The Importance of Good Archdiocesan "Communications"

A few people have asked my thoughts on the latest "situation" between the Archdiocese of Detroit, Michael Voris, and Real Catholic TV. I wont go into the entire story if you haven't heard it, but if you'd like a quick summary you can read this [Link].

As usual, everyone seems to have a take. I'd love to link to all the folks discussing the matter, but this post would then be full of links, and you would never get back to my blog.

Canon 216

†

Can. 216 Since they participate in the mission of the Church, all the Christian faithful have the right to promote or sustain apostolic action even by their own undertakings, according to their own state and condition. Nevertheless, no undertaking is to claim the name Catholic without the consent of competent ecclesiastical authority.

Does Canon 216 apply?

†

Yes... and seemingly, maybe not? Regardless of what anyone thinks of Voris, I believe Archbishop Vigneron has a duty to safeguard the word/term/meaning/identity of "Catholic" within his Archdiocese. So, he can and should oversee any 'apostolic action' within the Archdiocese using the name Catholic. That would seemingly be Real Cathoilc TV. Yet, it isn't that simple, and I think most people see the nuanced situation here. Right or wrong, Brammer and RCTV are claiming that the 'competent ecclesiastical authority' in this situation is actually Bishop Rhoades of Fort Wayne-South Bend. In the end, I leave the determination of such a matter up to the Canon Lawyers who are entrusted with it. As are all legal issues, this fact scenario presents a very difficult situation to determine legally.

Archdiocese of Detroit

Prudence Factor

†

While I am not competent to make a legal determination, I am competent to give my opinion in another professional manner. Having worked in policy, communications, public relations, and the law - I can more than competently speak about the action the Archdiocese took in the arena of public opinion.

In my opinion, and had I been on that AOD Communications team, I would have NEVER allowed that press release to go out at all. As I stated above, the actual Canonical issue here isn't the point. This isn't about right or wrong (see below), I am making a point about the Press Release and the tactics employed by the AOD Communications office, and seemingly the AOD itself.

While ultimately this is an ecclesiastical matter, Bishops must, must, must understand that the faithful deal with "Church Politics" in the same way they do regular politics. There is a finesse to Communications-PR, and I rarely have seen a Diocese manage their communication efforts well. This isn't to say that the the AOD here isn't ultimately right, but if this was about being Right or Wrong they wouldn't be issuing press releases, but instead would be calling Voris, Brammer, et al into the Chancery offices. This is about public opinion. Here is my litany of reasons as to why this Press Release and strategy is an awful Communications-PR move on the AOD's part :

1. This is 'old news.'
2. This war is being fought in the arena of "Public Opinion" aka the Blogosphere.
3. Communications is a set formula : Message Clarity + Firm Facts + Timing = Success; the AOD did not satisfy the variables here. 
4. The Surrebuttal is almost always more important that than the original claim. 
5. If the "Higher Ground" tactic is going to be employed, you must also remain "Above the Fray."
6. Your "closet" must be empty. 

N.B: Again, this is my analysis from a Communications-PR standpoint, not a Canonical one. Had the Archdiocese not brought this situation to the "arena of public opinion" this analysis would be moot. They fired the first shot here, and therefore must play the situation according to the "rules of the game." As my analysis will show, while each individual point may be rebutted, the collection of them indicts the AOD's decision quite harshly.  

Point 1.

†

This whole situation is old news. It really is. This past April, when Voris had issues with a presentation in Pennsylvania, this issue circulated in the form of a stock response from the AOD Comms Director, Ned McGrath. This time it comes from "Communications Associate" Joe Kohn. Kohn is a good guy, working a long time on the excellent Michigan Catholic. That being said, he should know that you don't recycle news and try and make it "fresh again." It almost always comes off stale. If it doesn't come off as stale, it is usually because of "new facts" that your side isnt aware of, otherwise you would have used that new angle in the first place. This is exacerbated by other factors, in this scenario points 2-6. The release was too short and didn't explain why they were issuing it again... which leaves that question answered by those who read it. Which leads to Point 2...

Point 2.

†

Whether they wanted to fight this battle in the "arena of public opinion" or not, that is exactly where the AOD took the "fight." By issuing a Press Release they essentially made this private matter a public one. Obviously I dont know their mindset, or their intentions, but I can judge their actions. They could have just as easily contacted the involved parties and had a private discussion about this matter. This point is worse for the AOD in light of Point 1. Because this is an "old issue" with nothing that seems to have brought it to the forefront again, it makes it appear that the AOD wanted to wage this battle via public opinion. 

Because the release was issued, it makes people ask the question: "What prompted it?" Because they didn't answer that question in the release, the AOD is at the mercy of those reading the release and then commenting on it. Generally a release goes to news outlets and they follow up on it. The only news outlets that care about this story are Catholic News sites and the Blogs. While Voris is a pretty big "lightning rod" in the Catholic blogosphere, the split on him isn't enough to easily fall in the AOD's favor. That is why this was a huge risk on the AOD's part. Most Catholics dont care or even realize The Vortex exists. Yet, if you know about him, you read blogs and watch the Vortex. Love him or hate him, your mind is made up. This release will do one thing and one thing only: make people discuss the merits of what Voris says, and whether the AOD should be squelching that. In the end, this isn't about Canon law for most people, but about the message and prudence. Which is why the AOD should have paid better attention to Point 3....

Point 3.

