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.
From the standpoint of crisis managment I believe everything you said is directly to the point and correct. Particularly if the manager is tasked with protecting Richard Roberts' position at the University. Clearly there are a variety of audiences here, though the most important audience would have to be students and potential students (and their parents) and financial donors. Richard needed to address the charges made against his family and him in a more open forum than one of his shows or a clearly religious program to reassure students and donors that he didn't knowingly do anything wrong. The Larry King show was a better choice than most. I would disagree with your take on Oral Roberts' phone comments, however. As as a small but frequent donor to the University, hearing the old patriarch was reassuring. I wanted to know that there was someone involved who had the University as their primary concern. I wanted to know that if things began to unravel someone could take control. My concern has always been, if wrongdoing is found will the Board of Regents have the strength to separate what is good for Richard Roberts from what is good for ORU. Listening to Oral Roberts say "if there is anything out-of-line we will bring it into order like we have always done," eased my fears. Did it make Richard look weak, yes. Did it make the University look strong, absolutely. Overall I thought what few questions Larry King asked were handled well, although that silly little exchange about remodeling the house 11 times in 14 years was because the black mold is bad in Tulsa, Oklahoma, was ridiculous.
Hi, Phil. here's my gut reaction: even though i don't even have an affinity for Richard (he's just not my style), I wonder how the presidents of Yale, Harvard, and other major Universities would fare if their lifestyles were put under the microscope. heck, the president of Chicago Symphony Orchestra - a fully non-profit organization - makes nearly $400,000 and nobody questions her...But, don't the Roberts' have a lot of book-money and other sources of income, that could be a factor, here? These allegations may all be true - and if so, then they should change and be held accountable (I don't think prison, just give back all of the excess). But, like you said, they may have been caught-up in the amazing feeling (and temptation) that accompanies having access to seemingly endless amounts of cash. Anyone of us, or the critics, could go the same direction. That's why it's so important for everyone of us to develop integrity before the money rolls in. Perhaps, Joseph couldn't have handled all of the riches of the kindgdom of Egypt at his disposal, when he first arrived there. But he could, and did with amazing quality, once he had developed the character. however, in the Roberts' situation, a salary-cap wouldn't hurt.
I had the privilege to hear Floyd Flake speak at the Willow Creek Leadership Conference this past August. In his presentation he made a powerful statement. He said (not a direct quote) that all you do as a leader should be above reproach so that if accusations come (which they did in his case) you have nothing to worry about. This doesn't even necessarily have to relate to the charges, but "all else". i.e. if they look into your computer to find how you balance your books what else will they find on it? If a leader operates above reproach in all areas of life they can hold there head high and say bring it on when accusations like this come.
In the case of Floyd Flake his life was so above reproach, and his testimony so strong that some of the jury in his case joined his church (after charges were dismissed, and deemed ridiculous)
As the body of Christ this can be an incredible testimony of stewardship, and provide a model of leadership that can really impact people for eternity.
In order to conduct our lives and business so these types of situations rarely or never happen, we must be transparent. Leadership that is not open and honest with its team (profs, students, or staff) engenders distrust. I'd more willingly trust a fallible leader who was honest with me about his faults than a seemingly infallible leader who was aloof and always had a saccharine smile.
Ministries (specifically) and non-profits (generally), must be transparent. That is why in Canada, non-profits' financials are all available on the Canadian Revenue Agency's website. As people have previously mentioned, transparency is key.
In Texas, we have watched for the past two weeks the trial of a college president over her use of funds. http://www.chron.com/disp/story.mpl/metropolitan/5202729.htm l -and it’s not pretty! Although ORU is a private university and TSU is a public university; both situations came from leaders that made poor choices – whether they were right choices or not. You’re on target Phil with your comments but it is ashamed that it had to get to the point of a lawsuit. Once the lawyers become involved, PR is difficult since what you say and do will end up in the courtroom. As we say in Texas, it’s hard to get the poop back in the cow! Making amends, settling the suit and being honest and transparent, in that order, are the choices at this time in the game if damage is to be minimized. Whining in the media is not going help the cause.
