Flack's Revenge

The Circle of Life in PR

Death is part of life.

Predators feast on prey, thinning herds and improving the health of the greater ecosystem.  Carrion fertilizes the fields.  Fauna bloom and provide sustenance for the herds. And, so, the cycle continues.

The circle of life holds true in tech and PR as well.  The headlines and press releases brim with tales of death and rebirth.

As I have chronicled in my PR Death Watch series, sacred cows (i.e., anachronisms) of PR die as shiny  golden calves are born.  In a new season, the golden calf, once frolicking and so full of life, takes ill and succumbs.

Tom Foremski issued his death knell for the press release on Silicon Valley Watcher (Die, Press Release, Die! Die! Die!).

Just this week, we witnessed the death of the social media press release, the prodigal Phoenix once risen from the traditional press release ashes and now egested on the fallow field like so much excrement (see Ragan's story Has the Social Media Release Withered on the Vine?).

I attempted to resurrect the traditional press release in my post Revenge of the Press Release.

Having tired of tormenting the traditional press release,Tom Foremski has now turned to a new victim, voice mail and texting (see his story Pana.ma: Kill Voice Mail and Texting...).

And we have witnessed the birth of a brave new form of newswire (Reinventing the Newswire: CNW Acquires DNA13).

Yes, in nature, as in PR and tech, the circle of life continues and it is good.

Social Media: Impact on Organizations

Social media is not only changing how we communicate.  It is also changing how organizations work, and how they are perceived.  I have a post on the Social Fluency blog today that discusses the broader implications of democratized communications.  It mentions a couple of great books on the topic, and a post by Paul Gillin: Gain Control by Giving Up.

I encourage you to visit Social Fluency, read my post and add to the conversation.

In Comedy and Interviews, it's all about Timing and Segues

Jokes.com
Doug Benson - Working on Segues
comedians.comedycentral.com
Futurama New Episodes Funny Demon Zombie TV Show Funny TV Comedy Blog

I enjoy listening to Slacker Radio on my BlackBerry when I go running.  While some like to workout to music, I enjoy listening to the Slacker comedy channel.

One night recently, while running along the beautiful Croton River gorge in the scenic Hudson Valley village where I live, Doug Benson (a Last Comic Standing star) came on, and did a bit on comic segues.  Here's some text from it, and the video (see above).

A lot of comedians work really hard on their jokes, which I think is really awesome.  But, what I've been doing lately is working on my segues.  Those are the transitions between jokes that let the audience know that you've changed topics.  It's very important.  So I hope you enjoy my jokes tonight... but I hope you really enjoy my segues...

I am getting too old for this sh-t

Pigs like sh-t, did you know that in your lifetime you are more likely to get attacked by a domesticated pig than by a shark?  Especially if you swim in pig-infested waters.

Dingos can swim.  I used to have a pet dingo - but the most ironic thing happened: a baby ate my dingo!

Babies love Vegas!

Pretty funny, and reminded me of the instructions we give during media training: know your key messages, stick to them and BRIDGE (another word for segue) to your messages.  Also, in both comedy and media interviews, timing can be important, and you need to put up with some heckling.

So I thought I would combine the two and envision what a tech interview in Doug's bizarro world might sound like, an interview that might happen if the client watched Doug's video in lieu of media training:

Tech Exec: Our databases and system are the MOST scalable

Reporter: Sounds great, what are your annual revenues?

Tech Exec: Revenues, scalability, it's all good, either way we are kicking some serious butt, but seriously, folks....

Reporter: Yea, OK, right, who are your customers?

Tech Exec: Customers?  The biggest, the most impressive, a who's who of the Fortune, and fortunately they all really love that scalability I was telling you about...

Reporter: This is getting tiresome, can't you give a straight answer?

Tech Exec:  Straight answers? The road to the truth can be straight and swerving...

Reporter:  Is there any chance that you will you tell me about your profits?

Tech Exec: Absolutely, our Pro version is a great Fit for all types of companies

Reporter: Alright already, go ahead and tell me about your scalability

Tech Exec: It all starts at the application layer...  we layer all this tech talk so we can sound very impressive....  the numbers are indeed impressive, it all gets down to the number of CPU cores... and that is core to our scalability and our value prop... so make sure you give us some props in that damn article

Can't We all Just Get Along, Online?

There were two excellent op eds this week, one in the NY Times and one in the WSJ, both related to how we communicate online.

David Brooks' piece Riders on the Storm describes research from years ago that hypothesized that the Internet results in polarization - a widely held view (Instead of the public square we could end up in a collection of information cocoons).

Brooks points out a new study that contradicts this theory.  According to the op ed:

The core finding is that most Internet users do not stay within their communities... most people spend a lot of time on a few giant sites with politically integrated audiences, like Yahoo news... but when they leave they often go into areas where most visitors are not like themselves.

[The researchers] found that the Internet is more ideologically integrated than old-fashioned forms of face-to-face communications.

In the WSJ op ed Is Internet Civility an Oxymoron, Gordon Crovitz looks at a very specific facet of how we communicate online and argues that unmoderated, anonymous comments create more noise than wisdom. 

