Posts Tagged ‘media’

The Seven-Point Litmus Test for Creating Real PR News Stories

Thursday, February 17th, 2011

Going for P.1

Posted by Tom Gable

Today’s PR University teleseminar from Bulldog Reporter covered “10 PR Power Writing Tips: How to Create Compelling Copy That People Want to Read and Share.”

The panelists were: Michael Smart, national news director, Brigham Young University, and founder, Michael Smart PR; Nancy Brenner, senior vice president, MS&L Global Corporate, New York; Don Bates, APR, Fellow PRSA; academic director, Graduate School of Political Management, George Washington University; and Tom Gable, APR, Fellow PRSA, CEO, Gable PR. Jon Greer moderated.

I’ll provide more details later on some of the great tips from my fellow panelists in such topics as: be an internal reporter; know your audiences; word choice matters; always be concise; make news when you don’t have any; where’s the wow: rewrite, revise, repeat; and commit yourself to continuous improvement. Within that, yours truly covered the Gable PR seven-point litmus test we use as a starting point for issuing real news stories with topical, relevant information and evocative and provocative quotes. Here is the short course, adapted from an earlier PR University teleseminar and workshops at various PRSA and Counselors Academy conferences:

  1. Is it really newsworthy to anyone other than the company and, perhaps, the CEO’s family and a few friends?
  2. How big is the impact: company, community, region, market niche or category, industry, technology or science breakthrough, nation, hemisphere, humanity?
  3. Has the same or similar story already been told (quick database research will answer the question)?
  4. Can the premise be supported by valid data, third party sources, real case histories and ongoing proof of principle?
  5. Does the company have credible “gurus,” or spokesmen and women who can bring the story to life and become valuable and trusted resources for the media?
  6. Can the company be further differentiated by its people, technology, culture and personality? Or if you lined up all the companies in the space would they all look and sound alike?
  7. Can the story be summarized in a compelling headline, Tweet or one or two-sentence sound bite or elevator pitch? If posted through social media, will it generate interest and action (Re-tweeting, links, etc.)?

This quick test can help create a smart, compelling and interesting story or posting that breaks through the clutter, communicates to key audiences and supports the long-term image and reputation of your client or organization.  For tracking Tweets from the teleseminar use the hash tag: #bulldogpr

In Crisis PR, Consider the Half-Life of a Tweet or Comment

Wednesday, January 19th, 2011

Too sensitive?

Posted by Tom Gable

How quickly to respond to negative blogs and comments? Gable PR had a recent experience with a client that announced progress with a controversial technology for drug discovery. We anticipated feedback and had assembled an extensive array of data, links and citations for outside validation. Unfortunately, we soon found ourselves in an imbroglio that went far beyond questions on the technology

The CEO, we soon learned, had personal and financial issues in a previous business almost two decades ago. The science story drew mostly positive coverage. A science blogger probed into the technology and a skeptic’s manifesto. Worse, a former girlfriend to the CEO soon added to the comments. She wrote under a pseudonym and blasted the CEO for a bad real estate deal, other business transactions that went sour and even previous jobs held by the wife (personal shopper at Nordstrom). Others popped in via Twitter.

The CFO of the company responded with facts and suggested that perhaps the personal attacks weren’t relevant and bordered on defamation, which generated more personal attacks!

Long story short: the company stopped responding and the commentary died a day later. Lesson learned: answer succinctly and factually to correct the record; don’t get caught up in continuing the negative dialogue and personal attacks, which seems to get progressively worse and more personal once the opposition figures out that the facts are against them.

Understand that the half life of a Tweet is two to five minutes, according to a study of an Audi program that used Twitter for branding, and hot blogging topics, particularly on obscure topics, flame out and die in a day or two.

The plan, then, is to set aside ego, which is often difficult, especially when the attacker and his or her motives are known. Stick to the facts, post and move on. You will be amazed how quickly the issue goes away (well, it never totally goes away, since the Internet is forever).

It’s NOT a PR Problem. Think Real Values, Mission and Culture.

