Oracle Exec Twitter Suspension: Reporter Clash

Corporate Responses to Media Scrutiny: A Case Study

Businesses and the journalists who cover them frequently experience conflict, especially when reporting is perceived as unfavorable or brings unwelcome attention to a company’s operations, or is deemed inaccurate by the organization itself.

Many companies actively defend their reputations, contributing to the substantial size and profitability of the crisis communications industry. However, the manner in which a company responds is crucial. According to crisis communications professionals consulted by TechCrunch, a recent post on Oracle’s corporate blog, along with its subsequent social media activity, missed the mark.

The Oracle Situation

The situation centers around Ken Glueck, an Oracle executive with 25 years of experience at the company, who was temporarily suspended from Twitter after encouraging his followers to engage in harassment against a female reporter.

This stemmed from a series of articles published by The Intercept detailing how a “network of local resellers facilitates the distribution of Oracle technology to police and military entities in China,” and Oracle’s dissatisfaction with this coverage.

While companies often publish responses to media stories on their own platforms, and sometimes utilize advertisements in mainstream media, the crisis experts—who requested anonymity due to their work with companies like Oracle—offered insights that could be beneficial for Oracle moving forward.

Key Principles for Effective Crisis Communication

Don't Amplify Unwanted Attention

A primary guideline is to avoid drawing unnecessary attention to content a company would prefer remain unnoticed. Oracle’s recent post did not directly link to the new Intercept story that Glueck aimed to refute. However, in an earlier post concerning the first Intercept article from February, Glueck hyperlinked to the story on Oracle’s blog in the opening sentence, even highlighting its title: “How Oracle Sells Repression in China.”

“How many of Oracle’s customers or employees had previously disregarded [The Intercept piece], and now he’s bringing it to their attention?” one expert questioned.

Focus on the Outlet, Not the Reporter

Another crucial point is to address issues with the media outlet itself, rather than attacking individual reporters. In his initial response to The Intercept’s February article, Glueck mentioned the outlet 26 times and the author only once. In his latest statement, he referenced the reporter, Mara Hvistendahl, 22 times—primarily by her first name—and even invited readers to contact him with information about her, emphasizing in bold text: “If you have any information about Mara or her reporting, write me securely at kglueck AT protonmail.com.”

Although Glueck later characterized this as a playful gesture, it was subsequently removed from the post, potentially due to its perceived “sinister tone,” as noted by one of the consulted experts. “No one appreciates a bully,” the communications professional stated, adding that “bullying projects weakness.”

Define Your Objective

By responding in a dismissive tone to The Intercept’s reporting and continuing his attacks on Hvistendahl on social media, Glueck’s strategy lacked clarity, according to one of the crisis specialists.

“You can criticize the reporter, but will that prevent The Intercept from publishing further stories about Oracle? And what will be the reaction from other media outlets? Will they be deterred by this incident, or will they rally in support?”

Keep Responses Concise

Two of the experts praised Glueck’s writing style, describing it as both fluid and humorous. However, they also observed that his response was excessively lengthy. “I found it difficult to read through completely,” one remarked.

Prioritize Direct Communication

The crisis experts suggested that the ideal approach involves initial engagement with the reporter, followed by communication with their editor if necessary, and ultimately, legal counsel if warranted. “That’s the proper escalation path if a reporter has demonstrably misrepresented a story,” one source explained.

Oracle’s Unique Approach

Glueck may have intentionally disregarded these guidelines. Oracle is known for its independent approach, and Glueck embodies that culture. The Wall Street Journal published a detailed 1,300-word profile on Glueck last year, describing him as a “potent weapon” for Oracle.

Hvistendahl suggests there may be another reason for Oracle’s chosen strategy.

In a statement provided to us, she writes that “Ken Glueck has published two extensive blog posts attacking me and my editor, Ryan Tate. However, Oracle has not disputed my primary finding: that the company marketed its analytics software for use by police in China. Oracle also hasn’t refuted our reporting on the sale and marketing of its analytics software to police in other countries. We found evidence of Oracle selling or marketing analytics software to police in Mexico, Pakistan, Turkey, and the UAE. Additionally, my colleague Tatiana Dias uncovered police contracts between Oracle and Rio de Janeiro’s notoriously corrupt Civil Police.”