"Regardless of right and wrong, perception is what’s really on trial here".
Truer words were never spoken.
"Out of touch" is one of the most dangerous conditions any Christian leader can be in. In general - and I'm not being specific to Richard & Lindsay Roberts - when you're riding on the jet, living in the ministry's paid-for house, having your clothes tailor made or purchased at a high end store, having assistants fetch and do what you ask, don't worry about your next paycheck, when your life is filled with busy-ness at high levels, and the board rubberstamps most of your wishes...well, you just might start forgetting what drives and motivates the regular person. What starts creeping in is a dangerous dynamic: Entitlement. You begin to believe your luxuries and perks are deserved. One can easily start drifting off into The Emperor Has No Clothes territory.
Without getting too preachy, Jesus was always aware of people's lives, no matter their status in society or life. He ate with the rich, touched lepers, treated women with respect and dignity, dealt with rulers, swindlers and the outcast. Talk about being relational at all levels. If you come across in the media as entitled and out of touch, you're in trouble. Best to take a few steps back and take stock of your life, ministry and leadership. The glare of the spotlights is pretty intense these days. It can either illuminate...or burn.
It is funny to read how lots of alumni and former employees of ORU and OREA write that they are not surprised by the allegations brought to RR and LR.
In the Bible, having mold was a curse. Hagee had mold in his house too and they had to move out for 18 months. The walls are coming down people, and God is exposing these pimps!
I think Mrs. Roberts told on her self at one point in the interview concerning the cell phone problems. A cell phone that is paid for BY ORU should not be given out to your children's friends (likely that even happened). That is bad spending. Why should the school be paying for the cell phone bill if, as she stated, she is not even employed by the school? I was a student when P.Rob called Dr. Brooker on stage to talk about the campaign. To hear them flat out lie to our faces on the Larry King show very much upsets me! If you catch them in one lie, your bound to catch them in another. And your right, many of us who graduated from the university are not at all surprised by any of this. We had to sit in chapel services while Mrs. Roberts yelled at us because a few students were upset at the special treatment of her daughter. She would tell us that she is the reason some of us are here, like that is an excuse for her daughter having walls torn down at the school so two rooms could be converted to one to give her more space or when we viewed her children speeding around on golf carts and tearing up the grass (and the golf carts). Many of us were on committees or groups within the school (that she does not work for) and our progress was hindered because we had to wait until she gave an approval of something. You ask why we stayed. There are many of us that wanted to transfer after our first year but could not because we found that we would have to retake a considerable amount of our classes if we did so. Something else that is bothering me is the board of regents. This board is made up of MANY high-powered people within the Christian community. If professors brought this information to the board and they did nothing, what does that say about the ministries of those on the board?
[First let me say,] my friends, I don't feel that I have already arrived. But I forget what is behind, and I struggle for what is ahead. I run toward the goal, so that I can win the prize of being called to heaven. This is the prize that God offers because of what Christ Jesus has done. All of us who are mature should think in this same way. And if any of you think differently, God will make it clear to you. But we must keep going in the direction that we are now headed. I often warned you that many people are living as enemies of the cross of Christ. And now with tears in my eyes, I warn you again that they are headed for hell! They worship their stomachs and brag about the disgusting things. All they can think about are the things of this world. We don't want you in the dark, friends, about how hard it was when all this [persecution] came down on us in Asia province. It was so bad we didn't think we were going to make it. We felt like we'd been sent to death row; that it was all over for us. As it turned out, it was the best thing that could have happened. Instead of trusting in our own strength or wits to get out of it, we were forced to trust God totally—not a bad idea since he's the God who raises the dead! And he did it, rescued us from certain doom. And he'll do it again, rescuing us as many times as we need rescuing. You and your prayers are part of the rescue operation—I don't want you in the dark about that either. I can see your faces even now, lifted in praise for God's deliverance of us, a rescue in which your prayers played such a crucial part. [Therefore], don't fret or worry. Instead of worrying, pray. Let petitions and praises shape your worries into prayers, letting God know your concerns. Before you know it, a sense of God's wholeness, everything coming together for good, will come and settle you down. It's wonderful what happens when Christ displaces worry at the center of your life! Now may the Lord of peace HIMSELF grant you His peace (the peace of His kingdom) at all times and in all ways [under all circumstances and conditions, whatever comes]. The Lord [be] with you all.
