Flack's Revenge

Who ARE You Today? The Question Ties PR Field Up in Knots

Asking the PR profession to agree on a definition for what it should be today has tied the field up in knots.

There has been much blog debate about PRSA's efforts to redefine public relations, and lots of dialog on Twitter (check out the hash tag #prdefined to track the conversations).  And it is not just insular industry chatter, e.g. the NY Times covered the effort a couple of the months ago (see Redefining Public Relations in an Age of Social Media).

I guess it is like the cobbler's kids that don't have shoes - us PR folks are supposed to be great communicators, yet can sometimes struggle when we are the client. The question can be a lightening rod, too, and asking it - as well as expecting an answer that everyone can agree upon - is not easy.

I had been sitting quietly on the sidelines until I got an email from Heidi Sullivan of the Cision blog. She asked me late in the day last Friday on my thoughts, for a post she was working on - I decided that I was tired of procrastinating about the topic and came up with something I thought was simple and to the point:

“I define public relations as the practice that helps companies, people and brands express themselves in the best possible way.  It is about helping them communicate – directly, and with and through intermediaries – to advance their objectives.”

You can see what others thought by visiting the Cision blog, and checking out the three leading contenders on the PRSA site (the industry group is now asking for comments before putting this to bed).

Perhaps it is misguided and overly ambitious to expect everyone to agree on a single definition for such a diverse  field.  You can't help but think that the result will be a camel, that is a horse built by a committee.

But I am glad that I finally gave it some thought and responded, and urge others who have not had their voices heard to chime in too.

PR: Stressed for Success

There has been a lot of Twitter buzz in the wake of a CareerCast study that listed public relations as one of the most stressful professions.

I believe that PR can be a very rewarding career, but do find it stressful at times (in particular, life at a PR agency can have its trying moments).  The fact that few people understand what the field is about can also be frustrating - I find that I am constantly explaining what I do for a living .  I think my kids finally understand what PR is, although at first they were hoping that my career can somehow help them get on TV.

Awhile back, I wrote on the Fusion agency blog about the field and its challenges in my post PR's Moment of Truth.

The reputation of PR is not helped by the fact that many people outside the profession simply do not understand what it is about.

When you think about it, it is simply amazing that we go out there and get the job done every day, considering the many skills that the average PR person who manages accounts is expected to master. He or she must be a word smith; a storyteller; a good conversationalist; a salesperson; a customer support person; a marketing strategist; a manager and resource coordinator; an MC of sorts, to facilitate interviews and press events; and a media specialist.

 

 

Louis CK Conquers Media, Heeds Mom's Advice: Just Tell Them Everything

Louis CK is a comic hero for every man, an unkempt alternative to the more mainstream comedians (think Seinfeld or Dane Cook).  He is irreverent, dark and just plain damn funny.

I have greatly enjoyed Louie's work, inlcuding his  FX and HBO series.  That is why I was pleased to see reports of Louie's recent successful effort to market content directly to his fans.

I first learned about this last week in the GigaOm piece: What Louis CK Knows that Most Media Companies Don't  The article says:

Until recently, comedian Louis CK was known mostly for a hilarious clip about how “everything is amazing but no one is happy,” which lampooned our inability to recognize our own good fortune and led to a TV show. Now, he has become the new poster boy for the idea of selling content directly to fans, after the success of a video download he offered on his website without any digital-rights protection. And that success contains lessons for traditional media companies who continue to lock down their content and otherwise fail to take advantage of the social web.

What Louie did, essentially, was bring his content directly to the public via his website at an affordable price ($5) without imposing restrictions or digital rights protection - avoiding the tangle of overhead, middlemen fees etc. that he otherwise would have had to pay. In other words, Louie made it cheap and easy - and is profiting in the process. He has also been getting a ton of great press.

The NY Times' David Carr covered this yesterday in his Media Equation column:

The show could be viewed as the consumer wished, with no rights protection or expensive subscription. A buy-it-and-watch-it proposition, no cable company involved...While I was talking with him on the phone Thursday night, he checked his Web site and about 175,000 people had bought his special through PayPal. He expected 200,000 total downloads by the weekend, which meant he would have grossed $1 million. After covering costs of about $250,000 for the live production and the Web site, that’s a $750,000 profit. And he owns the rights, and the long tail of buyers, in perpetuity.

