In April’s Reputation Report, our team of Reputation Management experts share their insight on the month’s biggest news stories. This month we are analysing the war of words between Prince Harry and Dr Sophie Chandauka, a potentially landmark libel case as well as the furore surrounding British Steel.
Sentebale is the big loser in the war of words between Prince Harry and the charity’s chair
Tim Jotischky, Divisional Managing Director, Reputation
There were no winners in the bitter war of words between Prince Harry and Dr Sophie Chandauka after he walked away from Sentebale, the charity he co-founded, citing an untenable relationship with the chair of trustees.
She responded with a TV interview, accusing him of “harassment and bullying at scale”, saying his brand was toxic and he was guilty of “misogynoir” – a damaging allegation, given his own complaints about the Royal Family.
The focus then turned to the £427,500 spent on media, website and fundraising advice in less than 18 months – an eye-watering amount for a charity with an annual income of £3.4m.
Prince Harry demanded the resignation of Dr Chandauka. She refused, took legal action to remain in post and reported her concerns to the Charity Commission, who have now opened a regulatory compliance case, which will investigate any conflicts of interest in the hiring of consultants. Both sides say they welcome the investigation.
Disputes within charities are more common than you might think. I once advised a charity, whose trustees forced their founder to resign after he refused to accept their demands for more robust governance and attacked them publicly on social media.
However, it is rare for such disputes to be played out in the media. Partly that’s an inevitable consequence of Harry’s involvement, but it’s also because both sides are media savvy and aware it is important to control the narrative. We should expect more briefings, counter-briefings and media interviews.
The biggest loser is the charity. Whilst the individuals involved are fighting to protect their reputations, Sentebale’s brand could be damaged irrevocably.
Dr Chandauka has argued she had to engage consultants to facilitate the charity’s entry into the US because Harry had become a liability. But it’s hard to believe it won’t lose out financially if its high-profile founder is no longer involved. And will prospective donors want to become involved with a charity at war with itself?
This is a battle of wills, as much as an argument over the charity’s future direction. The danger is there might not be a future to argue over.
The case of Elliott Kebbie and a landmark moment for libel legislation
Neil McLeod, Divisional Managing Director, Corporate
Not many people may be fully aware of the case of Elliott Kebbie, the former Royal Marine who took on West Yorkshire police over its actions when false claims were made against him.
But it has helped raise incredibly important points in relation to libel laws.
Kebbie’s issue centred on a 400-word email sent by a police constable to senior Royal Marines officers in relation to an investigation sparked by false claims made against him. Without having spoken to Kebbie, it accused him of making threats to a former partner and insinuated he was not a Marine at all.
Cutting a long story short, former footballer Kebbie’s lawyers later issued defamation proceedings against the police force.
There has long been criticism of libel in England. Blockbuster celebrity cases in recent years, press freedom arguments and noise around SLAPPS (Strategic Legal Actions Against Public Participation), have no doubt served to fuel negative opinion. Libel, or the threat of suing over it, is usually seen as an expensive, heavy-handed process to help the rich and famous get away with wrongdoing.
Following a four-year ordeal, Kebbie, a former Leeds United footballer, was vindicated by victory in a saga serving as a reminder of the genuine importance of libel in protecting reputations. It also underlines the vital need for organisations to adopt robust processes and the importance of professional communications if their own public image is not to be damaged. West Yorkshire police now have the unenviable title of being the first force in England successfully sued for libel, costing the taxpayer £300,000 in the process.
Its actions were incompetent, lacked serious legal nous – and completely avoidable.
The battle for British Steel and what it means for UK:China relations
Robin Brant, former BBC News China Correspondent and Associate Director, Reputation
British steel is saved, it seems, for now. The taxpayer has come to the rescue of a key strategic industry. But a Chinese company has been humiliated and a government riled.
The mess has exposed two key tenets of effective communications – and the consequences of ignoring them. Consistent messaging and trust are crucial. Both have been lacking in the discussion and very public row over the future of the Scunthorpe works.
British Steel was owned by Jingye, a Chinese state-controlled company. The Starmer government is wholeheartedly trying to repair relations with China. Rachel Reeves was there recently, touting UK exporters and better times. Yet her Cabinet colleague Jonathan Reynolds is down on China, saying the government had ‘got it wrong in the past’ by allowing Chinese firms to invest in key industry here.
Then there’s the conduct of the erstwhile owners. Five years in and the works was losing tens of millions every month. Jingye refused an offer of UK government money to replace and update the furnace at the heart of the operation. The signs were that it was willing to switch it off – an irrevocable move – and cut loose more than 2,000 workers.
To some, it didn’t seem like an honest broker in the negotiations. So, one side was giving mixed messages. Completely contradictory messages in fact. The other side wasn’t trusted.
On the politics it’s a win for the prime minister. There’s a reputational upside too. But the longer- term strategic effort to build bridges with Beijing has taken a hit. China’s government was affronted. It cried about ‘malicious hype’ and said confidence would be damaged. Both sides have emerged with some bruises.