BLACKFISH BACKLASH: SEAWORLD'S ATTEMPT AT NAVIGATING A CRISIS SITUATION Leslie Rodriguez Rasmussen, Ph.D., Xavier University, and Melody Fisher, Ph.D., Mississippi Sate University [from Cases in Public Relations (2019), by Brunner, B. R., and Hickerson, C. (Eds.), Oxford Univ. Press] For more than 50 years, SeaWorld, a marine mammal amusement park, has been the destination for those seeking family-friendly entertainment. Adventure seekers from all corners of the world come to interact with marine animals, enjoy thrill rides, and view the famous dolphin and killer whale shows. At the height of its popularity, SeaWorld welcomed more than 11 million visitors annually and held a respectable place in the stock market. With all its successes, though, it was inevitable that issues would plague the parks: SeaWorld's work with animals has always made it a target for animal rights activists. In 2011, the People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals (PETA) filed a lawsuit on behalf of five wild- captured orcas, arguing that the parks were violating the mammals' civil rights. The case was dismissed (Zellman, 2012), but the most damaging attack came in 2013 with the release of the documentary Blackfish. Blackfish focuses on Tilikum, a male orca responsible for the deaths of two trainers and a SeaWorld trespasser. Through Tilikum's tale the documentary offered audiences a persuasive view of SeaWorld's capture and mistreatment of marine animals. Interviews with former employees, video footage of animals, and commentary paint SeaWorld as cruel and inhumane. The Blackfish backlash occurred soon after its premiere at the 2013 Sundance festival. The documentary was selected to appear in theaters and on CNN, giving more audiences access to its claims. As a result, Willie Nelson, Trisha Yearwood, and many other entertainers cancelled shows at the SeaWorld parks, attendance declined by more than 5%, and total revenue dipped by more than $15 million by 2013 (Ahmed, 2013). The theme park suffered blow after blow and was eventually forced to hire a communications firm to help restore its image and financial standing. This case study examines SeaWorld's response to a threat capable of inflicting long- term damage. Background SeaWorld San Diego opened in 1964 with two aquariums and several dolphins and sea lions. The organization eventually acquired several killer whales from the defunct Seattle Marine Aquarium, including Namu, the first killer whale held in captivity. In 1989 Anheuser-Busch purchased the three SeaWorld parks and three other sister parks, but sold them to the Blackstone Group in 2009. In 1992 SeaWorld acquired four whales from Sealand of the Pacific, which shut down after orca whales were involved in a trainer's death. Tilikum, the orca believed to have drowned that trainer, was sent to SeaWorld Orlando and is now its most successful sire (Frontline n.d.). Tilikum is also the orca responsible for the 2010 death of senior trainer Dawn Brancheau at SeaWorld Orlando and is the centerpiece of the Blackfish documentary (CNN, 2010). With additional parks in San Antonio and Orlando, SeaWorld now owns approximately 86,000 animals, including the largest killer whale population at any zoological facility. The organization also houses several endangered species and is actively engaged in animal rehabilitation and conservation. Over the years SeaWorld has been targeted by multiple animal rights groups, perhaps most notably PETA. The organization faced government regulation and litigation over the death of Brancheau. After Brancheau's death, the federal Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) prohibited trainers from entering tanks with orca whales. After a lengthy appeals process, the U.S. Court of Appeals maintained the ruling (Hurley, 2014). SeaWorld declined to take the case to the U.S. Supreme Court. In the years following the Blackfish release, SeaWorld's public image was tarnished. Celebrities broke partnerships with the organization and spoke out against its treatment of animals. In 2013 and 2014, parade-goers at the Macy's Thanksgiving Parade jumped a barricade to protest the SeaWorld float. A race-car driver took a Blackfish-themed car to the Talladega Speedway in 2014. As mistrust mounted, financial loss soon followed. Two years after the documentary's release, Time Magazine reported that SeaWorld “faced an 84% drop in net second-quarter income, from $37.4 million in 2014 to $5.8 million in 2015, in the second quarter" (Rhodan, 2015, para. 2). Despite the financial crisis, SeaWorld attempted to regain consumer trust by announcing plans for the $100 million Blue World Project, a large-scale expansion of the orca habitat at the San Diego park. Plans included a $10 million commitment to orca whale research. Unfortunately, SeaWorld made this announcement before obtaining the required permits. The California Coastal Commission later granted the permits with several caveats: (1) SeaWorld could no longer transport orcas to and from California, (2) a maximum of 15 orcas could be held captive in California, and (3) SeaWorld could not breed whales. SeaWorld responded by suing the California Coastal Commission over the no-breeding condition. However, after years of public scrutiny and political pressure, SeaWorld declined to pursue the lawsuit or the Blue World Project. Instead, the organization attempted to capitalize on the imposed decision. Three years following the Blackfish release, to regain consumer trust, SeaWorld launched a new campaign, proclaiming that “SeaWorld has been listening and we're changing. Society is changing and we're changing with it. SeaWorld is