As a PR person, I had to chuckle about his approach, and media relations advice that Louie's mom gave him (from NY Times).

The transparency of the enterprise, including its cost in relation to how many people bought in, was the subject of media coverage all last week.... “It feels weird having numbers out there, because that’s my personal income,” he said. “But I talked to my mom, who is a pretty judicious, careful person, and she said, ‘Tell them everything. Just let it all get out there.’ So that’s what I have been doing...” 

I don't know if I would always agree with that approach, but the advice seems to be working for Louie.

There's Gold in them Thar Apps - and App Developers

Forbes had a nice story today, The Rise of Developernomics.  It included a link to David Kirkpatrick's famous quote and article: Now, Every Company is a Software Company.

The article today was about the importance of software developers, and the economics of nurturing and keeping top talent.  The writer, a contributor named Venkatesh Rao, argues - very convincingly - that there is no better place to put your money these days than software developers:

Unless you are a professional investor (and probably even then), places to store surplus capital today where it will even be safe and/or not depreciate too fast (let alone generate a return) are getting incredibly hard to find.... But there is one safe haven, if you know how to invest in it: software developers.

Is it true?  Can developers really be that much in demand? As I read the article, I thought about all of my friends who have worked in IT consutling and software development - and the ups and downs they have experiencecd, particularly here in NY.  The banking industry turmoil and competition from offhsore outsourcing has taken a toll.

Yet, most if not all of these people are working today.  I also thought back to the NY Tech Meetup event that I wrote about yesterday - nearly every company that demo'd closed with an appeal for developer talent.

No doubt, one of drivers of software developer demand - and the reason that every company is turning into a software company - is because of the growth of mobile apps.

Indeed, Venkatesh cites the following example:

Perhaps you are a baker with a small business — you are effectively useless, not because bread isn’t important, but because surviving in the bread business is now a matter of having developers on your side who can help you win in a game that Yelp, Groupon and other software companies are running to their advantage. If your bakery doesn’t have an iPhone app, it will soon be at the mercy of outfits like Yelp.

Mobile apps need not just developers but marketing - and, on that note, I'd like to point out a post that I wrote for the Handshake 2.0 blog: Getting Your Apps in Gear.  The topic, and title (a play on the phrase from the desktop software world, getting hindquarters, or a synonym for this, in seats) grew out of conversations with Anne Giles Clelland (who runs the site) about app marketing and PR. It is about how to drive downloads and usage for your apps.

I encourage you to visit Forbes and Handshake 2.0 and read these articles.

Wall Street Journal says Product News can Counter Bad Buzz and Lift Stocks

The Journal wrote last week about the effects (both good and bad) that social media reviews and other forms of online chatter can have on a company's stock price.

Online reviews can...have an impact on the stock price of the companies offering those products, lowering average returns by nearly 0.1% in as little as three days, according to a new study...

In what should be good news for stock pickers that have a social media analytics bent, the data can apparently predict a stock's performance:

Both positive and negative user-generated chatter seemed to predict market returns a few days ahead of time, the study found.

In what shoulld be good news for tech PR and marketing, the article concludes that issuing a press release can help:

Managers can take steps to combat negative reviews. New product announcements can increase positive buzz about digital products, such as cellphones and computers

It is an interesting time for buzz about social media buzz; Judy Gombita, a friend and co-contributor at Neal Schaffer's Windmill Networking blog (yes, I just signed on to blog there as well), wrote a great post yesterday about what social media buzz can mean for crisis management.  Judy also pointed me to a good article in the Telegraph about online chatter and blunders in social media marketing

Innovation is Alive and Well in PR (Bulldog Reporter Series)

The Wall Street Journal had an interesting article today about research that showed an innovation gap, i.e. the companies that are seen to be the most innovative do not always spend the most on R & D.

Some say that the PR field can be set in its ways, and not on the cutting edge of innovation.  In response to recent articles about agencies vs. startups, I contributed a two part series in Bulldog Reporter.