It points out that media sites are reevaluating policies of treating all comments equally. Some sites are no longer allowing anonymous comments, or any comments at all.  Others are encouraging anonymous comments (and in one case, building an entire business model around the concept).

In an interesting twist, Gawker put in a system last year that gives preference to certain commenters based on reader and editor ranking.

Twitter Unintended Consequences: Are we all headed for that "Tim Russert Moment?"

I love the Sunday morning political TV shows, and used to very much enjoy watching Tim Russert as host
of Meet the Press on NBC.  It really was very sad for me, to learn about the news of his early death by heart attack a year or two ago.

Tim was famous for putting politicians (those from the left, the right, it really did not matter, he was an equal opportunity interrogator) on the hot seat.

There was always a real sense of drama as he confronted politicians and their advisers with what they had said in the past, miraculously excavated and presented on screen in stark letters and words or recited by Tim.  He had a knack for finding the quotes that caused the most discomfort, e.g. the ones that highlighted flip flopping or inconsistencies with the party line.

In doing this he was uniquely able to get the unscripted reaction, and I am sure caused quite a few PR teams to squirm in anticipation or in the wake of the interviews.

My blog post Media Wonderland discussed the unintended consequences of the real time, social Web.

Now that more and more people are willing to share and blab all, on Twitter, Facebook, etc. - and with the variety of ways to search these streams - are we making it easier for future Tim Russerts, people across all walks of life who might evaluate us, judge us, interview us, etc.?

Are we all headed for that Tim Russert moment?

Fried Eggs Asks "What's Cracking," giving PR Something to Crow about (and with)

It is nothing short of amazing, the innovation in social media.  This can present a challenge in terms of 
constantly needing to keep up (as I alluded to in my post on Social Fluency) .  On the other hand, there is never a shortage of new tools to add to the quiver.

I thought I'd take the opportunity this week to review two that I believe show great promise: UberVU and Fried Eggs.

Fried Eggs is a micro blogging platform modeled on Twitter. However, it offers a number of improvements that make it a great app in its own right.

For those who know Twitter (and who doesn't these days), Fried Eggs provides a familiar experience, and uses many of the same conventions - you can direct message, retweet, and follow to your heart's content and find myriad ways to put the ubiquitous "@" sign to work.  So it is pretty easy to get started with the app and understand what it can do.

Once I got past the similarities, a number of features jumped out and made me think: why didn't Twitter do it this way?

Fried Eggs tackles the most obvious challenge with the Twitter - the 140 character limit (some would argue that Twitter's simplicity and brevity are the reasons for its success - yet trying to squeeze thoughts into 140 characters is not always easy).

Simply hitting a button labeled "elaborate" opens a window that lets you do just that. The extra characters are hidden in the default view so that the screen is not gummed up with so much text, but you and your followers can easily get to it if needed.  It seems like the perfect feature and platform for launching press releases - the headline can go in the crack (somehow, that just doesn't sound right - should it be creak, or cluck?) and press release body text, in the elaboration.

Fried Eggs also does a better job by showing comments and nested discussion threads, and gives you an easy way to store pictures and video inline - you do not need to invoke a separate application, as you have to do with Twitter.  In another nice touch, there is a search box right there - no need to go somewhere else to search Fried Eggs.

These days it is not enough for a social app to be better - it needs to have a critical mass of users and an ecosystem of other apps around it.  Will Fried Eggs get enough users to truly become a force, and will developers jump on board?

Who knows.  Although I doubt Twitter is too worried, they might have given Fried Eggs an opening with developers, given some of the bad buzz last week in the wake of Chirp and Twitter acquisitions (see the CNET story Et tu Twitter? Here comes Developer Ire).

At any rate I think it is worth checking out.  I am having a lot of fun with it.  And when Twitter is down, it provides another outlet for me to share my thoughts.

Next up: My review of UberVU

Tiger Smash: Trash Talking of the Brands

It is nice once in awhile to step outside my usual role in the technology field and consider the larger world around me.  As a sports enthusiast, I was fascinated to watch Tiger Woods' reentry into golf leading up to and during the Masters last week.  As a marketer and PR guy, I found it hard to do this without considering the interplay of brands, advertising and media coverage surrounding the event.

Like many people, I have been tracking Tiger's efforts at image rehabilitation.  The Masters was another step on his road back.  Regardless of what people think about Tiger as a person, perhaps the event would the change the subject and get people talking about what he does best again.   Could Tiger rally and prove he still has game?

It was interesting to note the reactions of people who were watching and reporting on the Masters.  In my conversations at the local tavern, on the train during my commute, and while tuning in to news coverage, I heard a range of opinions.  Some seemed genuinely happy for Tiger when he got off to a good start on the first day.  Others clearly wanted him to fail.

One news cast pointed out a plane that circled with a banner that had an anti-Tiger rant.  A commuting friend heard on the news that Tiger audibly swore after a bad shot; something that should not be that remarkable, yet this was supposed to be the new, cleaned up Tiger.

