After a botched season, President Ancillo Canepa and Head of Sport Milos Malenovic answer the questions of their own media chief, but not those of the media. Communications specialist Mark Balsiger sorts things out.
No time? blue News summarizes for you
- FCZ misses its season goals after turbulent months.
- Critical media questions are not answered. Instead, the club bosses speak in the club's own podcast.
- Communications expert Mark Balsiger clarifies: "The alternative with the podcast is not an option, because the person who formulated the questions is someone in the pay of FC Zurich."
FC Zurich missed its self-imposed goal for the season, which was to qualify for the Championship Group. President Ancillo Canepa made himself available to the media for brief interviews immediately after the 2:1 defeat against YB last week, including for blue Sport.
In-depth discussions on the in-depth analysis of the missed season goal were subsequently refused with any media. Instead of answering critical questions from the media, Canepa and sporting director Milos Malenovic expressed their views in a club podcast. Critical questions? Not a chance.
Umbrella scandal, Denoon arrest and Mendy signing. None of this is discussed. In any case, it's all just hyped up by the media and not a big issue internally, according to the FCZ. And yet there are so many other questions that are burning under the nails of fans and media representatives.
What concrete measures are being taken to improve FC Zurich's tarnished image and reposition the club as an institution with style and class? Who bears the main responsibility for the sporting failure? What lessons can be learned from the failure? How do you assess the transfers of the last few transfer periods? What does head of sport Malenovic have to say about the accusations that he dictates the line-up to the coach?
There is a lot of commentary on the podcast on YouTube. Most of them are critical. blue Sport asked communications specialist and author Mark Balsiger what he thinks of FCZ's approach.
Is this form of communication a model for the future?
It is actually being practiced more and more, yes. Which is often the case: In difficult phases, certain companies simply go into hiding. The media, which have fewer and fewer resources at their disposal, are often in a weak position.
What do you think of FC Zurich's decision to forego critical media questions and instead rely on the club's own podcast?
The club's management obviously had "no desire" to face critical questions. In doing so, they are failing to recognize the role of the media, which asks the questions on behalf of the general public. The alternative with the podcast is not an option, because the person who formulated the questions is someone in the pay of FC Zurich. It is precisely in critical phases that you see who can really communicate convincingly. What President Ancillo Canepa & Co. are delivering here is ultimately cowardly.
What effect do you think this approach has on credibility and public trust?
FCZ receives a lot of critical comments on its Instagram profile for its actions. It is piquant and unprofessional that it had originally announced that it would allow questions from fans. As a result, they are now even more upset. Sports clubs would do well to take their fans seriously. They are the ones who create the atmosphere in the stadiums.
What risks does it entail for a company or club to systematically avoid critical questions?
Regardless of whether they are a Federal Councillor, CEO or president of a football club - top figures always want to be well received by the public. The pressure they put on themselves is great. They and their staffs will do almost anything to achieve this. There is a zero-defect culture. Many people don't understand that you don't just stand in front of the media when the sun is shining, but also when it's raining heavily.
Are there any communication strategies that would have helped FC Zurich to deal with the situation more professionally?
Of course. First of all, it would have needed an honest admission that it had performed poorly this season. Self-criticism never goes down badly with the public. You have to be blunt and say what's going on, but soon turn around and look to the future. FCZ could have invited two fans to this discussion, for example, who would then have asked their questions on behalf of everyone. Football is a business of money - and emotions. The clubs should also be able to deal with the latter.
