Flack's Revenge

If it ain't Social, it ain't Worth a F**K!

The Facebook Developers' conference generated lots of buzz last week.   Much of the excitement was around the launch of Facebook Connect (see details  on Facebook Developer News), which many covered and proclaimed as a step forward in the social Web.

Facebook Connect makes the data, updates and interconnections from your social network portable, for integration with other Web and social networking applications (and vice versa: updates from your blog can go back to Facebook, for example). 

It seems to be a powerful concept, and Facebook is once again demonstrating its leadership and ability to drive the dialog in social networking (sure, they have also had their share of controversy, but they somehow manage to stay ahead of the curve; and their numbers verify their growth and progress, I read somewhere that they have achieved user parity with MySpace).

Somehow the concept of the social graphs seems to have been haphazardly lumped into all of  this, and I am trying to determine if Facebook Connect really does advance of the concept.

I have blogged about Social graphs (WhatIs definition) from time to time.  As the name implies, social graphs provide a visual way to analyze social networks. They hold the promise of a better way to map relationships, and graphically show networks, connections and hubs of influence. 

The challenge in all this of course is sensitivity over privacy and personal data.  People don't necessarily want to show up on some marketer's graph.  Also, most social networks are to an extent closed - users can make their profiles inaccessible to others.

Not to get to hung up on terminology, but it seems like Zuckerberg and others who have chimed in about Facebook Connect very casually throw the phrase around and say "social graph" when what they are really talking about is social networks.

To me, this news is more about socializing Facebook and the Web  and less about graphs.  Unless I am missing something, Facebook Connect does not necessarily advance the social graph concept.  Although, perhaps that is an application developers are working on as we speak.

The term "socializing" in the context of information and applications is quickly becoming one of my favorite verbs.  You can socialize press releases, content and now other Web applications, with Facebook Connect, as noted above.

Social is in, standalone, out.  You want your info to play nicely with others and leverage your connections, and connections' connections (threatening rugged individualists, freelance gunslingers and wallflowers everywhere).

I am starting to wonder if Web 3.0 = social Web?  The Social Web seems to be where some of the more interesting development work is being done, and would appear to be a logical extension and advancement of Web 2.0 concepts (I am sure the semantic Web zealots will be chiming in on this).

So I am thinking of updating my old slogan.  What do you think?  Does Web 3.0 as Social Web have legs?

Interesting Links

Getting behind in my blogging and reading, will have to do something about that!

So forgive the fact that I am referencing links that are not quite hot off the press.  They are still great links, and I am sure you will enjoy them if you haven't seen these pieces already. 

These, among other links, have been sitting in my Firefox browser for the past few weeks (a neat trick, you can set up Firefox to "remember" which sessions you had open in tabs when you close, so that they get instantly called up again the next time you start the browser - neat, except that it is a recipe for procrastination).  While we are on the subject, everyone who uses Firefox should upgrade to 3.0, it rocks.

Anyone who reads Flack's Revenge should know that poor PR writing is one of my pet peeves.   That is why the following caught my attention:

From the Riffs, Tiffs and What ifs Blog:  It's Complex to Write Simple These Days--but Hemingway's Rules of Writing can Still Work

This post opens with the perennial question: "Why Can't new PR and Marketing People Write?"

Steve Kayser writes about writing in the context of Hemingway's recommendations, and includes these tips amongst others:

1. Use short sentences.
2. Use short first paragraphs.
3. Use vigorous English.
4. Be positive, not negative

A great read, and some excellent tips.

In the post I am not cut out for PR from the Getting Ink blog, Sally Whittle tells about her experiences as journalist-turned copywriter/PR person, and discusses (amongst other things) the rudeness she encountered from journalists in the process.

Not that we want or invite gratuitous trashing of journos, but it is becoming so commonplace to air peeves about PR people these days, it is nice to hear another perspective from someone who has experience on both sides.

Competition for Profnet (HARO Gets some Nice Buzz)

I  learned about a service called HARO (for Help A Reporter Out) via some colleagues that joined a Facebook group of the same name a few months ago.   The group seemed like a novel way to leverage social networking for connecting reporters with useful info and sources.  So I signed up.

Shortly thereafter, I got a note from colleague (and top PR guy) Justin Finnegan about a  media inquiry he had learned about through HARO.   Only this inquiry came from a website service. Apparently Peter Shankman (the same guy who started the HARO Facebook group) also has a website, HelpaReporter.com.

Anyway, Gawker covered this today, in the post: Why Does a Flack want to Help a Reporter? (thanks for alerting me to this Justin).   According to the article:

A flack named Peter Shankman (who enjoys getting tased) has built up quite a little reporter-helping service! Through a free website, Helpareporter.com, Shankman takes in queries from reporters in search of sources for random stories, and then sends those queries out to the PR world, who—coincidentally—like to be featured sources. Everybody wins! Except for the otherProfnet, which does the same thing, but charges a big fee to flacks to participate

This was also covered in the Industry Standard.  Congratulations, Shankman!