While most were focused on the main story line - who was ahead - I was more attuned to the imagery and subtext.  As Mickelson took the lead, were the cameras focusing more time than they should on his wife and her reactions, or was it just my imagination?  Their obviously strong relationship and her presence stood in contrast to the absence of Woods' wife (was Elin at Augusta or not? There were some questions about this; if she was there, the cameras did not capture her, at least not while I was watching).

Leading up to the Masters, I wondered how soon the brands that were so quick to abandon Tiger would be back.  It makes you wonder about the conversations that must take place in conference rooms at companies and in ad agencies - the high stakes brinksmanship the people behind the campaigns and brands must go through as they watch each others' moves, play "what if" games, and then place their bets.

Nike pulled off a bold gambit by being the first to jump back on board with Tiger.  They got a lot of attention for their ad, but was this a shrewd move or foolish?  Many thought the ad was in poor taste. The NY Post reported yesterday that Elin hated the ad, another reason she now apparently wants a divorce.

The question about how much the focus on Mickelson and his wife was incidental and how much a marketing (and possibly PR) campaign was answered for me by Tuesday's full page NY Times ad that shows Mickelson kissing his wife's head, and included the words:

Congratulations to Phil Mickelson and his family on his victory... With his 3rd Masters win, Phil demonstrates why he is a great ambassador and role model for the game of golf, he personifies the game's values of integrity, focus and precision, which are at the core of how we at Barclays [Capital] are committed to earning success every day for our clients

For those who think golf is a genteel sport, there was nothing subtle or genteel about this ad.  Nothing subliminal about it at all, left me almost feeling sorry for Tiger, gave me a better understanding of the trash talking of brands, and left me wondering about the intersection of family values and golf. 

NYT Proclaims Age of Publicity, Communications Staff and Strategy

Like many other areas of the business world today, the field of PR is experiencing its share of difficulties (see my recent post on the topic, in which I described some depressing numbers about the state of traditional PR).

That is why I was glad to see that we actually are in an "age of publicists, communications staff members and strategists," right there in black and white in the NY Times.

OK, it was a throwaway comment, part of larger story about how Andrew Cuomo shuns press conferences but loves to mix it up via DIY media relations.  And the headline rankled a bit: "Behind the Curtain, Cuomo Runs his PR Machine." (Do we talk about journalism "machines?"  See my post, which includes a tag cloud of the modifiers typically used with PR - many of them are negative).

I suppose what the Times giveth to PR, the Times also taketh away.

Anyway, looking beyond my obsession over how the field is portrayed, it is a good article that demonstrates that conventional wisdom is not always correct.  Many in the field feel that media relations is best done up close and personal.  But Cuomo's style of eschewing press conferences and in person or onscreen briefings in favor of mixing it up from a distance via phone calls is effective.  As the article reports:

Still, whatever the grumblings, Mr. Cuomo’s strategy has largely worked: He has avoided taking positions on controversial issues, even as the state, facing a large budget gap, grapples with the prospects of laying off state workers, raising taxes or eliminating programs.

Mr. Cuomo has managed to steer clear of much of what is messy about Albany, and any politician would be delighted to draw the approval ratings he routinely does.

Social Media Baby Steps

I have a post on the Social Fluency blog today.  I was going to call it "Everything I Know About Social Media, I learned in Kindergarten" but my team thought this was cliched and came up with something cheekier (and better, I agree).

Enjoy the post.  it is a follow-up to my earlier topic, What is your Brand of Social Media Snake Oil?, and includes advice on following simple guiding principles for leveraging social media in marketing and communications.

Wikileaks, the New Face of Investigative Journalism?

Until recently, Wikileaks.org was a little known website that outed sensitive information about businesses and government.  The site has now achieved prominence by posting a video of a U.S. Army air assault in Baghdad that killed Reuters photographers.

In finding and publishing the video, Wikileaks has accomplished what Reuters, the Freedom of Information Act and an army of lawyers could not.

It is story that I find fascinating (despite the grisly and tragic nature of the events), because it demonstrates the power of new media to uncover facts and shape major media coverage.

It involves social media, technology,and crowdsourcing (when Wikileaks realized what they had but not could not view the encrypted video, they sent a plea for supercomputing time and assistance via Twitter), and a shadowy source.

There's even (ostensibly) PR folks involved in all this.  According to an article in the NY Times yesterday:

Today there is a core group of five full-time volunteers, according to Daniel Schmitt, a site spokesman, and there are 800 to 1,000 people whom the group can call on for expertise in areas like encryption, programming and writing news releases. 

Sounds like the start of a bad joke, doesn't it: "A programmer, encryption specialist and flack walk into a bar..."

Some may quibble (as the Times story did) over whether Wikileaks is about advocacy or journalism.  According to the article:

The site is not shy about its intent to shape media coverage, and Mr. Assange said he considered himself both a journalist and an advocate; should he be forced to choose one, he would choose advocate. WikiLeaks did not merely post the 38-minute video, it used the label “Collateral Murder” and said it depicted “indiscriminate” and “unprovoked” killing. (The Pentagon defended the killings and said no disciplinary action was taken at the time of the incident.)

My question is, Is there really much of a difference these days?