Two lessons from the Congo

You may have read about Secretary of State Hillary Clinton losing her cool at a town hall meeting in the Congo this week. When a student asked her about what her husband thought about China’s and the World Bank’s infrastructure projects in the Congo, this is what the chief U.S. diplomat said, according to The Christian Science Monitor:

“You want to know what my husband thinks?” Clinton reportedly replied in a forceful voice. “My husband is not the secretary of state, I am. You ask my opinion, I will tell you my opinion. I’m not going to channel my husband.”

You don’t have to be in executive communications to guess what happens when reason and mouth go asynchronous. There may have been many causes for Madame Secretary to be a little testy that day. Jetlag and her brutal travel schedule may have played a role.  Or maybe she had a conversation with her spouse that morning and it lingered. Well, it happens to all of us.  But that’s not what this post is about.

Unfortunately, the media focused more on Madame Secretary’s outburst than on the cause and recovery of the unfortunate episode. I got intrigued after I read the first story and saw a YouTube video of the accident.  Something clearly didn’t add up. Let’s see if we can learn a few things from the incident.

Lesson number one: get the facts

The first stories and a transcript of the conversation between the Congolese student and Madame Clinton should have set warning bells in the Foggy Bottom.  You don’t have to be a journalist to realize this was a story. I may be wrong, but someone from the department must have been recording the town hall meeting.  The tape should have been analyzed carefully because Madame Secretary was a bit more aggressive than usual. And you have to see or listen to her to appreciate the full impact of her remarks. Take a look at this YouTube ITN video and compare it to the Christian Science Monitor story:

You may have noticed how there seemed to be some confusion about what the student actually asked, suggested by the way Madame Secretary took her earphones off, looked left and right and said: “Wait … you want me to say what my husband thinks?”

Now, fast forward to the State Department briefing the next day, given by Assistant Secretary for Public Affairs Philip Crowley, shown in this State Department video. Fifteen minutes and 31 seconds into the video, a reporter asks a question about the incident.  Here is the official State Department’s Daily Press Briefing transcript:

QUESTION: P.J., you told CNN that the student who asked the question yesterday was apparently lost in translation, had touched a nerve with Secretary Clinton. I was wondering if you can explain a little more of what you meant by that. And also, does Secretary Clinton have any regret? Is she sorry that she lost her cool over this offense?

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I would say two things: First, it is our understanding that the student – perhaps he was nervous in talking to the Secretary of State. He meant to say – meant to ask a question about the views of President Obama. By mistake, he said the views of President Clinton. So there was a – and he was speaking one language, but obviously, as I said, what the Secretary heard, I think you have to put it in context. Obviously, she is the Secretary of State. As we’ve seen, her husband, as a significant global figure in his own right, has his own agenda.

Lesson number two: don’t speculate

The spokesperson wasn’t sure what happened. “It is our understanding… perhaps he was nervous,” is pure speculation. “He meant to say – meant to ask…” is more speculation.  In fact, we know now that the student asked for President Obama’s opinion about the subject of China’s and the World Bank’s involvement in the Congo .  Unfortunately, the translator made a mistake and said President Clinton instead.  And that begs another question: does the State Department have its own translators? At this point in the video, Mr. Crawley goes to his prepared text.

MR. CROWLEY: But as I said to CNN, it’s important to understand the context here, that one of – an abiding theme that she has in her trip to Africa is empowering women. As the question was posed to her, it was posed in a way that said I want to get the views of two men, but not you, the Secretary of State. And I think it – obviously, she reacted to that. But I think it’s part of something that she is obviously very passionate about, which is making sure that if – that the role of women in the agricultural sector and the political sector and civil society – if Africa is going to advance in the future, the role of women has to be more significant in the continent than it is today.

QUESTION: But back to my core question, though, sir.

MR. CROWLEY: And just to finish the –

QUESTION: Does she have any regret?

MR. CROWLEY: Just to finish the point –

QUESTION: Go ahead. I thought you were done. I’m sorry.

MR. CROWLEY: — at the conclusion of the town hall, she and the young man got together and I don’t think there were any hard feelings that were –

QUESTION: But chauvinism aside, sir, does she have any regret about –

MR. CROWLEY: I have not talked to the Secretary. She is –

QUESTION: — losing her cool as the top diplomat in public?

MR. CROWLEY: She’s currently in the air coming back from Goma and I have not talked with her.

QUESTION: Was the student selected to make – to ask a question?

MR. CROWLEY: I –

QUESTION: Pre-selected?

MR. CROWLEY: I do not know.

QUESTION: Isn’t it – doesn’t it strike you as a little bit odd to take on a student like this? It’s hardly an argument between equals, whatever he might say that’s outrageous or unsettling. Does it suggest a certain super-sensitivity on the Secretary’s part?

MR. CROWLEY: Again, obviously, she reacted to what she heard, but resolved it with the student before the event ended.

QUESTION: Just a follow-up on this. You just said that this was an error on the student’s part. Yesterday –

MR. CROWLEY: No, no, I’m saying it’s been reported that the student meant to say President Obama, said President Clinton by mistake.

And now comes the killer question, based entirely on Mr. Crowley’s speculative answers.

QUESTION: Well, okay. No, but that’s what I’m trying to clarify, because yesterday, officials at the State Department and what the traveling party were saying that this was a translation error by the translator. You’re saying now that this was –

MR. CROWLEY: Well, I –

QUESTION: — a student being nervous and saying the wrong thing. Which one is it?

MR. CROWLEY: We – I wasn’t there, okay? And I was careful when I talked to CNN to say there may have been an error in translation. Clearly, she reacted to the English translation of the student’s question. It has been reported – I’ve seen one report where the student said he meant to say something else rather than what he did say. There was – the traveling party went back to the French – the original question as it was posed in French to try to understand exactly what the student said. I don’t know what the sourcing was by the network that I saw last night that said that the student meant to say something else.

All I’m saying is that, to Barry’s question, which is how the Secretary responded to the question as it was posed to her in English, I think it’s important to put that in context, which is she’s in Africa focused significantly on the role of women in that country, and as it was posed to her, as she said, I’m the Secretary of State, do you want to ask – you want my opinion on an issue, I’m happy to provide it. But she’s not there to provide a perspective of –

QUESTION: I understand that, but –

MR. CROWLEY: — as it was posed in English.

QUESTION: Right, I understand that. Okay, I guess where my confusion was is that you were describing the incident in the initial question – answer to your initial question. And I’m kind of curious why you chose to highlight the –

MR. CROWLEY: I have not talked to the traveling party today to find out if they have further clarified, based on their analysis last night. I don’t think that we have a problem with the translation per se, and the report that the student said I meant to say Obama, I said Clinton, so that there – actually, the question was fairly posed, but that the student posed the question the wrong way, I have no reason to doubt that version of events.

QUESTION: Okay. So that’s sounds to be the one you’re going with then.

MR. CROWLEY: Well –

QUESTION: I mean, you’ve gone back to that several times, so –

MR. CROWLEY: Put it this way: If you want to ask me about the Secretary’s comments, I’ll be happy to take – to go into that in further detail. I can’t speak for the young student.

Yes.

QUESTION: Can I switch topics?

MR. CROWLEY: Please. (Laughter.)

This incident makes a great case study for spokespeople in the corporate world too.  Make sure you have a competent person with your executive wherever he or she goes, including people that speak the language of the country they visit.  If the unexpected happens, meaning your executive says things he or she shouldn’t, make sure you have a credible statement ready, based on facts. Never speculate.  There is nothing wrong in saying, “I’ll get back to you as soon as I talk to our people who were with our executives.”