We’ve been working on the presentation for the last month and, with all of the last-minute changes coming from the Obama Administration, there’s still lots of polishing to do.
I’ll give you a clue to our key message… plan and move now.
There are some communications requirements coming up in early October and lots of great opportunities for those in health care and employee communications to emphasize their company/organization’s value to employees and the patient community.
The webinar is free to members of PRSA’s Employee Communications Section and Health Academy. PRSA and section non-members can access it for $200. Is $200 too steep for your budget? Why not sign up for one of the two sections for $70 and get free access to the webinar and section resources for the next year?
That’s why media relations pros slave away day after day on targeted pitch lists, creative media kits, and relationship-building with reporters. At the end of the day, it’s hard not to feel like Pretty in Pink’s Ducky, continually pleading with his romantic muse, Andie. Andie wants nothing more than the elusive rich-boy Blaine cross their teen sub-culture lines and he hers much the same way a journalist pines for the holy grail-esque story that will make his/her career (and, nobly, make a difference in the world.)
Face it, sometime our efforts get reporters attention can get just as silly.
So what’s a dignified PR pro to do?
Many have seen the financial struggles of media outlets around the world and leaped onto the sponsored content bandwagon. In case you’ve missed the discussion, take a listen to Edelman’s Steve Rubel on last week’s episode of “On the Media.”
I’ve seen sponsored content done well. Relationships between writers/bloggers are disclosed and the transactional nature was transparent.
As Rubel describes in the podcast, there’s a whole spectrum of sponsored content from product placement to co-created content.
Is sponsored content ethical? It can be. Again, with proper disclosures and a transparent approach, corporate organizations can buy their way into a media-driven conversations.
Is it effective? Again, it can be. If the sponsor and story are well matched and well placed, it can work very well. After all, do you think that shows like Top Gear or Yard Crashers would work without the support of in-show advertisers?
Probably not, but those aren’t news. Those are entertainment shows.
What would you think if “Sponsored by BP” started showing up on the tickers at the bottom of MSNBC or FOX News?
As New Jersey sits squished between two major media markets (New York City and Philadelphia), it’s local news stations are at risk of getting squeezed out.
So, how does a station survive? Well, many stations, noticing the surge in interest over celebrity and entertainment news, have taken a more sensationalized approach to reporting. In many cases that’s involved taking a more human interest approach to the news – focusing more quickly on aggressors and victims, over-simplifying news to accommodate short attention spans and facilitate sharing on social media channels, etc.
Does the new show meet the FCC’s requirement for serving the community? Is this new show really journalism? Many think not.
But is the show effective? Is it meeting the FCC guidelines despite its non-traditional approach to news gathering and reporting?
Is it a sustainable business model? Fox seems to think so, having reserved various iterations of the name (e.g., Chasing Chicago, etc.) for use in other markets.
What are the implications to the station’s attempts to cover “real” news in the future? Have they totally degraded themselves beyond journalistic recognition? Or, are they merely responding the the market demand and evolving the medium?
From “The Best and Worst) Cities for Newspapers.” Ad Age. June 11, 2013
This week’s AdAge included it’s listing of the Best (and Worst) Cities for Newspapers. Of course, perpetual bottom-of-the-barrel Las Vegas ended up on the “worst” side of the equation. The study claims that only 24 percent of residents read the Las Vegas Review-Journal (I’m assuming they’re referring to the print edition) and eight percent consume news online.
While the article’s map paints an interesting picture, the more valuable insights come from the Scarborough report that was the origin of the city comparative data. When you drill down into the data, you see that other issues, including education, age, gender, and household income are at play even more than geography.
Given the challenges of the Las Vegas community and its characteristics, how should news outlets proceed to foster a more informed and engaged citizenry?
When the Asiana flight crashed on a San Francisco runway last week, it did not take long for comedians to take make the tragedy comedic fodder. Good taste aside, it’s what we expect from comedians. It has its place. In most cases, it’s a matter of personal taste as to whether you find the jokes funny.
In the end, he became the fodder and will likely have a hard time finding a new post any time soon.
Today’s lesson: leave the jokes for the comics. It’s okay to inject humor into your work, but make sure it’s always in good taste, consistent with your (or your client’s) brand image, and never at the expense of others.
Even though the Zimmerman verdict is in, pundits are quarterbacking over what counsel did well and poorly in the trial. Even more interesting is the discussion of the role of the media in the trial. Regardless of how you feel about the verdict, the media’s coverage both primed and framed the public’s response.
Case in point. When the news broke, NBC’s Today Show aired an edited clip of Zimmerman’s call to the police dispatcher. The clip had Zimmerman saying, “This guy looks like he’s up to no good. He looks black.”
If you were watching the Today show that morning and heard that clip, you would have been outraged at the blatant racial connection to Zimmerman’s assumption about Trayvon Martin.
