Thoughts About Richard Roberts Appearance on Larry King
I’ve had so many Oral Roberts University graduates and others close to the school talk to me about the current allegations made against Richard and Lindsay Roberts, that I woke up after midnight thinking I should write down some thoughts about Richard and Lindsay’s appearance on Larry King Tuesday night. We have to keep in mind that for the most part, the lawsuit from a small group of disgruntled former professors is about the actions of the President and his wife, not about ORU itself. Oral Roberts University is a fine institution, and year after year, educational experts continue to say
wonderful things about the academic aspects of the school.
Having said that, I’m certainly not an attorney, and have little knowledge of the legal issues they’re facing, but if I was advising Richard and Lindsay from the point of view of media strategy, here are some thoughts:
1. The Larry King interview was a good move. Getting your point of view out into the media is important. Larry is getting up there in years, and although his audience isn’t as strong as it used to be, it’s still a good platform. When it comes to interview questions, Larry’s famous for throwing softballs, so it’s not a tough challenge. Plus, I don’t know if this was negotiated, but Richard and Lindsay not having to take live phone calls was even better. So from their point of view, the Larry King choice was a good one.
2. Having his father, Oral Roberts phone into the Larry King interview wasn’t so good however. In fairness, that may not have been Richard’s choice, but having Oral comment on the situation, continues to make Richard look weak as a leader – as if he still needs his father’s approval and support during difficult times. Richard’s been president for a number of years now, and for the sake of perception, he really needs to step up and clearly take charge of the situation.
3. Richard and Lindsay were obviously shaken during the interview, as if these allegations were weighting heavily on them – which is very understandable. Certainly, anytime you get sued it’s frustrating and disconcerting. However, the problem becomes a disconnect between trying to imply that these accusations are baseless, and yet looking really troubled by them. I would have advised Richard to be more confident, indicating that these were simply upset professors who had a grudge. Granted there’s a fine line here. You don’t want to seem arrogant and aloof when serious charges are in play, but the fact is, looking beaten up and hurt makes the viewer feel like there must be something here.
4. Some of Lindsay’s answers to certain allegations indicate being out of touch with regular people – the kind who work at ORU or support it. For instance, to the question of her giving scholarships to undeserving family friends, her reply was that she “only makes recommendations” to the scholarship committee. But chances are, when the folks on the scholarship committee get a personal recommendation from the President’s wife, they have to take it very seriously. Most viewers would genuinely doubt if they would be willing to snub Lindsay Robert’s personal request for a student scholarship. Other issues relating to late night cell phone use seemed just as odd. They explained that when their daughter’s friends stay late, they give them a cell phone to take home for safety reasons. But how many times have you given your kid’s friends an extra cell phone to take home “for safety reasons?” Other answers about giving her daughters her own cell phone sounded hollow as well. How often do you give your high school or older kids your own personal cell phone overnight? Probably not often.
That’s not to say it doesn’t happen. But few can afford to have extra cell phones laying around the house they can hand out liberally to family and friends.
The point being, whether it’s accusations about fancy cars, excessive remodeling of the house, extravagant clothing budgets, or handing out cell phones like candy – right or wrong – these are all indications of a lifestyle that is far out of reach for most people who support or work at Oral Roberts University.
As I related this morning in an interview on ABC Radio, even if these accusations are proven in court, I don’t believe for a minute that anyone involved was the least bit malicious in their actions. These are good people trying to do the right thing. But it does indicate a certain lax attitude toward the responsibility of leading a major non-profit institution, and the personal transparency needed to gain the trust of supporters.
Finally – I would urge Richard to stop publicly using such strong religious terminology, or “lingo” as we often say on this blog. These accusations aren’t against Richard Roberts the evangelist, they’re against Richard Roberts the university president. That’s why he should respond in a clear, professional manner. Using phrases like “God told me” to do this or that, only hurts his perception. To his supporters and friends, he doesn’t need to use that terminology because they already know he’s serious about his faith. And to the secular, unbelieving world, it just looks wacky.
Again – I’m not advocating for or against Richard or Lindsay. I’m sure they’re trying to live as rightly as possible and I hope it turns out well. Plus, I’m not privy to these issues, and there certainly seems to be some big problems with the other side’s perspective. Only the court can decide what’s right and wrong. But as we discuss frequently on this blog, we live in a media-driven culture, and from the moment these accusations were made, they had to be dealt with in the context of the media. And in that context, these charges will reverberate throughout the religious and non-profit community, impacting literally hundreds of other organizations.
That’s why it’s so important to have this conversation. How do we respond against baseless allegations? How do we respond to real allegations? Better yet, how can we conduct our lives and business so these types of situations rarely or never happen?
Regardless of right and wrong, perception is what’s really on trial here.
-
Benevolent Guru
-
Bonebrake
-
BoycottTBN
-
Steven M
-
Paul, the Apostle
-
steve
-
http://churchonthelake.org Mark Deckard
-
Jeff Reid
-
KRM
-
http://clubfritch.com gilliebean
-
http://www.msgpr.com Lee Miller
-
Truett Hancock
-
Alan Smithee
-
Freethinker




