved still has created a regional network of Facebook and Twitter feeds with thousands of people behind them, you can start to appreciate how very, well, online things are.

And that's been fine. I've been good with it. I've used a few wee tricks to help things glide along: I'm not a huge fan of Facebook, but the blog updates my Facebook page with every post so at least there's the appearance of engagement. I rely quite heavily on NetVibes, an RSS reader which organises my many streams of information into nice, manageable tabs that let me dip into updates of what's relevant when it suits me. Twitter has become a comfortable background habit, a sort of place you drop into on the way from a completed activity to a new one. (If you find me on Twitter at the weekend, chances are that Sarah's trying on some new clothes in the shop.) And I have been quite selective about what 'social media' sites I use, so although I'm 'on' Quora, FourSquare and the like (you have to understand what makes them tick, at the very least, if you're going to advise clients), I'm not active.

Strangely, most of my writer friends are on Facebook and fewer use Twitter. Another oddity is that people have started commenting on blogposts on Twitter rather than using Blogger's comments feature. It's always fascinating to see the shifting dynamics of different networks and their interactions, a little like the iridescence of oil on water.

But Google+ has presented me with a dilemma. Do I stay or do I go? It's yet another social network, it's becoming more demanding as more people have joined up and started to poke around, exploring what the new room looks like. It extends the powerful sharing capabilities of Twitter, allowing longer posts than 140 characters along with link sharing, but brings the powerful 'circles' feature to bear. Circles are like Facebook's 'Lists', but are more siloed - you share easily with only the circles you want to share with.

It's very similar indeed to Facebook, in fact, but it's a lot faster - perhaps a result of the fact that it's still dominated by 'early adopters' and therefore a geekier, more aggressively 'sharey' crowd.. I was asked what Google+ was like yesterday and I replied "More Facebook than Twitter but more Twitter than Facebook". If that doesn't seem helpful, well, I don't know.

Google+ is disruptive. It's Facebook at near-Twitterspeed. I'm finding I have to consciously decide whether to share information on Twitter or Google+ and frequently wondering why I'm sharing at all and just don't bother. The world, as a consequence, has not ended. Life has gone on. The one decision I have not had to make is whether to share on Facebook, because I never really considered it a sharing platform in the same way as Twitter, for instance. and yet Google+ is just that - it makes it very easy to share links, pictures and thoughts. It combines some of the learnings from Buzz and Wave and makes crowdsourcing and conversation easy. But the wide-ranging topics and speed of updates are slightly scary and very distracting. Even Google has been caught out with the volumes - they had issues with their notification management servers as a result of demand spikes from Google+.

A TweetDeck for Google+ may be the answer, a Circle Manager. It might be that we evolve better techniques to manage circles based on topics and content flows rather than relationships.

But right now, Google+ is a time-suck and I'm having to consciously invest in it as everyone tries to figure it out. I suppose the great difference is I'm still there looking around - with Wave and Buzz, I was out of there within 48 hours. This time it's more sticky.

The jury's still out, but I'm beginning to see how Google+ could well do what Orkut failed to do. But something's got to give somewhere - we're fast approaching the point where I cannot see how people could maintain yet another platform. I reckon two's company, but three's a crowd.

Anyone else out there reached a limit?

The ENOC Case Study Continues

Image via WikipediaSorry, but I started following this story and I can't seem to tear my eyes away from the wreckage even as I try. Today's newspapers report Dubai based petroleum company ENOC's denial of yesterday's Gulf News story.

Yes, that's right. ENOC Group suddenly had something to say after something like a month of obdurate silence.

Top honours to The National once more, which carries a better researched and more rounded story, taking the opportunity to recap the whole episode and referring to ENOC, with perhaps a grim smile as it rewards weeks of treating the press as if they don't exist or matter, as a 'troubled company'. Khaleej Times couldn't bring itself to name its long-term rival and refers to 'reports in a section of the English media'. Gulf News itself wasn't for stepping down, running ENOC's denial but affirming its report that 'sources in the oil industry confirmed the possibility that other retailers have shown interest in assuming responsibility for those [ENOC's] operations'

Breaking its long silence has certainly brought ENOC to the fore again and will once again step up the pressure from media and the public for some form of clarity. Sadly, there hasn't been a lot of that around but ENOC's statement to the media yesterday does rather protest too much when it accuses Gulf News of baseless speculation.

