“The exhibition accused the Western news media of miscasting Czar Ivan IV as ‘the Terrible.’ A display of contemporaneous German etchings that showed the 16th-century czar’s troops committing atrocities was offered as proof that labeling him a murderous tyrant was simply defamation by foreigners.” – “Russian History Receives a Makeover That Starts With Ivan the Terrible,” The New York Times, March 30, 2015.
Moscow, 9:03 AM, October 1576.
Main Conference Room
Grozny Public Relations Solutions
- So where are we on the new client?
- It doesn’t look good.
- The problem, as I see it, is that “Ivan the Terrible” doesn’t really have that relatability factor.
- It makes him sound kind of…
- Terrible.
- Yeah.
- I mean, the good news is that there’s widespread brand recognition.
- We’ve definitely gotten his name out there.
- And he’s got reach. The 1552 Kazan slaughter really brought him to the attention of a new audience; they’re trembling from Smolensk to the Urals. Fear is a leveragable asset.
- So we’ve got the awareness, we just need to apply some reputation management.
- We shortlisted some options. Now nothing’s set in stone; remember, we’re just spitballin’ here.
- So, as I see it, the first part’s fine. Ivan. Good solid name, road-tested by three previous tsars, great public response. It’ll play in Prokopyevsk. It’s just the “Terrible” that consumers get hung up on.
- We drafted some alternatives.
- Lay them on me.
- Ah, let’s see… we got… Ivan the Fastidious? Ivan the Louche. Ivan the Groovy.
- Eh, too uptight, too suggestive, too dated.
- The focus group also reacted positively to Ivan the Tender. Only it would be a radical shift in his value proposition…
- Hey guys, I hate to change course, but I think we should first really deal with the elephant in the room. We know there’s also kind of a deeper image issue at play here than just the name.
- I know. We’ve got to talk Massacre of Novgorod.
- It’s been getting some pushback.
- It doesn’t look good. Mass slaughter’s been losing cachet in a lot of sectors lately.
- Okay, so we’ve thought about this, and we think we may have a way out.
- Get this: we’re ditching “Massacre.” We’re calling it a “Disruption.”
- The Disruption of Novgorod.
- Think of Novogrod as like an outmoded industry.
- And Ivan as a small start-up.
- Who’s throwing out the whole playbook.
- He’s all about change-oriented post-medievalism.
- Solution-driven.
- Just with the solution being to have thousands of Cossacks ransacking a city and brutalizing the populace.
- I like it. Let’s do a soft launch and see if we can make it stick, then roll out a full campaign if it takes. Try to downplay the carnage dimension and foreground the innovation aspect.
- You mean the new forms of impalement?
- Right, like I said, the innovation aspect.
- What about the disembowlings?
- We’re using the phrase “internal restructurings.”
- I want to shift gears for a moment. Let’s talk social media. I think it’s key to rehabilitating the Ivan brand.
- It’s all about multi-platform connectivity.
- What does that mean?
- I don’t know.
- I want him on every medium. Instagram his orb and scepter. Send a newsletter out with all his favorite links of the week.
- They’re all conspiracy websites about bishops.
- Oh.
- We did set him up a Twitter account.
- But the results have been sub-optimal.
- He’s been tweeting “Death to the Tatars” over and over.
- And sending a lot of rambling multi-part ones about treacherous boyars.
- Okay, first rule, as always: never let the client tweet! Remember when we told Catherine her password and she started tweeting out horse pics—
- That hasn’t happened yet. She’s later.
- Oh, sorry.
- Okay, so what about the Facebook page?
- Mixed news.
- His profile pic is fine.
- The face is contorted into a bloodthirsty demented snarl, but whatever, it’ll do.
- It’s the cover photo that’s problematic.
- It’s a painting of 30,000 slaughtered Ottomans.
- It sends the wrong message.
- Bad optics.
- Did you talk to him about it? Is he up to speed on the social media strategy?
- He’s been resistant.
- He told us to go ебать ourselves.
- Hmm… Okay, maybe the whole Tsardom just needs a makeover; a fresh face to the company. Can anyone else interface with the public? What about the son?
- Ivan Ivanovich?
- Uh…
- Bad news on that front. He got disrupted.
- In the head.
- With a scepter.
- Let’s put that one on the back burner, then. What else is on the table?
- So, the war-induced total economic ruin is hurting us in certain demographics.
- All demographics, really.
- Hang on. Let’s take a step back here. We all know where our numbers are weak. Let’s try and play to Ivan’s strengths instead.
- Uh… he’s a poet. He plays chess. Creditably good as a theologian according to contemporary historical sources.
- Hang on, I’m going to make two columns on the whiteboard. Okay, we’ve got assets and liabilities. So, poetry, chess. Great, great. These are selling points.
- I guess we should put killing his second son on the other side.
- And the massacre…
- Disruption!
- Right.
- Plus the economic ruin.
- Got it.
- He’s good at besieging, though. And gibbeting. Put those in the assets.
- Pillaging! I nearly forgot pillaging.
- Guys, I think we’re going in the wrong direction here.
- Flogging the clergy. Eye-gouging. Throwing people off that bridge.
- Kicked a pregnant woman. Mutilated an architect.
- Hold up, everyone. We’re going off the rails; time out. This is leading us in circles. We need to start thinking outside the box. I want bold ideas.
- Hmm…
- Well, how about… Let me just throw something out there. Terror might not necessarily be a minus. Why don’t we think of it more like “creative destruction”?
- I like it. And it’s his core competency.
- Plus it’s scalable.
- And gives a strong corporate identity.
- Okay, let’s run with it.
- “Ivan the Terrible.”
- “Just as terrible as you expected.”
- “Only more so.”
- Perfect. Let’s break.
- Back in 10?
- Sure. Then I want us to talk about product tie-ins. We’ve got this idea for an app that showcases impalement locations in real time….
- It’s like Uber.
- But for violence.
- I love it.