The first one (The Tyranny of the Billable Hour) ran on Cotober 13.  Please see the second installment (PR Agency Reinvention), which ran today. 

It argues that agencies can and do innovate without becoming software startups or making the agency model obsolete.

 

Witty, Sarcastic, Informative? Finding the Right Voice on Twitter

Marshall McLuhan famously stated that the medium is the message, this is very relevant for the worlds of communications and PR. Just like in fashion, where styles change over the seasons, modes of communication change.

It is important to master different media forms as each has its nuances - the carrier of the message can have an impact on tone, style, imagery and pace. These in turn have an effect on how your message is received and can either work for or against you.

As one example, the 1960 presidential election debates showed an unshaven, sweating Nixon, tilting the balance to the telegenic JFK and demonstrating the power of TV. 

Major networks and media dominated for latter part of the last century, and provided a platform for formal, top down communications. More recently social media emerged, challenging other forms of media and encouraging a more informal style. Blogs, the original social media, have ceded ground to social networks and Twitter. People are increasingly relying on these last two for news and information delivered via short form, unfiltered Tweets and status updates.

I wrote about some of the PR challenges that can come with Twitter. More recently I have noted some cases which make me think that it can sometimes help to be a little sarcastic or antagonistic when you are tweeting in support of a company or brand.

Two that were in the news in sports and tech made some people in the PR field scratch their heads in wonderment; yet the tactics were well received and covered in the media - no harm, no foul I guess, we all live and learn and ideally adapt.

In the first, which I heard about via Twitter, of course - the Journal wrote that Pat Henlon, the PR guy for the giants was talking trash over Twitter with some demoralized fans. See below:

The Giants also fired back in that placid, well-reasoned asteroid field of opinion, Twitter. Summoning his inner Don Rickles, team public-relations maestro Pat Hanlon zinged back at fans slamming the club's offseason torpor. Hanlon tweaked one commenter as a "knucklehead" and used a couple of words that aren't a big deal on HBO's "Hard Knocks" but might get you in trouble in this newspaper.

When someone suggested that the 2011 Giants were worse "on paper," Hanlon shot back: "We don't play on paper. You know what you can do w/ that paper?"

Too much? Too uncharacteristic, too un-Giant-like? I liked Hanlon mixing it up on Twitter. If you're going to be on Twitter, embrace the Twitter. Get in there, get greasy, throw your elbows around. Don't embarrass yourself or employer, but real-time conflict is expected, encouraged, celebrated. Hanlon engaged, and didn't offer stale PR autopilot. That may not be the Giant way, but it is the Twitter way.

Also, more recently, the Journal covered Michael Dell's rants in the wake of HP's recent moves to divest its PC business and shut down WebOS.  Here is an excerpt:

On Thursday, the billionaire computer executive took to Twitter, unleashing a handful of pointed tweets at competitor Hewlett-Packard Co. Prompting the abuse: H-P’s announcement earlier in the day that it would try to spin off its PC business, much of which it bought from Compaq Computer Corp. in 2002.

“If H-P spins off their PC business,” Mr. Dell tweeted, “Maybe they will call it Compaq?”

Mr. Dell has a reasonable audience for his tech-related epigrams — his “verified” Twitter account boasts 21,699 followers...

“They call it a separation,” Mr. Dell tweeted. “But it feels like a divorce.”

Mr. Dell has also used social media to interact with customers with laptop troubles, as well as comment on tech trends. One tweet celebrated the 30th anniversary of the PC. Mr. Dell sometimes uses smiley faces and exclamation points. Still, Mr. Dell has a history of making snide comments about his competition.

Abercrombie & Fitch Lob Grenade at Jersey Shore Cast

Ah, the delicate and complicated dance between journalism and PR. We tempt them with our pitches. We run campaigns, events and sometimes stunts to get their attention and coverage. Many journalists say they are beyond our influence and ignore our pitches and campaigns. Yet every once in awhile, the temptation is just too great.

This was the case yesterday, when many covered a light story, one that provided welcome relief to late summer doldrums and "hold your head" headlines about the economy.