Here are five rules of Public Relations that may help:

Rule One
News expands to fill a vacuum
This is a Great Truth of Public Relations. If you do not speak clearly and with purpose, you leave room for speculation. The media, like the people it represents, will speculate. Experts, pundits, the public will all speculate. Many will happily speculate for the media to use in its own speculative stories. If you decide to issue 'no comment' or, worse, not to pick up the phone, you have invited speculation round to yours for dinner and have no right to complain when your paintwork gets scratched and your carpet ruined.

Rule Two
Responding to speculation legitimises it
If you respond to one speculative report, you respond to all of them. Many major corporates have a policy of not responding to rumour or speculation, precisely because you really don't want to start affirming or denying purely speculative plays. It's actually a journalistic technique, to speculatively assert something to see if you get a 'bite'. By all means respond to legitimate public concern and hard facts presented to you. But don't fail to respond to those and reserve your powder just to waste it on speculation.

Rule Three
Don't pretend to play hardball
ENOC's statement asks for an apology from Gulf News. This was, in my professional opinion, a basic error (one of very many). Gulf News hasn't apologised and has stood by its story. So where are you going to go now, big shot? If you just let that go now, you just affirmed the story, which only ever discussed a possibility in its original form. Discussing a possibility is, of course, pure speculation. Better not to have gone there in the first place, IMHO...

Rule Four
Tell the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth
Interestingly, ENOC's statement only comments on one aspect of Gulf News' story, the possibility that ADNOC will be given the running of ENOC stations in Sharjah and the northern emirates. It doesn't comment on part of the story that discussed ENOC requesting a lifting of the price cap or the strong rejection of proposed solutions by government officials. It only talks to one fact in the whole story, but has now established the principle that ENOC will comment to correct facts presented by media. It's not a rounded statement, where one was most certainly called for.

Rule Five
Have a communications strategy
Have an agreed strategy in place, don't just go knee-jerking all over the shop. The National today gleefully trots out the original statement made to media by ENOC, that the affected stations were subject to 'technical upgrades' and the subsequent lack of any evidence to that effect. Having made a statement that few, if any, believed and then followed that up by totally ignoring the media, the company has now arguably lost public trust. As one commentator in today's National story has it:

“I doubt they want to hang onto the whole network, otherwise they would have supplied them. We’ve gone beyond that point now. It’s all speculation of course, but Enoc may just be trying to get a better price for them.”

That's pretty cynical, no? But it's hard to see what the company's management of the media and public transparency aspects of this story has done to mitigate such cynicism from the public, pundits and media.

Silence. The New Comment.

Image via WikipediaI know I've been going on about this, but it really is such a brilliant case study. The Great Sharjah Fuel Crisis continues, with ENOC and EPPCO stations shut down last Friday by Sharjah police after having failed to supply fuel to residents in Sharjah and the Northern Emirates for a month.

As I predicted a while ago, the story started to internationalise - this story in the UK's Daily Telegraph (kind enough to quote yours truly) talks of 'baffled' residents in this oil rich nation unable to buy fuel. Tellingly it ends with these words: "No one from either ENOC or the other main petrol company affected, Emarat, was available for comment."

Bloomberg filed an excellent piece today, linked here, which continues the trend of international interest in the story. Being a newswire, the Bloomberg piece has made it into a number of interntional newspapers and websites. Bloomberg's story, an in-depth analysis of the situation, makes an important link between the ENOC Group issue and Dubai's indebtedness and economic stability, as well as drawing some interesting conclusions regarding political stability. The story isn't going away, in short, and now it's arguably starting to affect Dubai's reputation in a broader sense. I would humbly suggest this would not have been the case if there had been an agreed and effectively implemented communications strategy to start with.

Tellingly, the Bloomberg story contains these words: "An ENOC spokesman declined to comment when contacted by Bloomberg. A Dubai government spokeswoman didn’t respond to an email requesting for comment, and an official in Abu Dhabi National Oil Co. public relations division didn’t answer calls to his office and mobile phone"

Gulf News filed today with a follow-up story on the issue, which talks about the Sharjah government's resolution in solving the issue. You'd almost think journalists were keeping the story alive to punish the silent spokespeople, wouldn't you?