Monday, December 6th, 2010

Disaster Pending

Posted by Tom Gable

What do BP, Tiger Woods, the TSA, Toyota, Apple’s Antenna Angst and HP’s CEO scandal have in common?

Most are included in the inaugural “Top 10 PR Disasters of 2010” poll, conducted late November by Cantor Integrated Marketing Staffing in partnership with CommPRO (we added TSA because of its late surge in media attention). They reported sending an email survey to 25,000 professionals in PR, communications and related disciplines, generating 167 responses, a return of just 0.67 percent. But this anti-popularity poll is worth looking at for similarities. The ranking:

  1. BP Oil Spill Response
  2. Toyota’s Great Recall
  3. Tiger Woods’ Marital Mess
  4. Action for Children – Autism Ad Campaign Backlash
  5. Apple’s Antennagate
  6. HP’s CEO Scandal
  7. EasyJet Volcanic Ash Cloud Saga
  8. Nestle’s Palm Oil Crisis
  9. Johnson & Johnson’s ’10 Recall
  10. Al Gore’s Trysts

An interesting exercise, but I would argue that these go beyond having PR disasters. More importantly in each case those swept up in the tornadoes of negative media coverage for their transgressions had deviated from the strong core values and behaviors that made them successful in the first place. They violated consumer trust. As a result, each needs to solve deeper and more important cultural, organizational and other shortcomings before PR can start persuading many different target audiences to take a new look.

When a brand tumbles after a successful rise to stardom and success, there is a disconnect. Psychologists call it cognitive dissonance, where conflicting ideas battle for loyalty in your head (Toyota quality versus Toyota cost cutting to drive profits; the world’s greatest athlete versus the world’s worst philanderer; important need for ensuring air travel safety versus the brutish behavior and public theater the TSA pursues in subjecting everyone to delays and indignity rather than focusing attention on the most viable terrorist candidates).

The fix is to embrace image as a part of corporate strategy, then PR can work to regain reputation and trust.  As written about before, this requires consistent communications over time and delivering what scientists and engineers call proof of principle. What do you stand for? Can you consistently demonstrate evidence of these values? The value of reputation has been proven over time in studies by many brilliant authors in the world of reputation management (Charles Fombrun, Leslie Gaines-Ross, Al Ries, etc.). The fix requires not merely whipping up new communications plans in hopes of fluffing and puffing up deflated images. Once the deeper organizational flaws have been solved and a new visions established, PR can work to rebuild reputations for the long term from a solid foundations of facts and deeds – values-based PR at its best.

Strategic PR Plan in 30 Minutes or Less?

Saturday, October 16th, 2010

Influential Channels

Posted by Tom Gable

Well not quite. But to at least get everyone pointed in the same direction, we often use a little mind-mapping exercise with clients who are unfamiliar with the strategic requirements of a good program. It involves walking through a dozen questions with the client (or internal team) and posting the initial answers on a white board. Once the big ideas are covered, the teams can follow up with creative and strategic sessions to add depth to the program, then fine-tune the tactical details.

In the crude white board example shown here, the CEO of an enterprise software company wanted to use social media to reach its key targets: CFOs of large companies. There are probably a million or two CFOs on Twitter and Facebook, right?

To help this CEO (with an engineering Ph.D.) understand the essential elements of strategic PR planning, we went thorough a quick mind-mapping exercise. If you look at the map, social media is among the missing.

The same approach has worked for a consumer client with a product aimed at 18 to 24 year olds who thought the front page of The Wall Street Journal was his perfect target and for other clients who were a little off on their targeting (Oprah for a biotech compound; USA Today for a foreign engineering firm; etc.). We use this approach internally as well to get the creative juices flowing. You can try this at home.