I grinned as I read several articles about an Abercrombie & Fitches press release that explained that the company would pay the Jersey Shore show cast not to wear their clothes. The company had executed a brilliant campaign, and the media were all over itt.  For example, it got covered in not one but two Wall Street jorunal articles, and a NY Tmes piece.

And it wasn't just the media that were having fun with it. The NY Times story - Abercrombie wants off  'Jersey Shore' (Wink-Wink) - mentioned that the A & F CEO interrupted a quarterly earnings call with Wall Street analysts, incredulous that they wanterd to discuss other things:

“Is no one going to ask about the Situation?” Mr. Jeffries, the chief executive, asked after a series of questions about Abercrombie’s finances and strategy. Finally, an analyst did, and Mr. Jeffries explained the background. 

Of course, the media need to let everyone know that they are in on the joke, as the "wink wink" headline in the Times indicated. And they all had to seemingly justify their coverage by interjecting real world concerns. The article in the Journal's Money & Investing section, of all places, raised the real issue of brands getting tarnished through association with the wrong crowds:

It appears Abercrombie is merely trying to stir up publicity. After all, the company last year sold a Tshirt printed with the words "The Fitchuation," an obvious reference to the star of the reality show nicknamed "The Situation."

But brand image isn't all fun and games. Flashback 10 years to England, where Burberry clothing and accessories became the uniform of certain hard-partying young Brits. Sales in England were very weak by 2005, when Burberry acknowledged that the brash new customers had alienated some of its higher-end traditional shoppers. Tommy Hilfiger had a similarly unpleasant experience in the U.S. in the 1990s, when it became a hip-hop staple that no longer clicked with preppies.

Extreme Media Relations: Artist Can't Stomach Coverage, Stages Hunger Strike

The New York Post reported today that an artist was so distraught over an article in the New Yorker that he has been staging a very public hunger strike, in an attempt to get a retraction. The strike is now in its 17th day.

According to the Post piece, Local painter John Perry was upset because he did not like the way that he was characterized in the New Yorker story, which detailed a dispute between Perry and 80s film star John Lurie.

The details are not all that interesting, but I just thought that the idea of media relations via hunger strike was kind of amusing.  I also love the quote attributed to Perry:

"I just want some acknowledgement from them that the evidence . . . is not completely in accord with what was written in the piece," Perry told The Post. "The last thing they want is for me to drop dead out here, because then someone will look over that article with a fine-tooth comb," he said. "It will call into question their renowned fact checking."

"The last thing they want me to do is drop dead..." - classic, will have to remember this line, and the dedication to pulling out all stops to defend reputation and change coverage.

Hypocrisy Rampant in "When not to Pitch a Story"

There has been quite a bit of back and forth about the right time to pitch a story. Some of the voices make the seemingly reasonable point that in a busy time for news, when a mega story is breaking (like it did this week), reporters are focused on a particular issue and it's not the best time to try to get their attention with other things, namely your clients' or employers' desire for ongoing media visibility and attention. Others suggest that trying to relate client stories to the current news and interject them is opportunistic and in bad taste (as an example that comes from within the PR world, interestingly enough, Ragan's PR Daily advised: PR Pros: Don't Even Try to Pitch a Story this Week).

In making these arguments it is easy to blithely go along with the story line that puts the press on a pedestal and kicks PR to the curb. But let's get real here. The above narrative casts media and PR as polar opposites - with media being the pure and noble heroes and PR being the shameless promoters.

I am not interested in picking a fight with the media - that would not be good for my career - but I do think it is important to point out that it is not such a black and white world that we live in. After all, the vast majority of media are profit-making organizations. They hire reporters to write great stories that have catchy headlines to build audience and revenue. In short, they do these things for some of the same reasons that we write press releases and pitches - to draw attention. News stopped being about just news a long time ago (witness all the coverage about what Katie Couric is doing next and the state of network news).

I do think that there is such a thing as good and bad timing, and good taste and bad. We as PR professionals owe it to our clients and employers (after all, we are an extension of their brands) to know when to hold our fire and recognize when a pitch crosses over from being relevant and topical to something that reeks of opportunism. But I don’t think we should bury our heads in the sand and apologize for doing our jobs