However, the full conversation between Zimmerman and the dispatcher went as follows:
Zimmerman: This guy looks like he’s up to no good. Or he’s on drugs or something. It’s raining and he’s just walking around, looking about.
Dispatcher: OK, and this guy — is he black, white or Hispanic?
Zimmerman: He looks black.
This is a totally different conversation. Zimmerman’s racial identification is in response to the dispatcher’s question.
How much did NBC’s and other media outlets’ reporting of the case affect public opinion? Greatly. According to David E. Johnson’s article, a poll taken a year ago showed that “62% of Americans believed that Zimmerman was guilty based on the images that they saw and what they heard in the media.”
As the dust of the case settles and the conversation continues about the race and justice, we cannot forget the role the media played and the role journalists and media professionals have to ensure accurate reporting.
One of my colleagues purported, “The creative director is brilliant as there is so much buzz around this issue.”
My frank (and admittedly rather crass) response? “Buzz is bullshit when everyone who’s talking about you thinks you’re an idiot for degrading your publication’s brand.” It’s never safe to assume that just because someone is talking about you they’re saying nice things. Ask Paula Deen. I think she’d rather people forget her name for a few months.
My colleague appreciated my point and responded, “Of course, this isn’t their first questionable cover. They’ve actually published more offensive covers in the past, in my opinion. The risk is diminishing the quality of the reporting the cover is illustrating. Who knows what kind of long-term negative impact it will have. My guess is not much.”
He may very well be right. Boomberg’s cover, although crude, is somewhat par for the course for the publication. Getting mad at them is akin to being upset at Maxim’s publishers for the half-naked girl du jour on their cover or being upset with Simon Cowell for being rude. Crass and rude may be a part of the brand.
However, is that a solid brand strategy? In the case of the Bloomberg cover, it’s likely that a mere fraction of the people who clicked the link to see the cover actually read the story. Unfortunately Sheela Kolhatkar’s diligent investigation into what will likely be the next great American financial disaster is largely lost in the melee.
So, what’s the lesson here? Strong visuals can be incredibly powerful and effective at attracting people to your content. However, when an element of the story (in this case, the visual) eclipses the message, then there is a loss.
Also, shock and awe campaigns are often short-lived. It’s hard to maintain that sort of energy without denigrating your brand into a bad B-movie. In the end, brands are built on relationships. If given the choice, choose to establish that relationship with a handshake, not a clown’s joy buzzer.
A recent PRSA Tacticsarticle alerted me to Asiana Airlines decision to not seek U.S.-based PR counsel in the wake of this month’s Boeing-777 crash in San Francisco. According to the Wall Street Journal Blog, Korea Realtime, this decision is consistent with the Korean business culture in which the primary focus is on strong in-house communications teams. Apparently there is a concern that outside counsel would unduly influence the company’s management.
Most American PR professionals would say, “Of course outside counsel would influence the company’s management and business practices. These are probably the origins of the issues that led to the crisis in the first place.”
However, we have to look at this from the Korean cultural perspective and understand the deference they give to their internal teams. Those of us working in American corporate communications are often frustrated that our leadership will listen to the advice from a third-party consultant even though we’ve been giving the same recommendations for months. Somehow hearing the same song from a more expensive voice makes the point more salient. In that respect, adopting a more Korean-style approach would make us feel more valuable and probably cost the company less (assuming in-house counsel is giving good advice).
Another thing I think Asiana is doing well is keeping the focus on the issue and not the image. In the initial stages of a crisis, the most important thing is to stop its source – put out the fire first. Second, you address the needs of your victims and their families. Third, start finding out what happened and why. Fourth, share the findings and explain what you’re doing to make sure this never happens again. On the surface, that sounds fairly straightforward. However, when you’ve got international media clamoring for the latest update and issuing conjectures and half-baked truths, it can be a nightmare. Yes, deal with the issue. Image is secondary. However, Asiana exec’s are missing out on a key element here. PR isn’t about image. It’s about relationships. Those relationships with the victims, their current and prospective customer base, the traveling public, regulators, and the media all need to be managed simultaneously.
In addition, this crisis involves a business whose audiences are largely non-Korean and whose crisis took place in another country. At this point, it’s unclear as to whether Asiana’s in-house team has experience in dealing with American media or the media markets of its victims, including China. There has already been a call for the airline to express more sincere sympathy to its Chinese market for the tragic deaths of the two teenagers.
So, what do we learn from this?
Have an up-to-date crisis communications plan that addresses international and social media.
Get management buy-in on the plan. Their involvement is critical,
Ensure you have adequate resources (in-house or on contract) to implement the plan at a moment’s notice.
Practice your plan regularly through drills. Make sure your infrastructure works and you’re prepared for the unexpected.
When the crisis hits, put out the fire, help the victims, and support a thorough investigation into the crisis’ origins.
Throughout a crisis, establish and maintain an empathetic dialogue based on facts.
Nancy Syzdek, APR 
