By Robert Simpson, President & CEO, PRA Communications -a firm specializing in strategic communications & community engagement for the mining industry. Originally published on Forbes Agency Council.
In public relations, the saying “never pick a fight with someone who buys ink by the barrel” has long held sway, particularly in the mining industry, where leaders are cautious about inviting negative responses.
That’s why the industry took notice when Robert Friedland, founder of Ivanhoe Mines, alongside some of his colleagues, published an open letter in Canada’s national newspaper, The Globe and Mail, refuting media allegations about the company’s Platreef Mine Development Project in South Africa. The industry split into two camps: Some viewed this bold move as a strategic masterstroke, while others saw it as a reckless gamble. Ultimately, the impact wasn’t as negative as feared, demonstrating that clear, direct and strategically delivered viewpoints can be advantageous.
Other companies have followed suit. Recently, Barrick Gold published a detailed rebuttal to allegations of environmental violations at one of its mines. Ivanhoe Mines issued a public statement challenging reports of labor disputes at its new project in the Democratic Republic of Congo. McEwen Mining, Glencore and Anglo American frequently engage with the media through public letters to address and correct what they deem to be false or misleading allegations. Some companies even release their conversations or written responses with journalists to reinforce their stance.
This raises the question: Is publicly refuting media reports an effective public relations strategy, or does it risk drawing more attention to the issues and appearing defensive?
As companies weigh the pros and cons, they should also consider another public relations adage—to paraphrase: If you don’t tell your own story, someone else will, and they may not have your best interests at heart. This is a common scenario in the mining industry. Today’s modern mining sector is characterized by technological and environmental innovation, a commitment to decarbonization and ongoing economic reconciliation with Indigenous communities. Communication is about more than playing defense; today’s mining companies have a positive and powerful story to tell. A recent perception audit conducted in British Columbia, one of the world’s premier mining regions, found strong latent support among the local population for mining, including significant positive sentiment among those living close to active mine operations.
Miners may have more support than they realize. In this context, one of the primary advantages of confronting media reports head-on is that it allows a company to control the narrative. By clearly addressing allegations, the company can provide its side of the story, present evidence and clarify any misconceptions. The bigger advantage is that it enables companies to rise above a defensive stance and tell a new agenda-setting narrative. This is where the return on a communications investment can be substantial.
Increasingly, mining companies are implementing comprehensive, proactive communication strategies fueled by third-party investigations, stakeholder engagement, continuous media and social analysis and timely responses. By leveraging these tools, companies aim to ensure their perspective reaches large audiences and maintains credibility in the public eye. They are also looking within, using their own people and milestones as inspiration for telling stories about the modern mining industry. Showcasing these stories not only defends corporate reputations but also builds a case for why they are great employers—a crucial point given the shrinking, aging mining workforce—and demonstrates their commitment to the communities in which they operate, an important factor when seeking government and regulatory approvals.
Some may argue that too much information can invite pushback miners seek to avoid or potentially interfere with investor outreach. But today’s investors—and the pool of potential mining investors continues to shrink—are looking for clarity and a good understanding of responsible mining practices, delivered to them in a way that’s easy to find and understand. Failure to do so represents a missed opportunity.
Ultimately, it comes down to the question Robert Friedland asked himself a decade ago: Is it safer to hunker down and let mining opponents own the public narrative, or is it time for mining to come out of the shadows and take its place as a core industry vital to the future of our modern society?
More executives are finding this question easy to answer.