Communicating with (and through) the New Communicators

In my post Crossing the Blogging Chasm on Fusion PR forum last week, I wrote that blogging is crossing the chasm into mainstream adoption.  Many different types of people blog.  This means you need to dig deeper than the simple fact that someone blogs when considering  how (or even if) to engage the person, and be a bit smarter than just striving to "go after the blogs."

But let's look at it another way.   Does the fact that someone blogs say anything interesting about them?  E.g., I blog, and enjoy blogging.  Does this fact say anything about my identity?  Should I feel any kinship with other bloggers, despite the fact that we might come from wildly different backgrounds and focus on different things?

For starters, it is pretty clear that most people who blog also read blogs, and communicate with other bloggers.  BlogCatalog, a social network for bloggers (of which I am a member), was  founded on the idea that bloggers share a common bond. 

Further, the power of interconnected blogging networks has been proven.  For example,  Bloggers Unite campaigns have shown that bloggers pull together toward shared goals. And most people are familiar with Netroots,  i.e. "political activism organized through blogs and other online media," according to the Wikipedia definition.

Although the above efforts are not marketing driven, I believe they do show the powerful and potentially viral nature of the technology.

Savvy marketers and communicators will increasingly add how people communicate to the types of demographic data they collect.  The mere fact that someone blogs may not by itself be that interesting, but what about the ability to target upper income left leaning bloggers?  Or car buffs who use Twitter or Facebook?

The really smart marketers will learn how to leverage the greater networks of these new communicators.   This type of intelligence will guide marketers towards leveraging extended communications networks, allowing them to target these communicators, ideally by using some of the same tools.

This Nasty Breakup Brought to you By.....

This one seduced the babysitter.  That one is a little nutty. The first has various disgusting addictions. 

Then there is the one who cheated on his spouse with a cougar rock star.  The wife returned the favor and is also having an affair with a rock star

If you feel like you need a play book to keep up with the latest divorce scandals, you are not alone.  And for some strange reason, the battles are often fought in the media, causing one to wonder why (of course, given my field, I am always focused on questions about public image and communications strategies).

OK, it makes a juicy headline, and people love to read about this stuff.  But what do those directly involved get out of this?  Is it the belief that there really is no such things as bad press or too much information?  Does it spring from some twisted desire to destroy opponents at any cost?

For example, what is the gainsay for Cook and/or Brinkley in airing some of the details that came out recently (I have heard more than I care to about Cook's various addictions)?  Like some cheap novel or Hollywood B movie, no one came away looking good.  I am not a lawyer, but did hear (I believe on the Larry King show, bless those talking heads) that it would have been a simple matter for either side to have called for closed door proceedings.

What are your thoughts on this?

Does Your PR Writing Pass the "Sniff Test"?

Sniff, sniff.   What's that smell?  Could it be the rank odor of press materials turned kitty litter liner?

Passing the sniff test means writing PR copy that does not read like it was generated by a PR committee.  Yes, it might be hard to believe, but many in PR actually aspire to a achieve a writing style that sounds highfalutin and official.

Not that this was ever impressive, but these days, with the explosion of online content, people have more choices and it is more important than ever to write in a credible and interesting way.  There is little patience for PR and vendor speak.

People can read about your product on their favorite blogs, news outlets and even in some cases read about users' firsthand brand experiences.  If your market can tap into the opinions of real users online, why should they read a jargon-laden, officious, self-congratulatory press release?

Believe it or not, it is possible to write in a way that is interesting, educates and informs while staying true to your greater PR mission.

But first you will need to abandon some tired habits (for more on the topic, you might see my PR Death Watch series and post that proclaims the death of "PR Speak".  Also see my Keeping it Real post, and Finding the words that Work in Tech PR).

Whether it is a pitch, a traditional press release, or a social media release, you are well advised to screen your copy carefully for PR speak.  Get rid of those gratuitous words that add no real meaning, and people just read right past anyway

• In  the PR 1.0 world, everyone was a leader  and no one is a follower - isn't it time to graduate from using this tired modifier?
• Get rid of those fuzzy and unsubstantiated hype words.  If you can genuinely claim and defend a quantifiable superlative, do so - but leave out words like "best" "unparalleled" "unrivaled"
• Tell a story, and do so with fewer words and less repetition
• The headline is king.  Master it.  If you can't boil you story down to a few words that are compelling, jump off the page and inspire the reader to delve further then you don't have a story (this is one reason I am learning to like Twitter so much: it forces you to express yourself in under 140 characters).
• Go  beyond  the copy and messages handed to you by the sales and marketing team (nothing against them, I have spent my career in these areas,  but these are the corporate chest beaters, and if you just take your cues from this side you are not getting the full picture).  Instead, also factor in information from R & D and customer service.   