†

There is a set formula to Communications-PR that is time tested: 

Message Clarity + Firm Facts + Timing = Success

The AOD didn't have a clear message because they failed to answer why they were issuing this release. Again, this is about public opinion and the public is going to want to know why. The facts are shaky. Before you blast something, you better know your ducks are not only in a row, but the name, rank, and serial number of each one. Here, the AOD seems to have thrown out a press release assuming certain things. We all know what happens when we ASSUME. The timing part is just dreadful. Right before Christmas, by the time it makes the blog/news cycle we are on top of Christmas, and once the back and forth begins nobody is around to respond. You can survive a bad variable occasionally, and miraculously you can sometimes survive two, but never all three. Why? Because of Point 4...

Point 4

†

When you issue a Press Release, you are not putting it out into the wild to say: "This is our statement, take it, print it, the end." In fact, what you really want to do, is to tease your position enough to have people start asking questions. Similarly, in court when you make a claim, you know that the other side is going to address it. Even if it is a water tight point, you are on firm legal ground, and the facts are in your favor, you still will face a rebuttal from the other side. Therefore, your surrebuttal is sometimes going to be more important than your original claim. It shows that not only were you right in the first place, but that you are so right even the other sides explanation fails. It is being right and right again.

If you have no surrebuttal your original claim often looks desperate, unfounded, or even contrived. At best it brings the question to the forefront and allows the "jury" to decide. Not a real comfortable position to be in. Generally, I want an arbiter of facts to deliberate knowing I am right based on the fact I explained how right I was... twice. Making a claim, and then trying to "take the higher ground" doesn't work, as I explain in Point 5...

Point 5.

†

The tactic of "Taking the Higher Ground" in the moral sense of the term only works if you also remain "above the fray." What I mean is this: you can't throw a punch in a fight, and then claim you were hit with a sucker-punch. The AOD made the first move here, they can't expect to sit back, not answer questions, or respond to any rebuttals and all the while think that people will see them on the "high ground" and side with them. 

If you issue a release, you need to be ready to stand and fight. You started it, you have to be ready to finish it. No one forced you to issue that release, therefore you have to know your moves ahead of time. It is like Chess, your job is to know the issue so well, and be on such firm factual and moral ground, that regardless of what moves the other side makes you have a counter. Not only is that not true in this case, but it seems as if the AOD is barking up the wrong tree as I explain in Point 6...

Point 6.

†

One of the first issues raised by anyone, aside from Canonical complexities, is that the AOD is going after the wrong group. Certainly if RCTV is in the wrong, it doesnt matter what other groups are doing all that matters is what RCTV is doing. Because this is about opinion, it does matter how the AOD is treating other groups. In the original article, LSN brings up the group Elephants In the Living Room. This is a dissident heterodox (possibly heretical) group that exists within the AOD. While their name doesn't use the word Catholic they do utilize Catholic property, resources, and publicly express their opinions contrary to the teachings of the Church. Oh yeah, and they are mostly priests. 

While many who are supporting Archbishop Vigneron in this battle against RCTV bring up the fact that he has admonished and prohibited any AOD involvement with Call to Action, EILR is allowed to meet on AOD property and has received no publish admonishment. This is something a Comms Director should be begging the Archbishop to address prior to a release going out against Voris. If you want to fight something in the public opinion, double standards will murder your chances. 

Pointus Maximus

†

If the Archdiocese has failed to meet with RCTV or its representatives, they will come out of this looking awful. Before putting out any release the question: "What will they respond with?" should be asked. This rule is regardless of ANY superior factual or moral ground your side may have. Had that occurred in this situation this release and situation would not sit where it does today. Unfortunately for the AOD the Comms team failed to war game this scenario out properly. Hence, you have the AOD looking foolish if in fact they have asked RCTV to cease using the "name" Catholic but are unwilling to meet or address any questions or concerns that RCTV may have. In fact, the AOD might have a Canonical obligation to do so...

Conclusion

†

To reiterate, ultimately this is a Canonical issue. Yet, the right and wrong of the issue is a second fiddle to the issue being played out on the blogosphere. Right now, a seemingly good and orthodox Archbishop is caught in the middle of an awful PR situation. Having recently released reports about Church closures, he has now allowed his Communications staff to create a world of chaos in the blogosphere.

Every Diocese should have a good communications staff. They should be faithful Catholics who also are savvy in dealing with the media, the public, and the digital media world. The blogosphere is not the Church, that is for sure. But members of the Church are part of the blogosphere. In other words, when you enter into that arena, you have to play by its rules. 

Had I been the CommsDir for the AOD last week, I would have made sure the AOD knew the ramifications of this press release, and had a goal in mind. Right now Voris is gaining support in a lot of places he doesn't always get it. Sure, some of the folks that have taken issue with him in the past are calling for him to "heed his Bishop" but a lot of those calls are coming from people who have questionable Canonical entities themselves.

In the end this matter will ultimately be decided Canonically, but the PR battle might be lost by the "winning team." I have said repeatedly on this blog that Dioceses need good Comms/PR people on their staff. Passion is one thing, but this situation is starting to smell very... personal. Voris isn't everyones cup of tea, but his dissenters would be hard-pressed to claim that he says anything contrary to the faith. 

To seemingly make him "Most Wanted #1" seems like a risky move on the AOD's part. I think they are losing this PR battle, and I think they would be well served to start managing this situation ASAP. In the end, they want to be right Canonically. Yet, they must show that their best and only interest is the spiritual and theological well-being of the faithful. Anything else will leave a sour taste... this is exacerbated by PR missteps that have already occurred. You can't always fix past mistakes, but you can certainly stop new ones from happening. 

In the end I pray for all involved. We need a Church united on doctrine and truth... not one divided over personalities and grudges. 

†††