  • Who are the ideal targets? Make a list.
  • What do you want them to do?
  • What are their motivations?
  • Where does each get his or her information — the most trusted sources?
  • How to influence the flow of information into those channels?
  • Get creative. Key messages – how to differentiate from the competition?
  • Unusual approaches?
  • Identify the tools and tactics to get it done (new product launches, trade show programs, media relations, seminars, direct mail, email, literature, speeches, a Guru Program, YouTube, guerrilla marketing, whatever).
  • How to integrate and leverage the tactics for maximum impact (e.g. how Apple and others leak hints about new products in the weeks leading up to the official introduction, provide reviewers with prototypes, etc.)?
  • Can you measure and monitor the results from each component of the program?
  • How often to review and adjust as needed?
  • What will success look like?

Good job! High-fives around the room. Now, get on with the real work of bringing this to life.

RIP Print Advertising (1704-2010) – and Long Live the Tweet

Sunday, October 3rd, 2010

Tweetless

Posted by Tom Gable

This headline is actually a take off on a posting by Simon Dumenco on AdAge.com in September titled RIP, the Press Release (1906-2010) — and Long Live the Tweet. When It Comes to Pithy Spin, Should Marketers Be Taking Their Cues From the Celebrity-Industrial Complex?”

The piece was about as deep and fact-filled as a Tweet (or maybe two Tweets). One excerpt:

“The long-suffering, much-maligned press release, I’d argue, finally died this summer, thanks particularly to JetBlue and BP, with a little moral support from Kanye West and just about every other celebrity with thumbs. (Of course, press releases will probably continue to stumble along, zombie-like, for years to come, because too many PR folks are still heavily invested in grinding them out.)”

The piece did generate lots of attention and comments in several PR discussion groups on PRSA and LinkedIn. I commented on the AdAge site:

“Perhaps use of the news release will fade in the puff-filled world of the ‘celebrity-industrial complex,’ where fast, furious and fluffy seems to rule the day. For legitimate businesses, organizations, institutions and even individuals with a need to get out a quality message with some depth and detail, the news release will continue to be the primary means of communication. This is particularly true with publicly traded companies, where SEC regulations mandate full and timely disclosure. And blasting out a series of 140-character snippets of facts probably won’t qualify.”

Many others pointed out the shortcomings of the piece and also provided links to excellent research supporting the future of the news release. Here are a few examples:

“Serious news requires more than 140 characters. There’s a time and a place for a mixture of the methods we use, some are more appropriate than others — it depends on the client, the story, the event, timing, audience, etc. A true strategist knows how and when to pull it all together.” — Posted by Marisa Vallbona, APR, Fellow PRSA

“Burson Marsteller just published the findings of its message gap research (link). They make a great point – press releases are no longer written just for the media. Given how often they are posted by different sources across the Web, customers and prospects might be reading them as much as reporters. Nuances granted (e.g. press release don’t generate coverage, good media relations skills do), this is another reason the press release isn’t dead.” — Posted by Jon Bornstein

“The news release is far from dead, it just has a new purpose. Granted, it not be an effective media relations tool, but it has become an important online way to talk directly to consumers through search. The wires aggregate the news wires, and news aggregators are the second most popular source of news, according to Pew Internet (click here). – Posted by Eric Schwartzman

“Total hogwash. If you believe it, you haven’t read David Meerman Scott’s whitepaper on press releases and/or his book “New Rules of PR and Marketing” covering the new mind shift of PR/Marketing strategy…tossing out ANY long standing tool without realistically understanding your market, your media, and seriously considering some of the of the NEW and strategic ways of utilization is not a good idea.” — Posted by Melissa Freye

“Total overstatement…This headline was meant to grab attention without the substance to back it up.” – Posted by Toni Hatch

“I made my comments known in the comments section of that preposterous post. Anybody else tired of “FILL IN THE BLANK is Dead” headlines? So bait-and-switchy and gimmicky. Judging from the comments above, you all see through it. Meanwhile, here at Business Wire (Monika is vice president of new media at BW), and our worthy competitors, we are sending 1000s of press release each work day. That ain’t dead, folks. That’s alive and well. If you’re really interested, here’s a link to our White Paper on The State of the Press Release.” – Posted by Monika Maekle

(On the Ad Age comment section, she wrote about the Pew Project for Excellence in Journalism finding that “As news is posted faster, often with little enterprise reporting added, the official version of events is becoming more important. We found official press releases often appear word for word in first accounts of events, though often not noted as such.”)