The goal is to be able to write in a way that resonates with prospective users of your product or service  - i.e. really connects with them, educates, and doesn't clobber them with official sounding language, hype and bravado.

Goodbye, Tony

Just thought I'd write this brief post to note the passing of former White House press secretary Tony Snow over the weekend.  Although I was aware that he had been ill with cancer, I guess I did not realize how bad it was until this sudden news.

The press secretary position is a thankless job, and I was surprised when Tony took it after a successful career as a high profile right wing commentator and syndicated columnist.  It seemed to be a tribute to the communications profession and press secretary office that he would take a such a position, which I am sure involved a substantial pay cut.  I guess it was an offer (and a calling) from the President that he simply could not refuse.

Some might think that the press secretary position is just about obfuscation, spinning and mindless recitation of the party line.  But watching Tony in action proved that this was not so.  He brought a real flair to the role, and was more soft spoken and glib than bellicose.  His journalism bona fides earned him credibility with the DC press corps.  He did not hold back in dealing with the media, and often gave as good as he got.

Although I did not agree with his politics, he seemed to be a straight shooter, a genuinely nice guy, and was a tribute to the communications profession.

Goodbye Tony, we will miss you.

Crossing the Blogging Chasm

These days, it is just technology and it is just kind of there.

What am I talking about?  Read more about this subject in my post of the same title on the Fusion PR Forum blog today.

Fending off the PR Hordes at Fox News (and those that Write about them)

David Carr wrote in the NY Times on Monday about the scorched earth PR tactics of Fox News (When Fox News is the Story).

It seems that PR is blood sport at Fox News, and they are as aggressive in defending the network's image in the media as their journalist counterparts are in espousing right wing ideology on their own channel.

(If Carr is correct, the hordes in the the Fox News PR department should be firing up their "apparatus"  right about now and flaming me or writing blog posts in response to this one; not that I have any inflated illusions about the importance of this blog, but according to Carr it would seem that they take no prisoners).

But enough about Fox News - I write not to bury them, nor praise them, but instead to talk about the portrayal of PR in the media.  So I will try to parse things a bit and isolate descriptions of the field from the broader focus on Fox News.

Mr. Carr uses the words "public relations apparatus" several times.  It seems like a throwaway line, written without much thought. But a definite slam, I doubt journalists would want their reporting teams to be referred to as an "apparatus."  Elsewhere he talks about a "public relations machine."

These are small points when one considers the tone of the piece and its message.  Carr seems genuinely amazed that a media organization (and its PR team) can be so aggressive and thin skinned in defending its image.

We in the PR profession have become so used to being the kowtowing supplicants that it really is jarring to read about reporters standing in fear of crossing a "PR apparatus" (a common refrain in PR is "don't pick battles with those who buy ink by the barrel."  All bets are off, I suppose, when your parent organization also buys ink - and electrons - by the barrel).

Actually, if not a positive portrayal of the profession, a departure from the usual stories about clueless PR people and their clueless PR pitches, or slippery PR spinmeisters. 

PR Deathwatch #4: Prepared Statements and PR Speak

Here's a quick review of the PR Death Watch list as it stands, and my latest installment.  The various topics together paint a picture of how our field has been changing.

PR Death Watch Continues
Endangered PR "Species" Continued
Death of Media Relations

Today's topic was inspired by a totally unnecessary exercise I witnessed, and provides a window into the glaring contrasts between PR of old - basically, "old" being anything before last year -  and how things are shaping up today.

 

The scenario (I'll leave the details intentionally vague) was that a blogger sent an inquiry asking a vendor to  confirm details of a topic that in my mind did not have earth shattering consequences - no CEO departing under a cloud, major product meltdown or recall, etc.

 

Before long a fire drill ensued - a drill caused in part by the fact that it was an important blogger asking,  some  key people were out of the office due to vacation schedules, and I guess some viewed the issue as potentially sensitive.

 

The PR folks proceeded to draft a statement, sent it around and made numerous revisions before producing what some might consider to be a very polished bit of text - text that in my view did not answer the question directly, and seemed like so much slippery PR speak.

 

Ultimately the team made revisions (keep in mind this all unraveled within just a few hours) to make sure they were being direct and clear in the response.  Of course,  by the time they were done and before they sent the response over the blogger had posted the story, saying in the post that we did not issue a statement or respond to his request.

 

So, what went wrong? Basically, a clash of cultures and styles.  Of course, the PR people cried "foul!" and pointed out to the blogger that we were not allowed sufficient time to respond.   But I am sure the blogger feels like he did nothing wrong.  Should it take a half day to get a simple question answered?

 

The irony is that, again, it was not earth shattering news and the resulting story in my view was not that consequential or negative.

 

There are many takeaways here,  but one of the more important ones is that simple questions sometimes require simple answers, social media does not have patience for PR planning and response cycles, and that prepared statments and PR-speak seems very much to be disonant with the tenor of the times.