Smart Money interviews Michael Robinson, senior vice president at Levick Strategic Communications, a crisis-management firm in Washington, D.C., regarding corporate apologies, specifically the response of Whole Foods to the revelation that their CEO John Mackey got a little carried away on the anonymous message boards.

Robinson was previously the director of policy and public affairs at the SEC. Not surprisingly, he stresses the importance of transparency in corporate communications. He also points out that while Mackey issued the concise apology we examined, Whole Foods as a company has not apologized for the actions of its CEO.

An interesting distinction. "Whole Foods" didn't do anything wrong here, while the company's CEO did. But his actions obviously reflect poorly on the company. Is an apology from the company also necessary to placate public disappointment and/or restore trust? How many different individuals and entities need to apologize for one incident? How many times? And to whom? Robinson has some good advice. An excerpt:

I think an apology is important. You have to demonstrate some level of contrition. I think you also have to say that you're making sure nothing else is going on. If there are others in the company who knew this was going on, we need to know that. The worst thing you can do is have what we call death of a thousand cuts. You have a story today, and the next day another story, and the next day something else.... There are some people or organizations that are always cited with an adjective in front of it: "Beleaguered CEO Carly Fiorina;" "Troubled pop princess Britney Spears." Once you acquire that first adjective, it's hard climb out of the cellar. (Smart Money)

Go read it all. Take notes. This will be on the final.

Extra credit: Levick has a blog called "Stop the Presses" with more discussion of the Whole Foods kerfluffle and other corporate communications dilemmas.