Flack's Revenge

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?

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.

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.

Today, I am pleased to feature a guest post from Shama Kabani.  Shama’s book The Zen of Social Media Marketing is now available on Amazon.

Read my post to learn about how Shama came to be a Flack’s Revenge contributor.  Enjoy, and thanks again Shama and Deb Holland!

Don’t Be a Twitter Quitter

By Shama Kabani

I leverage Twitter every day to help grow my business. But I’ve heard PR people say “Twitter isn’t a PR platform.” Or, “It’s a waste of my time.”

There speaks someone who doesn’t “get” Twitter. They try to use it as a social network and fail. Twitter isn’t a social network. It’s a human search engine. For instance, before I spoke to a group called Vistage, the host warned me it was a tough crowd. I searched Twitter for “Vistage Speakers” and then asked past speakers for recommendations. Within minutes, I had useful suggestions from as far away as China.

Here are five things PR people need to know about Twitter.

1. It takes at least 6 months to build traction. Services like Twesocial that promise to bring you Twitter followers might work, but be sure to read their reviews and make an informed decision.
2. Don’t be too literal about that little box that says, “What are you doing right now?” No one really cares unless your answer gives them value.
3. You need a strategy before you start Tweeting. Twitter isn’t a substitute for a great website, a solid communications strategy, and a clear message. If you don’t know what you want to achieve, you probably won’t.
4. It takes more than just pitching clients or services. Twitter is a way to connect to people who give you information you want – whether it’s gossip (Perez Hilton), news (Brian Williams), inspiration (the Dalai Lama), or business advice (Guy Kawasaki). (Conversely, if you’ve been following someone for a few weeks, and see no value in their posts, STOP.)
5. Following journalists is important, but so is following thought leaders in your own field. Reading tweets from journalists is a good way to learn what interests the people you pitch – but you’ll learn more (and get more business referrals and tips) from the best minds in your field (and your client’s).

The three big reasons that PR folks become Twitter quitters are:

• They don’t get enough followers quickly — usually because they don’t know how to follow others, or aren’t providing value. I wish I could say numbers don’t matter, but they do. Numbers equal reach. I have about 18,000 followers and get 10-15 quick replies to questions or requests for feedback. Numbers matter.
• They aren’t using tools like TweetDeck to minimize time. Or they aren’t using hashtags (words that include the # sign) to find and participate in relevant conversations. Or, they aren’t re-tweeting (sharing) valuable content from various sources. These tools not only save time, they add significant value to your tweets – which helps in building your following.
• They have an unrealistic idea of the time that Twitter requires. I spend at least an hour a day scanning and posting messages, or responding to direct questions.

Is it worth it? Of course! I’ve gotten clients directly from Twitter when someone tweets a message like, “Looking for a website design,” and someone else sends them a reply like, “We used Marketing Zen – connect with @Shama.”

More importantly, I’ve learned someone new every single day I’ve been on Twitter. Being something of a philosopher and always curious, that’s the most important thing for me!

Shama Kabani is president of The Marketing Zen Group, and author of The Zen of Social Media Marketing. Connect with her on Twitter, or read her blog.