The AdAge piece did get lots of attention. There are precedents for hyperbolic claims erupting when tectonic shifts are underway in the media, such as the punditry about the anticipated death of radio with the launch of television or the deaths of traditional print and broadcast advertising when the Internet started taking off after the introduction of the Netscape browser in 1994. The deaths didn’t happen and won’t because of the same reasons the world won’t see the death of the press release any time soon: people get their information from many sources, so communicators need to make strategic use of all the channels, tools and tactics to reach those targets effectively and measure impact.

The press release may see different forms of delivery and packaging, but it will continue to be a potentially powerful communications tool for organizations of all sizes, particularly when the work is fact-filled, content-rich and tells a good story.

And for a few last words about advertising, which AdAge claims started in the U.S. in 1704:

“From any cross section of ads, the general advertiser’s attitude would seem to be: If you are a lousy, smelly, idle, underprivileged and over-sexed status-seeking neurotic moron, give me your money.” — Kenneth Bromfield

Advertising may be described as the science of arresting the human intelligence long enough to get money from it. — Stephen Leacock

Editors panel: Online journalism standards lacking; no guarantees of accuracy, verification, trust

Sunday, September 19th, 2010

Daily and Sunday

Posted by Tom Gable

The title of the news panel was “It’s Not Your Grandparents’ Newspaper or Newscast Anymore” and although it occurred in San Diego with local media, one can find several lessons learned with broader implications:

        • - The ability to self-publish on the Internet has created a world where journalistic principles most likely don’t exist and readers now have the burden of determining what is journalism and what is not
        • - Evolving newspaper business models, with 24/7 reporting and fewer copy editors, has resulted in more errors
        • - The competitive nature of the broadcast media can creating feeding frenzies, such as the one experienced when the loon preacher in Florida threatened to burn a copy of the Koran on Sept. 11
        • - Viewers need to distinguish between entertainment shows and news shows
        • - Journalistic standards are lower with online media (or nonexistent)

The panel was held Sept. 17 at a biweekly luncheon meeting of the Catfish Club, founded by the Reverend George Walker Smith in 1970 to spur dialogue and understanding among different segments of the community. More than 70 attended, including community leaders, elected officials, retired Sheriff Bill Kolender and a couple of gadflies.

The moderator was Michael Grant, former columnist for the San Diego Union-Tribune and now journalism and media instructor at Grossmont College. He was joined by: Jeff Light, editor of the U-T (www.uniontrib.com); J.W. August, managing editor of KGTV (ABC affiliate, owned by McGraw Hill); Andrew Donohue, editor, Voice of San Diego, 100 percent online newspaper; and Leon Williams, now retired, the first black elected to the San Diego City Council and also the county Board of Supervisors, who has a long history of promoting positive deeds in minority communities.

Grant set the stage by noting that with the evolving world of self-publishing, there are no guarantees online news is journalism – accurate, verified and worthy of trust. He said in pre-Internet days, the news media acted as gateways to screen out the questionable, objectionable, unverifiable and other non-news. Now, with everyone being self published, journalistic principles may simply not exist. (I had one former editor hand back a daily business column written on deadline saying it wasn’t writing, it was typing; glad he was around to make it right.)

Grant, a droll former Texan, said the authors of websites, blogs and other self published information and mostly never been to journalism schools. As a result, it is now up to the citizens to have the burden of determining what is journalism and what is not.

Donohue said he sees “churnalism not journalism” because of the 24/7 news cycle being chased by media with smaller staffs and more pressure. He said if gatekeepers of old had been at work, the preacher who threatened to burn the Koran on Sept. 11 might never have been covered.

August, of Channel 10, said cable beats things to death. He also used the Koran story as an example. The cable news networks picked it up and it turned into a feeding frenzy. If they had just dropped it at the outset, August said, the story would have gone away. He noted the growth of fake news programs and the challenge of confusing real news with entertainment.