Somehow tenacious GN hack Deena Kamel Yousef managed to get through to the man so many journalists have failed to buttonhole and so the GN story contains this timeless quote from ENOC's Silent Spokesperson: "I cannot give a statement now, don't ask me questions I cannot answer. I agree that we should be more transparent, I agree 150 per cent, but we have directives not to talk about this issue now."

Deliciously, Deena twists the knife: "Pressed for answers, he made casual comments on the weather to change the subject."

Tellingly, the GN story also points out that: "Enoc's silent spell lasted for about two weeks while the spokesperson was on holiday after the trouble started. Repeated attempts by Gulf News to contact the company were unanswered."

On holiday? You're kidding, right?

Digital Day

Image via WikipediaYou've got to admit, any conference organiser that offers to have their carefully assembled and constructed event chaired by me has to have their heads examined. But sure enough, you'll always find a looney on the bus and the organisers of Dubai's Click 5.0 digital media conference, IQPC, have gone ahead and done just that.

It's going to be an interesting day, and not just because the gig's being chaired by a gibbering lunatic - there are some really good speakers and some smart, practical case studies planned, including one session entitled 'How to sell social media to your CEO' which has me fascinated already.

If you haven't got tickets yet, you're too late - but you can follow proceedings at #Click5. Any complaints about the chairman are obviously to be ignored...

Is Silence Golden?

Image via WikipediaGulf News confirms what my eyes can see - EPPCO and ENOC stations in Sharjah have been sealed off today, shut down by the Sharjah government because the company failed to respond to the Sharjah Executive Council's (quite proper) concerns that a major supplier of petrol and diesel to people living here has simply failed to pump any of the stuff for something like a month now.

Worse, the company chose (as I have pointed out many times, with apologies for the repetition) to maintain a policy of stoicism - silence in response to the media and silence in response to the Sharjah government. The end result? They've been shut down and their brand is in tatters, reduced to a laughing stock.

The petrol company in a leading oil producing nation that couldn't actually supply petrol. That's pretty special, no?

ENOC/EPPCO - Thrown Out of Sharjah?

Image via WikipediaThe Emirates National Oil Company and the Emirates Petroleum Products Company, better known to us all as ENOC/EPPCO, or the ENOC Group, are facing a deadline to get their forecourts pumping fuel or face closure, according to today's papers who all delightedly slapped the news on their front pages.

As Mark Twain once said, "Never pick a fight with someone who orders ink by the barrel."

According to the reports (The National does by far the best job of reporting the story, BTW), the Sharjah Executive Council through the Sharjah Economic Department set a 72 hour deadline Tuesday (it meets each Tuesday) for the company to get its stations in Sharjah working again, which would give it until tomorrow (Friday) to comply. The ENOC Group operates 82 outlets across Sharjah and the Northern Emirates. Well, operated. They've been failing to actually sell any petrol for the past month.

The National reports that the penalty for non-compliance will be the closure of all service stations and facilities operated by the company in Sharjah. That's pretty hard-core.

The whole situation has been rendered that much more ridiculous by the company's early attempt at shrugging off the problem with a little slice of the mendacity that so many organisations here so readily employ when asked anything even remotely challenging by media. It appears we're learning the lessons all too slowly - it's not just print media that matter now: when you say your forecourts are closed because they're being upgraded, you can bet your bottom dollar that there are thousands of eye witnesses out there more than willing to share the 'Oh no they're not' online - with each other and, of course, with any watching media.

After that little slice of silliness, the company has refused any comment at all, every report in the media graced with the failure of the ENOC Group spokespeople to return calls or comment. The ongoing policy of silence in the face of public concern and the questions of media haven't helped the company at all. The explanation delivered to the Sharjah Executive Council (one was, apparently) is being treated by confidential by the SEC, but the papers have enough energy experts quoting away for us to be able to substantiate what commenters to my much, much earlier posts on this have said: the issue is one of being willing and able to continue to supply petrol at a loss because the company buys fuel on international markets and then has to sell at locally regulated prices, which are substantially lower.

