1. If I was the PR person writing the news release for the Raina Inc. to take to the council meeting, I would include the important information in my lead – meaning the who, what, when, where, why, and how.
- Who: The Raina Inc.
- What: The pollution problem caused by the smoke stacks from the factory
- When: Immediately
- Where: Blackrock, Iowa
- Why: The smoke stacks from the factory release black smoke, hazardous to the environment
- How: The Raina Inc. has set aside $2 million on top of the past $5.3 million spent on resolving this situation in order to continue to cut down on pollution
2. I would leave out the bit of information stating “Raina received 500 complaint calls in the past three months protesting its pollution conditions” because the public doesn’t need to know how many complaints there actually were against the company. I would say that some have been received, but that many makes it seem like the company doesn’t care. I would also leave out that “Raina originally planned to delay its pollution-abatement program but speeded it up because of public pressure in recent months” because that’s not going to appeal to the audience this news release is aimed. Finally, the last piece of information I’d omit is the information about Leslie Sludge’s personal life. This is because it doesn’t focus on the issue of pollution at Raina Inc.
3. If a report called me to ask about the former manager at the Blackrock Raina, I would probably choose my words carefully, and say something like, “He didn’t share the same vision as our new manager in the environmental issues at hand.” I wouldn’t include how he supposedly stole money from the company and I wouldn’t want to give out any information that would make the company look back.
4. The public always has an opinion. Since the Internet is constantly used by people all over the world, the majority of people in the town of Blackrock probably use the internet as well, especially if the have an opinion to voice. I’m sure Raina could research some blogs of people in there area that are voicing their opinions about the situation. Raina could also create an online survey to send out to the members of the community to find out how they feel. It would also be important to research how other companies have handled similar situations to the one Raina is currently in. Raina could also use the internet as a way to let the public know how they feel about the situation, and what they’re going to do. New releases can be posted online, so that would be a good way to voice the companies position.
Muffy Lavens 
I definitely agree with choosing your words carefully with dealing with the Raina company. Because of how public the issue was, it is mandatory to make yourself look as good as possible in any situation. I also agree with the idea to do an online poll of the community to get more of an idea of what the public really thinks. Once the company knows how the public really feels, they will have a better idea of how to please them in the future. Especially with how environmentally-conscience the general public is in today’s world, it will benefit the company in the long run to “clean up” their act with their attempt to cut down on the pollution caused by the smoke stacks.
The are all very good reactions. Your answers are very thought provoking and intuitive. Your 5 W’s and the H in number one were spot on. I would not change a thing. However, I must respectfully disagree with you on your views about moving the Pollution Abatement program. Since the company is in so much trouble with the surrounding area, I think it would be a good idea to let them know that they had a plan set in the future, and that they wanted to move the plan to a sooner date because of the damage that was done. That would make it look like they are reacting quickly to a spreading problem. I would leave out words like “pressure” and “delay”, because I don’t think the target audience wants to be seen as a nuisance. Other than using those exact words, I believe that mentioning the change of the date is completely acceptable.
Muffy–
Good response–very thorough. Lots of thought went into this.
Chris and Jenn–Good comments from you both. Much more insightful in general than many of the ones I read in response to the reactions to the chapter 1 case study.
Good work, all!
Dr. Schultz