Williams said the media has a duty to be accurate. He told the audience that the reporters often ask leading questions (“Don’t you think it’s the end of the earth?”) and complained about reporters twisting things to create conflict. He said the media need to keep their feelings and prejudices out of the news and present the news as fairly and objectively as they know how (in whatever the format).

Light, recruited from the Orange County Register where had driven web-based initiatives, said the new owners of the U-T bought into a losing operation and now wanted to find a way to “improve lives and build a stronger community.” When the new owners arrived, they found an aging, shrinking and dissatisfied audience, Light said. They did research and people were interested in values and improved community coverage. Rather than do incremental changes, the U-T made major changes to give a strong signal to the community. This included a complete design overhaul and making website news coverage the driving force, with section editors later determining what should make the print edition.

On accuracy, Light said the time-honored process within the news business was to have reporters arrive at a different level of trust, based on experience. They would turn in their stories, which would go through the editing process. Does it ring true? Have the facts been checked? Then the story would print. He said news media hear quickly if the are wrong, or if not all sources have been used.

In answers to questions from the audience, he said they have reduced the number of copy editors at the U-T. It was a financial necessity. He said he was given a certain budget for reporting. Under the old news model, 40 percent of the staff covered the news and the rest was infrastructure, including copy editors and editors. Now, they’ve reduced the number of copy editors to increase the number of reporters in the field and improve community coverage.

There will be a spike in errors, he noted, but they will be cosmetic. The reporters are getting closer to each community they serve, which he believes will be well received. He said he likes the online comments to stories because they help the media learn. But he hopes to eliminate anonymous postings.

The panel agreed that online comments are great, but need attribution. Light said the blogs and the various voices with anonymous comments get into demagoguery. Donohue said online platforms can generate ranting. Since the Voice of San Diego changed to eliminate anonymous postings, the quality of the comments has gone up considerably. They also moderate the comments.

Grant noted that with anonymous comments, most of the harangues turn into people ragging the comments of others rather than the story.

Donohue said Voice of San Diego, the online paper, has a tight editing procedure. The reporter prints the first copy of the story and gives to Andrew to edit with a red pencil in the old-fashioned way. The reporter is then challenged to prove the accuracy of the story. As a third step, copy editors conduct fact checking. They also require that reporters to footnote their stories. The footnotes are hidden, but give the editors of the opportunity to research and learn more. On big stories, the material is sent to their lawyers. This diligence hasn’t prevented Voice from breaking some big stories in politics and education and winning awards. Its processes could provide a model for any legitimate media outlet, online or otherwise.

Print Media Rising in 2011 or Gone in 2022?

Friday, August 27th, 2010

Maybe Not

Posted by Tom Gable

Will print media make a comeback starting in 2011 or will newspapers be gone by 2022?

Two recent postings questioned the future of newspapers and print media. Joe Pulizzi, writing in Folio, noted that print can and should play a vital role in an overall content marketing mix. He offered seven reasons why he envisioned good news for print in the coming year (summarized here; see his post for more detail):

1. Getting Attention: There are fewer publications in most niches, so each gets more attention.

2. Print Media Help with Customer Retention

3. No Audience Development Costs; marketers can distribute a magazine to their customers using existing lists.

4. What’s Old Is New Again; marketers are leveraging print in their marketing mix.

5. Customers Still Need to Ask Questions. He noted that you can ask yourself tough questions based on what you read.

6. Print Still Excites People: He talked to a journalist who said it’s harder to get people to agree to an interview for an online story than print; people will reschedule for that.

7. Unplug: Joe opined that people are disconnecting themselves from digital media in increasing numbers. (Recent studies show that digital overload actually hurts cognition).

I agree wholeheartedly on No. 6 on the excitement of print, plus its credibility. Coverage in a real, non-electronic publication with a history of competence and integrity has significantly more value than coverage in most online media and blogs (the latter being, of course, fairly low on the credibility scale). Seeing your story in the print edition of the NYT, WSJ, Economist or even your home town daily paper generates a great sense of accomplishment. PR professionals almost expect coverage to land in on-line media, so the so-called earned media isn’t as dear online as in print. Of course the print media have a website, RSS feed, Twitter feed, etc., so you can have the best of both worlds. And it’s a world I surely want to continue in perpetuity.