Given this is the case, you'd be forgiven for wondering why they didn't just go ahead and say it. If the intention is to promote a change in the regulations or to gain some assistance in subsidizing the price of fuel, what could the possible harm be of letting the debate take place in public? If the company had been open and transparent about the situation in the first place, enunciated the issue and its position, it would likely have people understanding the issue and the company's response. There's even an argument that it would have prompted a faster and more positive resolution to the whole situation by bringing it out into the open.

Now they're facing being shut down and I can't see many tears being shed - particularly if they'll be replaced by nice, shiny ADNOC stations.

As Bad As It Gets

It can't get much worse than this. The latest development in the UAE's petrol shortage saga is that the Executive Council of Sharjah, one of the seven Emirates that makes up the UAE, has demanded an end to the petrol shortages and a full explanation of what's behind them by the end of today from Enoc/Eppco.

It's a clear enough sign that the Executive Council doesn't buy the pump upgrade story, either. But then, did anyone?

How bad can it get for a company? When do you have to recognise that mendacity and silence won't wash any more - that you actually owe a duty to people? When a government is forced to call you to task publicly and demand answers from you? I guess that's about as bad as it gets.

As Matthias, son of Deuteronomy of Gath, tells us: "Worse? How could it be worse?"

Of Genies And Bottles

Apart from a vague and popularly considered mendacious statement about pump upgrades, the petrol station operators responsible for the fuel shortages in the UAE have remained silent. Both Gulf News and The National report today with sidenotes to the effect that no spokesperson could be reached from Enoc/Eppco or Emarat. And, in fact, The National notes that officials from Jebel Ali Port were also unavailable or not commenting.

Gulf News today played catch-up with The National, which sent reporters to Enoc/Eppco petrol stations to determine that no pump upgrade work was going on, as it reported yesterday. GN today files on 'sceptical motorists' who point out, as I have indeed found, that stations 'closed for upgrading' miraculously open after the supply truck has swung by. The National has, once again, done a sterling job.

The lack of transparency is so stunning, it's amusing. This is, indeed, humour of the incongruous. And, of course, by failing to tackle the very proper concern of the general public, the operators are making it all a great deal worse. The papers are rubbishing the statements and talking to petrol pump attendants, motorists, analysts - in fact, anyone who'll talk to them. The result is a rising tide of reporting and growing public alarm which is leading to panic buying. This, of course, is putting more pressure on those stations that do have fuel and now even Adnoc stations are running dry despite the fact that they don't actually have an underlying supply problem.

So by staying silent, the operators are creating an ever-larger rod for their own backs. Tell people what the problem is, how you're solving it and how long it'll take. It's not actually very difficult.

What's the solution? Well, even the most hide-bound of morons would have worked out by now that the genie is out of the bottle. Social media, that Internetty thing, allows people to share opinions and views - so we all know what the papers are trying to prove - the stations aren't closing for upgrades. They haven't got any fuel to sell us because deliveries aren't coming through. There is a very real and basic problem here and it's not logistics or maintenance. As Gulf News quotes Kate Dourian, Middle East editor at Platts:

"Emarat, like the other two main gasoline suppliers, Enoc and Eppco, has for years been operating at a loss because it buys product at international prices and sells at government-regulated prices below market value."

This GN story goes into some depth regarding the subsidies issue.

That's not an 'issue at Jebel Ali' or a 'pump upgrade'. That's a very real systemic problem that could well have medium to long term effects - the issue has been bubbling under for months, with incidents of shortages going back to last year. So this is hardly a new situation - there has been plenty of time to plan a better, smarter communications strategy than dumb silence and unsustainable assertions.

The irony is, of course, that if irate consumers withdraw their custom, these companies will breathe a sigh of relief! So why not just clam up and wait for it to all blow over? Once supplies are restarted, people will forget all about it and life will go back to normal. They're not answerable to any consumer association or ombudsman, so a strategy of silence won't do them any harm, right?

Wrong. It's yet more bad publicity for the country as a whole (the oil producer that ran out of fuel - wait for the internationals to pick that one up) driven by old-fashioned contempt for the media and public that has resulted in considerable concern and inconvenience for a large chunk of the population.

We can all see the genie. Perhaps it's time for the operators to tell us what they're planning to do about it. When they do, they can console themselves with this: there's no shame in telling the truth.