finding new ways to continue to deliver on our purpose to inspire all our guests to take action to protect wild animals and wild places” (SeaWorld, 2016). SeaWorld stopped the fight and engaged in corrective action by shifting its focus and turning the problem into an opportunity to rebrand, reshape, and rebuild consumer relations. Situation On January 19, 2013, the documentary Blackfish, detailing the life of orca whale Tilikum, premiered at the Sundance Film Festival. The film claimed “to explore the creature's extraordinary nature, the species' cruel treatment in captivity, the lives and losses of the trainers and the pressures brought to bear by the multi-billion-dollar sea-park industry” (blackfish.com, 2016). Almost immediately, the film received national attention and was picked up by CNN and Magnolia Pictures for release on the cable channel and in theaters. After Blackfish's Sundance showing, SeaWorld released a general statement refuting the film's arguments and positioning itself as a leader in animal care (Storey, 2013). As publicity and controversy mounted, SeaWorld faced multiple challenges. Its image was undoubtedly shaken, national media attention spurred activism against the organization, and it faced litigation. The potential for financial ruin loomed. Opponents called for the release of its orca whales, and the loss of the whales would mean the end of SeaWorld's centerpiece attraction. SeaWorld eventually hired communications firm 42West to inoculate audiences before the film's theatrical opening. Vice president of communications Fred Jacobs emailed a detailed critique of the film to about 50 critics (Batt 2013). In this email, SeaWorld specifically refuted eight Blackfish assertions, calling them "egregious and untrue" (2013). The bulleted list primarily addressed circumstances surrounding the death of Brancheau and the treatment of Tilikum, but called the entire film “shamefully dishonest and deliberately misleading" (2013). SeaWorld also released a statement to ABC News, which was published and aired throughout networks, websites, and newspapers. Just before the documentary aired on CNN, Jacobs cited published research on whale anatomy and conservation in a written response to the network's inquiries. Jacobs attached empirical findings from biologists, as well as bibliographies of multiple studies conducted at the park to maintain credibility. On its website, SeaWorld posted “69 reasons you shouldn't believe Blackfish." The document dissected the film's script and created its own shot list with rebuttals (SeaWorld, 2013). SeaWorld consistently communicated with consumers digitally. The company took advantage of its varied presence on social media, including Facebook, Twitter, and YouTube. In addition to its usual messages of publicizing events and offering general park information, SeaWorld used social media to respond to consumer comments and questions regarding Blackfish. Bots were used on Facebook and Twitter to automatically answer posts that mentioned Blackfish and its claims. Bot responses deflected comments with material on conservation efforts. SeaWorld's Twitter campaign, #askseaworld, attempted to establish two-way symmetrical communication with consumers. The SeaWorld YouTube page showcased a series of 27 short videos with clips from Blackfish followed by interviews with SeaWorld experts who discredited the film. The fallout from Blackfish continues to hurt SeaWorld through the present day. According to SeaWorld senior corporate affairs officer Jill Kermes, the company launched a $10 million multifaceted campaign "to start that conversation with consumers and give them a place to go to get the facts about SeaWorld, about our animals, about our world-class animal care, and let them make up their own minds" (Kermes, as cited in Titlow, 2015). The mixed media campaign included print advertorials, national television advertising, and a separate website devoted to promoting conservation and education efforts. Seaworldcares.com features its rescue, care, research, conservation, and education programs and testimonials. The site bolsters the park's image as being concerned for the welfare and longevity of its animals while denying any mistreatment toward animals. Allie E @AllieErim - 6 Mar 2015 After watching blackfish I am severely disgusted with Sea World 9 2 12 5 [PHOTO 6.1] Follow SeaWorld SeaWorld @SeaWorld Replying to @AllieErim @AllieErim Hey Allie, if you're done watching Blackfish, here are some other videos that may interest you: bit.ly/Q6IEK7 9:23 AM - 9 Mar 2015 3 Likes 1 27 3 The sting of Blackfish and protests by animal rights activists persisted and caused more damage to the SeaWorld brand. In arguably its most controversial move, SeaWorld sent employees disguised as activists to join PETA to infiltrate the organization. Employee Paul McComb attended meetings and created fake social media pages under the name Thomas Jones. His Facebook account showed pictures of "Jones" attending rallies and inciting activists with action-driven posts calling for the "torching” and "draining" of SeaWorld whale tanks (theguardian.com, 2015). McComb was exposed after an address he listed was found to be that of a SeaWorld security officer. In a news release, PETA officials noted that McComb tried to "cozy up to PETA employees . . . in an attempt to incite illegal acts" (PETA, 2015). SeaWorld vice president for communications Fred Jones did not confirm or deny McCombs' involvement with PETA but evaded responsibility by saying that “PETA itself actively recruits animal rights activists to gain employment at companies like SeaWorld" (theguardian.com, 2016). After