Sources used in this document:

Pomerenke found that the media's attitude towards MMMA completely changed during the three-month period following the filing of the class action lawsuit. During that period, MMMA asked employees to attend a company-sponsored march of support which would show solidarity with those in positions of authority. However, it actually had the reverse effect. This, coupled with the hard-line defense the company took against the accusers, led the media to view the company in a negative light and thus news stories took on an obvious bias in favor of the EEOC and the persons accusing the MMMA of practicing sexual harassment (Pomerenke 1999, p. 211).

4. The article is fairly simple to read and understand. The author takes care to use terminology which most people could understand, even those not directly involved in crisis communication. The author uses sources which are easily believable, such as well-known newspapers like The Chicago Tribune (Pomerenke 1999, p. 217). This adds to the author's believability and gives credit to his findings. Pomerenke also takes care to how specifically the company manipulated employees and attempted to manipulate the media. The article also makes the implications clear for other companies about the issues presented in sexual harassment cases and make them mindful of their own behavior.

5. There are many things which businesses can learn from this research study. The first lesson, of course, is that sexual harassment is a very serious thing and can bring negative attention to even the biggest companies. Allowing unethical practices to continue unchecked in the workplace is detrimental to the company name. The case is also important in terms of crisis communication because MMMA handled their situation as wrongly as they possibly could. Instead of admitting the issue and promising to rectify it as quickly as possible, the company defended themselves and their employees. They then forced their other employees into complicity through the company-sponsored march. This made the employees who were still working for the company hesitant to report any inappropriateness in their own workplace experiences because they witnessed the negativity that comes with reporting workplace impropriety. This seriously hinders the ability of the company to find means of conflict resolution inside the company and therefore breeds further disquiet and even more problems later on. In addition, the negative reaction from the media led to an ever-expanding negative message being broadcast to the consumer about MMMA (Pomerenke 1999, p. 217). A problem which could have easily been solved internally became a national issue, something all companies should look at as an example for themselves.