Summary and explanation:

This is a confidential internal memo on McDonald's PR strategy in relation to an Australian documentary ("60 Minutes") which was being made on the McLibel case. The memo was leaked to the documentary makers, who included parts of it in their programme. It is clear that McDonald's wanted to deter any discussion of the issues and generally tried to avoid being interviewed. This memo helps reveal the Corporation's dilemma around the WHOLE world.

HIGHLY CONFIDENTIAL

60 MINUTES STRATEGY
McDONALD'S AUSTRALIA


DISTRIBUTE TO:DICK STARMANN - Snr Vice President McDonald's Corp
MIKE GORDON
MIKE LOVE - Head of Communications UK
PETER RITCHIE - Head of McDonald's Australia
CHARLIE BELL
Professional Public Relation
(Kyle Smith, Peter Lazar)

STRATEGY FOR 60 MINUTES

OVERVIEW

We know that 60 Minutes has been in Chicago (15/4-21/4) filming in various locations with the two defendants and a group of supporters. They are scheduled to be in the UK (2/4-24/4) where we can only assume they will be doing more of the same.

When 60 Minutes returns to Australia, we know they will contact us for an interview with Peter Ritchie to discuss our point of view on the case. We must be prepared. The following is the suggested strategy and actions for the period from the return of 60 Minutes to the period after the show has gone to air.

REQUEST FOR AN INTERVIEW WITH PETER RITCHIE

The Case for No!

  1. This is not an Australian issue - contain it as a UK issue.
  2. Potentially more local media follow up if Peter Ritchie speaks (we become more accessible).
  3. We could worsen the controversy by adding our opinion/perspective (this could add another dimension).
  4. We want to keep it at arm's length - not become guilty by association.
  5. Building a positive relationship with 60 Minutes is not a major priority - because of the nature of the programme.

The Case for Yes!

  1. We could avoid further criticism for - no comment.
  2. Peter Ritchie could more than adequately handle the interview and repeat the agreed position.

ACTION

We should definitely not agree to an interview.

HOW DOES PETER RITCHIE DECLINE THE 60 MINUTES INTERVIEW?

  1. This is a UK issue. As you know, the UK have chosen not to be interviewed therefore I don't think it's right that I should become the only McDonald's person that speaks on the issue.

  2. As you know I (Peter Ritchie) did consider speaking to you as discussed by phone, but I now don't think it's appropriate.

  3. I don't want to fuel the debate and make more of an issue of this situation in Australia than it already is. 30 Minutes is going to make a big enough issue of it anyway.

THE WEEK PRIOR TO THE STORY GOING ON AIR

We know that 60 Minutes always promo the stories they are going to run the week prior - sometimes highlighting a lead story. We expect this to be the lead story. Therefore, we could receive requests from other media, especially radio and print prior to the story going to air.

THE REASONS FOR DECLINING PRIOR INTERVIEWS

  1. This is not an Australian issue - it's a UK issue.
  2. We don't know what 60 Minutes are doing - only what we've seen on the promo.
  3. 60 Minutes dealt with McDonald's in the UK, not Australia.
  4. We have not given an interview to 60 Minutes so we are not giving interviews now.

REQUESTS FOR INTERVIEWS AFTER 60 MINUTES GOES TO AIR

Firstly, we should play down any importance or significance of the 60 Minutes programme and therefore not have Peter Ritchie or Charlie Bell involved with media contact. John Blyth should field all media calls/requests.

1ST OPTION - For all media follow up (TV, Print, Radio)

Refer all calls to the UK office (designated spokesperson) for any further information and follow up. We will furnish phone, fax nos etc. This will keep our consistent approach in this not being an Australian issue.

2ND OPTION

What if there is significant pressure to know what Australia's point of view is and there is a ground swell of public opinion building and running against us as a result of the 60 Minutes programme. Then if this occurs (unlikely), it would primarily come from radio talk back and print. Other TV stations would not touch the issue after 60 Minutes has done the story.

Who should we talk to?
1.Alan Jones}
2.Brian Bury}All to be handled by Peter
3.John Law}Ritchie because of his
relationship with the presenters

Who should we not talk to?

  1. Any ABC radio or TV station Australia wide (because they have given significant coverage to the case in a positive perspective).

  2. Neil Mitchell, SAW Melbourne.

PRINT MEDIA

We should send a statement - basically incorporating the 60 Minutes statement. No print interviews should be granted.

RADIO NEWS

Refer to UK for a news grab.

TV NEWS

Given them proposed statement.

CURRENT AFFAIRS

No interviews (not likely due to 60 Minutes covering story).

CUSTOMER REACTION VIA LETTERS, PHONE CALLS

Brief all interstate offices (receptionists) to refer all calls to Sydney to Communications Department.

  1. All phone calls from customers to be handled by Communications Department - outline of key points to be drafted.

  2. All written communication to be answered with a letter to be drafted.

STAFF BRIEFING

All Australian staff to be alerted to the 60 Minutes programme once an on air date has been confirmed, via a memo. This memo should highlight the fact that this is a UK issue and that we declined to be interviewed and that any enquiries from customers should be referred to the Communications Department and that we should limit any discussion about the issue so as not to keep it running unnecessarily.

CONCLUSION

This strategy covers all potential situations and will be updated, changed or adapted if events change. This will not be a positive story for McDonald's Australia, but by being prepared we hopefully can deal effectively with each situation as it arises and minimise any further negative publicity.