more negative attention, SeaWorld relented to pressure and announced it would discontinue breeding orcas. In a letter published in the New York Times, SeaWorld CEO Joel Manby shared the plan to phase out breeding and orca entertainment shows. Manby notes that the plan was made to accommodate activists, legislators, and consumers, but takes an advocating stance with the decision not to release currently held orcas (Manby, 2016). In this letter, Manby underscores the company's goal of being consumer-driven. He reflects on SeaWorld's early years and the positive audience responses to orca whale shows. He notes how times and activism have changed and stresses the importance of listening to the consumer when there is a shift in attitudes and behaviors. Manby illustrates the need for effective consumer relations. In essence, SeaWorld took a serious problem and transformed it into an opportunity. SeaWorld's image and financial standing suffered in the three years following Blackfish's premiere (Weisberg, 2016), and its response did not please consumers or critics. The new plan may be well received as SeaWorld revisits its goal of maintaining positive relationships with consumers. Outcomes The post-Blackfish environment was multifaceted and contained multiple challenges-challenges that, if not overcome, would signal the end for SeaWorld. Initially, SeaWorld publicly and aggressively refuted Blackfish. The organization executed multiple tactics claiming the documentary lied about the treatment of whales and Brancheau's death. But the aggressive approach appeared to draw more attention to Blackfish and was polarizing; thus, SeaWorld struggled to regain credibility with consumers. A strongly advocating position can carry the potential to alarm publics. SeaWorld attempted to regain credibility and trust by posting YouTube videos containing clips from Blackfish and corresponding rebuttals. Using SeaWorld experts to rebut the points made in the film, rather than an impartial source, may have left audiences in doubt of its authenticity. Consumers voiced their disapproval of SeaWorld on a variety of social media, prompting the organization to respond using a bot. The replies directed consumers to SeaWorld's Blackfish response. Unfortunately, the replies did not appear organic and were nearly identified as trolling. On Twitter, SeaWorld attempted to establish two-way symmetrical communication with consumers by using the hashtag #askseaworld. The effort resulted in more negative responses than positive ones and indirectly served as a means to publicize Blackfish. SeaWorld invited consumers to discuss their concerns, thereby remaining transparent, but the strategy appeared to backfire. The organization struggled to regain middle ground, likely because consumers were reeling from the years-long aggressive approach. Two years after the Blackfish release, SeaWorld ramped up its efforts to engage with consumers and reestablish itself as a global leader in conservation. The attempt to regain control and reframe the conversation was, by all accounts, too late: Park attendance and stock prices continued to fall (Weisberg, 2016). SeaWorld aggressively maintained a strongly advocating position during the critical time following the Blackfish release, rather than launching the campaign prior to or immediately following its release. SeaWorld also attempted to discredit its most high-profile opponent, PETA, by allegedly sending in an undercover employee to incite PETA activists to perform illegal acts against SeaWorld, thus providing evidence to discredit the organization. Rather than denying the act, SeaWorld's vice president for communications, Fred Jones, claimed PETA regularly participates in similar behaviors. The vague statement is telling, leaving consumers to make their own assumptions. Proposing the Blue World Project was a step toward image repair, though as a preemptive strike it would fail. As it stands, SeaWorld has declined to move forward with the project, opting instead to end its breeding program. Ending the breeding program was framed as SeaWorld's decision, as though SeaWorld was listening to its consumers-though it was at the mercy of the California Coastal Commission. The Coastal Commission, however, only has jurisdiction in California, not in states where other SeaWorld parks are located. SeaWorld's decision to end breeding is complex. For example, it is possible that Florida and Texas may have followed California's lead by placing restrictions on breeding, transportation, and population limitations. In the end, the decision to end breeding at all parks was the polar opposite of SeaWorld's initial response and ultimately represented a more accommodating stance. SeaWorld's effort to reposition itself as a leader in animal care and conservation will unfold in the coming years. Discussion Questions 1. Write a 1-paragraph summary of the case in your own words including the public relations issues/challenges (no more than 10-12 complete sentences) 2. Discuss the use of bots as two-way communication. Are they effective? Why or why not? 3. Do you believe SeaWorld brought more attention to the film with its response? Explain. 4. SeaWorld did not break any laws by sending an employee to PETA to pose as an animal rights activist. If no laws were broken, was this behavior ethical? Justify your answer with connections to the textbook. 5. What are the ethical boundaries of advocating for your own organization? 6. Ending the breeding program was framed as SeaWorld's decision, as though the company was listening to its consumers. Do you believe this approach was acceptable and ethical? Why or why not?/n