On the other side of the debate, Ross Dawson, a futurist, was speaking to Newspaper Publishers’ Association in Australia and predicted that within 10 years, mobile reading devices would allow people to consume news on the run and be the “primary news interface”.

He predicted the costs would fall from the $600 iPad level to under $10. “More sophisticated news readers will be foldable, or rollable, gesture-controlled and fully interactive,” he said.

He predicted journalism would be “increasingly crowdsourced” to “hordes of amateurs overseen by professionals.” (We now have that on the web, mostly with no adult supervision)

He did predict expert journalists would still be employed in Australia. Audiences would be guided to trusted journalists by some form of public reputation measures (probably recorded from electronics sensors implanted in our skins and transmitted wirelessly to the Media Measurement Algorithm Monitor in the sky).

Bottom line: this former printer journalist and long-time PR practitioner believes the printed word will continue to be valued by many, most notably those with a sense of the weight of non-electronic media. I read four papers every morning with breakfast and love to see how the news is played, the relationships of stories, news judgment in context and find new discoveries on every page. Sure, you can get a little serendipity online, but I don’t think the medium works that way. I find the printed variety better for scanning and quickly absorbing the flow of news and trends. I can turn a page and scan it faster for information than I can scrolling through a website screen or agonizing as I view 14 lines of news at a time on my Blackberry.

Joe, thanks for the post. I second the motion: print is rebounding — in 2011 and beyond.

Three Questions to Determine if You are Taking the Right Road in Crisis PR

Monday, August 9th, 2010

The Right Turn?

Posted by Tom Gable

When unexpected events or outside forces suddenly impact your operation, rapid, reasoned response is essential to protecting the brand and organizational image for the long term. You gather facts, analyze the impacts on all constituents and then determine your strategic management and crisis communications plans going forward. But options exist. You have reached a critical fork in the road to the path toward continued trust and credibility or possibly something less. How do you decide which road to take?

At Gable PR, we’ve used a quick litmus test over the years in handling a variety of crises (hostile take overs, threats to public safety, food-borne illnesses, religious scandals, etc.) – three questions to focus on the essentials:

1. Is the strategic plan true to the brand or organizational values and what you stand for?

2. Will it solidify your reputation for the long term, despite short-term issues?

If the answer is no, maybe not, or hedged in any way, ask:

3. How will this be played in the media and by your competitors?

The recent Apple “antennagate” and BP oil spill crisis provide good case histories where the organizations may have let ego, arrogance and perceived invincibility get in the way of critical thinking about strategy. An NBC San Diego reporter got to the point when he asked me in an interview about crisis as a metaphor for company values.

“How you operate in a crisis is probably a better indicator of the quality of a corporation than (how you operate) during good times,” I replied.

A wide range of business, technical and PR media noted that Steve Jobs puts a crack in the rarely sullied brand image of Apple when he admitted that in the smart phone world, “phones aren’t perfect.” And that consumers were guilty of the lost signals because, well, we held the phone to make a call.

Jobs said the issue was all so “blown so out of proportion,” then proceeded to add his own momentum to the blow out.

He dragged Motorola, Samsung and Droid into the fray by showing they too could have problems. Using the famous Kindergarten Defense, Jobs basically said that since everyone else is doing it, what’s the big deal?

Motorola had a great time with it, running ads that promoted a phone with “no jacket required.” As quoted from a recent Fortune brainstorming panel, Motorola co-CEO Sanjay Jha was asked how he felt about Apple posting video showing its own “death grip” testing of Motorola’s new Droid X Smartphone, and if he thought it was a fair business practice. Jha answered: “You know, I heard (probably apocryphal) that the most popular voice message on iPhone4 was, ‘Sorry I can’t answer your call, because I am holding my phone!’ I don’t think this is an issue with Droid X,” reported Fortune writer Seth Weintraub.

