Find a back issue

Perot Museum Shows How Not to Handle PR, Ctd.

Glenn took the Perot folks to task for not handling an accident in the museum as well as they could have. I agree with him. A patron was injured, and you need to consider the person’s privacy. No question. But when asked by reporters, they could have issued the following release:

In the Sports Hall, a patron was interacting with an exhibit that challenges people to jump as high as they can. In doing so, his ring got caught on part of the exhibit, and his finger was severed. We deeply regret that this happened. The exhibit has been closed until we can determine how this accident occurred. The Museum staff is staying in close contact with the injured man and his family.

Because that’s what happened. There were people in attendance who saw it happen. Did the Perot folks think the story would not get out? I’m certain the museum is concerned about what legal action(s) lie ahead. Will the man sue the museum? Will the museum be forced to sue the people who made the exhibit? What about the crew that installed it? Yes, yes. But you can still tell the public what happened without exposing yourself to (more) liability.

UPDATE (6:09) — I should have mentioned this when I posted the item: when the museum was located in Fair Park, on a contract basis, my wife handled PR for what was then the Perot-less Museum of Nature and Science. And in 2004, for one year, when it was still called the Science Place, she was a part-time employee.