Analysis of the image repair discourse in the Michael Phelps controversy

The following study reviews the image repair strategies used byOlympic swimmerMichael Phelps, his sponsors and the organizations that govern him as an amateur swimmer after a picture of Phelps allegedly smoking from a marijuana pipe appeared in a British tabloid. Additionally, the study reviews media coverage of the controversy to determine whether Phelps was successful in repairing his image. The study concludes that Phelps’ image repair campaign was a success. Implications for public relations practitioners and suggestions for future research also are discussed. © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. This essay analyzes and evaluates the rhetorical effectiveness of the discourse of Michael Phelps and other stakeholders fter a picture of the 23-year-old swimmer allegedly smoking from a marijuana pipe (bong) appeared in the News of the orld tabloid in London. In terms of media coverage, Phelps benefitted from a variety of events. First, the Phelps firestorm started in the midst of uper Bowl Sunday. Second, columnists dismissed the severity of Phelps’ scenario due to his age, and the use ofmarijuana as serious offense. They argued Phelps could have done something much worse—taking a performance-enhancing drug, for xample. Ironically, this hypothetical comparison became a reality just a few days after the Phelps controversy began when ports Illustrated reported that AlexRodriguez, considered bymany to be one of the greatest players in baseball history, tested ositive for steroids in 2003 (Roberts & Epstein, 2009). With that, Phelps became an after-thought in the sports lexicon. This topicmerits scholarly attention because, despite the high amount of crises involving athletes, little research has been one in this area. This study also is relevant to public relations practitioners, especially those that work with athletes and ports organizations. After all, according to Brazeal (2008), the “market value” of an athlete’s image hinges on their public eputation (p. 146). . Rhetorical context It is fair to say that Phelps—a decorated Olympic champion named the 2008 Associated Press male athlete of the year Crouse, 2009)—had a positive reputation before this incident occurred. According to Coombs (2007), a favorable precrisis Please cite this article in press as: Walsh, J., & McAllister-Spooner, S.M. Analysis of the image repair discourse in the Michael Phelps controversy. Public Relations Review (2011), doi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.001 eputation means the entity in question has reputation capital to spend, unlike those that are unknown or disliked (p. 147). he bong photo, however, presented a two-pronged threat to Phelps’ image. First, it clearly put him in a negative light. The hoto could not be ignored and spoke for itself. Second, the photo did something else—it reminded the public of Phelps’ past ransgression. ∗ Corresponding author at: Department of Communication, Monmouth University, 400 Cedar Avenue, Plangere Center, Room 210, West Long Branch, J 07764, United States. Tel.: +1 732 571 7553; fax: +1 732 571 3609. E-mail addresses: [email protected] (J. Walsh), [email protected] (S.M. McAllister-Spooner). 363-8111/$ – see front matter © 2011 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. oi:10.1016/j.pubrev.2011.01.001 ARTICLE IN PRESS GModel PUBREL-872; No.of Pages6 2 J. Walsh, S.M. McAllister-Spooner / Public Relations Review xxx (2011) xxx–xxx InNovember2004,months afterwinning8medals (6gold, 2bronze) at theAthensOlympics, Phelps released the following statement after being charged with driving under the influence of alcohol, driving while impaired by alcohol, violation of a license restriction and failure to obey a traffic control device: Last week, I made a mistake. Getting into a car after anything to drink is wrong. It’s dangerous and unacceptable. I’m 19 andwas taught that nomatter how old you are, you should take responsibility for your actions, which I will do. I’m sorry. (Michaelis, 2004, ¶3) 1.1. Rhetorical analysis of image repair discourse When a reputation is threatened, individuals and organizations are motivated to present an image defense (Brinson & Benoit, 1996, p. 30). According toBenoit (1997a), anattackor complaint that triggers a crisis has twocomponents: theaccused is held responsible for an action, and, that act is considered offensive. For both conditions to apply, the company/individual must be believed to be responsible for the offensive act. Second, it does not matter if the accused is in fact responsible for the act, but whether they are perceived to be responsible for the act by the relevant stakeholders (p. 178). Benoit’s (1995) image restoration theory encompasses five strategies: denial, evading responsibility, reducing offensiveness, corrective action, and mortification. Since the 1960s, when the philosophical assumptions of image repair focused mainly on public officials, scholars have extended the focus on the role of apologetic rhetoric in crisis communicationwithin corporations, and to a lesser extent, in popular culture figures such as sports andmedia celebrities (Towner, 2009). The next sectionwill provide a brief review of the literature examining crisis responses through the lens of Benoit’s image restoration theory. In the corporate realm, Brinson and Benoit (1996) found that Dow’s use of denial and minimization in response to accusations of developing harmful breast implants made Dow look irresponsible, dishonest, and uncaring. Dow’s use of mortification, corrective action and bolstering, however, were deemed successful in limiting continued damage. In response to a federal investigation of Bridgestone-Firestone tires, Blaney, Benoit, and Brazeal (2002) found that, while mortification was appropriate and necessary, the corrective action (the tire recall) contradicted the company’s denial that its tires were defective. Regarding responses of public officials, Benoit and Henson (2009) found that the image repair strategies utilized by President GeorgeW. Bush after Hurricane Katrina—bolstering, defeasibility and corrective action—were unsuccessful. Defeasibility was also deemed a poor choice because Bush attempted to portray the hurricane as an “unprecedented” event that could not be prepared for, when in fact, it was known for days that the stormwas headed for the Gulf Coast (p. 43). Regarding celebrity responses, Benoit (1997b) found that actor Hugh Grant effectively repaired his image following his arrest for lewd behavior with a prostitute by utilizing mortification, bolstering, denial and attacking the accuser (p. 256). Scholars have also examined crisis responses of athletes. For example, Nelson (1984) showed how tennis great Billie Jean King overcame the revelation of an affair with a former secretary partly because she had an enormous supply of goodwill with the media, her rivals, and fans. Benoit and Hanczor (1994) examined figure skater Tonya Harding’s failed attempt to defend against charges she was involved in a 1994 attack on rival Nancy Kerrigan, and Brazeal (2008) showed that Terrell Owens used bolstering and mortification after he was suspended by the Philadelphia Eagles for conduct detrimental to the team. While Owens created common ground with his audience by bolstering his passion for football (p. 148), his use of mortification faltered because he never once said “I was wrong.” Furthermore, Owens never once suggested that he would change his ways (p. 149). Jerome (2008) found that NASCAR driver Tony Stewart used the rhetoric of atonement, a prescriptive sub-genre of apologia which is necessary when a rhetor is faced with a situation for which the rhetor must atone for sins that cannot be denied, justified or transcended (Jerome, 2008, p. 126). While closely related to mortification, Koesten and Rowland (2004) distinguish atonement by arguing, “Where traditional apologia is used to defend one’s character. . .the rhetoric of atonement functions as a purgative-redemptive device for an individual or an entire organization” (p. 69). Further, atonement is more than just about restoring an image by acknowledging wrongdoing, saying sorry, and asking forgiveness; it is about the creation of an entire new entity (Jerome, 2008, p. 126). By offering statements of regret and alluding to the need to make a new start, Jerome (2008) found that Stewart’s utilization of atonement was successful among all of his key audiences (stakeholders); as proof, Joe Gibbs Racing and Home Depot both extended their contracts with Stewart, a costly move that would not have beenmade if Stewart’s image was still damaged (p. 131).