I am curious to hear what people think about the "Revised Lawsuit" and the appendix with the litany of serious allegations.
Having read the legal brief and today the transcript of the Larry King interview with the Roberts, I discerned some serious discrepancies.
The facts of the case have yet to be proven, however the nature of the allegations are matters of fact. Richard Roberts marched out to one of the biggest microphones in the U.S. and rolled out a carefully crafted PR message designed to keep his followers trusting and giving for as long as possible. However, the way he addressed the campaign issue was a deliberate blurring of the distinction between the out of state campaigning that is legal and the in state campaigning which he knew was illegal. Here is a quote from the transcript:
King:The candidate, they claim -- the litigants claim that you asked them to support a political candidate running for mayor of Tulsa. The candidate lost. He said he was ordered -- the people were ordered to take responsibility when the IRS investigated complaints, because as a university, you can't support political candidates.
How do you respond?
R. ROBERTS: Larry, I didn't ask or coerce anybody to do that. That's not true.
KING: Just plain out not true?
R. ROBERTS: It's not true. I didn't do that. Oral Roberts University has had a longstanding policy with our government students to be involved in campaigns. And students have campaigned for Republicans, for Democrats -- I don't know about Independents. But it's sort of a lab experience the government students have. And they do that in most universities. Most government students on university campuses are a part of some type of political campaign to gain experience.
KING: And they can do that...
R. ROBERTS: Yes, they can do that.
KING: That's not in violation of...
R. ROBERTS: That's legal. But it is correct, we don't ever endorse a candidate as a university. However, as an individual, we have a right. But not as an university or an...
KING: Did you ask these professors to do anything?
R. ROBERTS: Absolutely not.
KING: Nothing?
R. ROBERTS: <b>And we've had a longstanding policy of supporting candidates all across the country and helping them with their races.<b>-----End of excerpt---
Most viewers across the country are unaware the distinctions of the campaign laws. Roberts knows very well that the accusation is about instate campaigns, but he asserts the half truth of the universities well known out of state campaign work as if the accusers are going after something that ORU has done for a long time with the blessing of the law. Seems Larry King was not aware of the distinction or he would have surely follwed up harder.
Explanations regarding other charges strain credulity. Eleven remodels of the home at University expense because of the black mold plague sweeping through Tulsas most prestegious homes? Hail damage? Eleven times? With luck like that, makes you wonder if they are living right.
And the following heart tug given to explain twiglight tsext messages to undrage boys must make little old ladies get misty, however I found it hard to swallow.
Roberts:Larry, if I might add, Lindsay and I, for years, have had a special ministry to troubled kids -- to kids who had been on alcohol and drugs. It's not something that we publicize, because we don't want to draw attention to those kids. But for years we have reached out to kids who've suffered with drug and alcohol problems. We've helped them when they've been in and out of jail. We've helped them when they've come to our home drunk. And we've brought them and had them spent the night in our home and then gotten our bibles out and counseled them the next morning when they were sober and tried to help them. We've text messaged them. We've taken their phone calls at 2:00 or 3:00 in the morning. That's not something that we talk about, Larry. But we've had a ministry to these kids for years.----end of excerpt---------
right...sooo we have unidentifiable drunken teens spending the night at the the Roberts luxery detox and recieving personal ministry from the first family.
Full transcript below
This story has legs, and it’s not going to rest anytime soon. I think last night did little to quench the fire. Too much denial without specific evidence.
I thought it could have been a lot stronger if they could have produced some documents (cancelled checks, expense reports, etc.) to disprove even a few of the charges. But, essentially all they did was to deny any wrongdoing and talk about how hurt they were by all this. These are not folks who seem to know how to be authentic and transparent, and in the end, especially in today’s culture, that could be their undoing.