The Motorola ad noted: “At Motorola, we believe a customer shouldn’t have to dress up their phone for it to work properly.”

The press conference videos disappeared from Apple’s site shortly after the Hitler meme and other parodies blanketed the Internet. A College Humor video (NSFW) offered one of the cruder send ups of the Apple iPhone press conference and Steve Jobs attitude.

The Register (UK) nailed it:

“…Apple thrives by saying that its products are simply better than everyone else’s, and anyone who can’t see that is clearly not cool enough. Running down the competition is very uncool, and it’s not the Apple way of doing things.”

Lesson learned: which fork did he take? Did ego override sound crisis PR strategy? A review of comments by assorted experts found general agreement that Apple should have simply owned up to the problem and offered the bumper fix immediately via a press release rather than an odd video press conference, with follow up interviews. The approach would have protected the integrity of the brand and reduced risk to the CEO, with no follow up parodies and “antennagate ads.”

In contract, the concept of owning up and moving on was demonstrated clearly by Google when it announced it was discontinuing Wave. It offered a straightforward assessment and showed the integrity of a company and a culture dedicated to taking changes and not being afraid to fail. For an attitude toward failure, my favorite quote is from Thomas Edison, who said: “I have not failed. I’ve just found 10,000 ways that won’t work.”

Next: similar and obvious lessons from BP.

COP-16 Climate Change Panelists Told to Avoid Media; NYT Chides IPCC for Bunker Mentality, Bad PR

Friday, July 16th, 2010

IPCC Media Training

Posted by Tom Gable

Imagine that you have been selected and agreed to participate with other noted scientists in the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) to assess climate science and policy options related to global climate change, with a major event set for late November 2010 in Cancun where the world would be watching.

You are pleased as a scientist but wondering if it’s worth the commitment. Coverage of the previous meeting in Copenhagen, the Conference of the Parties (COP 15), was mixed, at best. Recently, global media questioned the authenticity of the climate change scenarios, citing hacked emails from English scientists who appeared to be conspiring to keep opposing opinions and contrary studies out of peer reviewed journals. Although outside studies cleared the scientists of wrongdoing (but urged improved communications and openness with those on all sides of the issue), skepticism did not wane.

Now, you are four months away from COP 16, to be held from Nov. 29 to Dec. 10 in Cancun and you receive a letter from the IPCC advising you to keep your distance from the media. The directions: refer questions to group leaders or the Secretariat. Do you feel stupid – your expertise, education and credentials not valued? Is IPCC afraid of new issues surfacing?  What are they hiding?

As reported by Andrew C. Revkin in The New York Times, several scientists worried that the IPCC bunker mentality would “do little to build its credibility after a trying year of attacks by foes of restrictions on greenhouse gases and skeptics of climate science.”

Revkin opined: “But any instinct to pull back after being burned by the news process is mistaken, to my mind. As I explained to a roomful of researchers at the National Academy of Sciences last year, in a world of expanding communication options and shrinking specialized media, scientists and their institutions need to help foster clear and open communication more than ever. Clampdowns on press access almost always backfire.”

Revkin asked for input from Rajendra K. Pachauri, the chairman of the climate panel. His response, as reported by Revkin:

“My advice to the authors on responding to the media is only in respect of queries regarding the I.P.C.C. Some of them are new to the I.P.C.C., and we would not want them to provide uninformed responses or opinions. We now have in place a structure and a system in the I.P.C.C. for outreach and communications with the outside world.
The I.P.C.C. authors are not employed by the I.P.C.C., and hence they are free to deal with the media on their own avocations and the organizations they are employed by. But they should desist at this stage on speaking on behalf of the I.P.C.C.”

Instead of a bunker mentality, adopt the tenets of authentic PR. In this model, research, preparation, fact-based communications and authentic engagement with the media (and all constituencies) can be the keys to success in building reputations and changing perceptions. For the IPCC, they have a wealth of talent they should be engaging in the communications battle. Scientists are used to presenting and answering tough questions, particularly when their work is subject to peer review. But working with the media requires different approaches, so investing time up front in education and training could make the engagements much more productive for the scientists, leading to more positive results in the media.

As the NYT and other coverage and comments in Discovery reported, the media from around the world will be seeking input from representatives from individual countries. Interest is high, particularly in third world countries where they feel they will be punished for the sins of the big polluters, such as China, India, the United States and other industrialized nations. They need energy to grow their economies. How will the global process translate to local impact?

As PR and news people know, readers and viewers want to know how decisions will impact them personally.

With some work, the IPCC organization turn its brilliant cadre of scientists into global ambassadors for the credibility and integrity of the IPCC process and advance local understanding. The scientists can be trained to easily transition away from IPCC issues and focus on individual areas of knowledge and expertise. They can refer to their own published works and those of their peers or other organizations as additional resources for the media.

With trained scientists, IPCC staff can serve as more than a news bureau and controller of messages. It can connect with the media in new ways by facilitating interviews with scientists, conducting interviews on key emerging topics on video and posting them to YouTube, holding a series of briefings with scientists from different regions of the world for select regional media and providing instant updates through Twitter, streaming videos and active blogging.

Instead of jumping into the bunker and getting defensive, the IPCC can use the Cancun meeting as an opportunity to open new lines of communication with the media and improve understanding of the issues and the nuances. Creating new media relationships with scientists from throughout the world can only help improve the overall quality of news coverage. Bottom line: an open, engaged program of pro-active media relations will have a positive impact on the long-term reputation of the IPCC, its people and the process.

The Future of PR and Social Media – Strategic, Integrated, Coordinated, Human

Monday, May 24th, 2010

No Magic Beans

Posted by Tom Gable

In listening to several gurus of social media at the Counselors Academy Spring Conference May 21 through 23 in Ashville, NC, a key theme emerged: there are no magic beans from social media to plant and instantly grow attention, engagement and business success for any organization. New technologies and applications will continue to emerge almost daily. The challenge still becomes to be smart in setting standards, goals and objectives, then integrating all the tools for precise execution over the long term.

The stage was set with the May 21 keynote by Brian Solis, principal of FutureWorks. A few key points lifted from his talk included:

  • Adopt the new KISS – keep it simple and share.
  • The is new measurement on the way: resonance. How long a message stays alive – the long tail.
  • Social media is the slot machine for attention. Become like a journalist. Be relevant.
  • What you share is important. There are no official audiences anymore.
  • Be creative. It increases your influence.
  • Social media is all about sociology and psychology. Social media is an emotional experience.
  • Measure. Work backward from what you are trying to make happen.
  • Integrate the tools into your strategic plan. There is no single tool or tactic.
  • Bottom line: engage.

A breakfast panel the next day delved into “Listening and Brand Monitoring in the Social Space.” Moderator was Carrie Kandes, vice president Marcus Thomas. The panelists: Eric Israel, Attensity; Ken Miner, Spiral 16; and Amber Naslund, director of community, Radian6 Technologies

Each stressed the importance of listening before doing. This included monitoring the depth and breadth of the conversations. Amber proposed that social media is the new phone. She said technology will continue to change so told counselors to avoid having obsessions with the “tool thing.” How do the tools fit?

Business is becoming more like politics. Every consumer has a voice to be considered. Companies need to position themselves to be able to react internally and externally to conflicting voices and outside complaints.

Ken said that like any other business tool, social media monitoring needs to be part of a process. Set standards. Define goals and objectives before you begin, he urged.

Once you start monitoring, how to use the data? Being strategic is not just an automated process with algorithms. Smart analysis and interpretation requires human brain power. Look at things in context and connect the dots in your process of brand monitoring, tracking trends and looking for blue water opportunities.

But attention not enough. What is needed to compel people to do something?

The panelists warned that brand monitoring can be a time sink. Decide what you want to achieve and how much time to invest before you launch a full scale listening program. Be strategic – consistent advice from the days Edward Bernays first launched integrated plans to change reputations and drive new behaviors.