Everyone is a Critic, Don’t You Agree?

Whether writing about a highly politicized issue on blogger, creating a group for like-minded people on Facebook, or producing a spoof of a product on YouTube it appears that everyone has something to say these days. The rise of the self-proclaimed critic is beginning to gain momentum and it has communication practitioners standing on edge, particularly in an era where viral marketing reigns supreme. So how will communication professionals respond to their newfound critics?

The solution to the problem is quite simple; if you can’t beat them join them. At least that appears to be how the advertising industry is responding to critics according to an article in AdWeek. Advertisers have already begun to concede to claims that their message is not on cue, but they contend that the true value is the product not the message.

Through observing real-time criticisms in venues such as Myspace and YouTube advertisers are capitalizing off of their critics by recrafting advertisements and reframing their products. This has been the successful strategy for the makers of Head On, the most recalled and hated commercial of 2006. The three clips below show how this new cycle of advertising works.

1. The Original Advertisement

2. The Criticism/Spoof Advertisement

3. The Response to Criticism Advertisement

While this may appear to be an unusual approach, the real question is whether it is an effective one. It appears that these spots are effective in garnering the audiences attention in a more positive fashion. However, the implications of this new strategy could be catastrophic for the field of communications. Essentially, what is being sold to consumers is not a product, but the idea that communication is unimportant and it should be ignored. It is already hard for many communication practitioners to break through the clutter in order to get their message to their audience. This new approach only promises to create a big headache for the field of communications that perhaps can only be treated by “Head On. Apply Directly to the Forehead.”
--Greg

A Mockumental PR Campaign

Hollywood knows PR. Agents promote actors. Studios and producers promote movies. Celebrities promote themselves and their most recent endeavors. But what happens when the Hollywood PR machine offends a foreign nation?

Kazakhstan, a former Soviet republic located in central Asia, is the unwilling star of the new movie, or “mockumentary,” from Sacha Baron Cohen. Cohen, a British comic and variety show creator of Da Ali G Show, has parlayed one of his regular sketch characters, Borat Sagdiyev, a fake TV presenter and self-proclaimed 'sixth most famous man in Kazakhstan', into a full-length movie. This movie, Borat: Cultural Learnings Of America For Make Benefit Glorious Nation Of Kazakhstan, debuted at the Toronto Film Festival earlier in the month.

Infuriated by a demeaning portrayal of customs, culture and peoples, Kazakh officials have launched a PR campaign to amend their image. Two Western PR firms are helping promote a positive image of Kazakhstan’s “sweeping reforms” and “civil society.” Prints ads have appeared in the NY Times and a new television commercial touts Kazakhstan as a “strong ally of the United States” and a nation that “voluntarily eliminated its nuclear weapons.” I have yet to see the print ad, but the TV spot leaves much to be desired – envision outdated, still pictures from an 8th grade history book with a bland voiceover. Most likely not the high-powered communications campaign needed to affect change. This example illustrates PR being used for two purposes: 1) promote a new product, and 2) correct false or negative information.

Sacha Cohen and his new movie benefit the most from the present PR flurry. Kazakh officials may increase interest in their nation, educate a few American or gain added press coverage with their campaign, but in the end late night talk shows and entertainment editors will drive the Hollywood PR machine toward Borak’s silver screen debut in November.
Wyatt

Where Have All the People Gone?

Nielson Media Research released their latest study indicating that for the first time the average American household has more television sets than it does people. On average, the American Household consists of 2.55 people compared with 2.73 TV sets. According to an article that appeared in Adweek it is not just the number of sets that has increased, but the amount of viewing time has also increased. So what implications does this have on the field of communications?

For communicators, particularly those in the advertising industry, this study reaffirms that TV is a medium that is not going to lose its influence anytime soon. This is not to suggest that communication professionals should back away from going digital as the study notes a continuing increase in the use of digital media, particularly among younger demographics. Instead, communication professionals should take a holistic approach when planning a campaign and utilize a mix of digital and traditional media.

Integrated marketing communications can achieve higher levels of product and message awareness because the message is communicated across several different touch points. It is an effective strategy in segmenting the market and it also provides communicators with a manageable way to distribute their dollars across mediums. The industry has been slow to embrace IMC and with Nielsen’s latest study it may further slow down this transition. For now we will have to stay tuned to see what happens in the continuing saga of IMC.

--Greg

Fifteen Minutes of Fame: Not Lonely Anymore

Rabid excitement, wild speculation and marked skepticism are nothing new to the Internet. These qualities generate viral communications and create buzz for new products, services, events or people. Recently, YouTube’s summer hit - Lonelygirl15 – has drawn the attention of many Internet enthusiasts.

The brainchild of three, twenty-something year olds, Miles Beckett, a med school dropout; Mesh Flinders, a screenwriter; and Greg Goodfried, a lawyer, set out to create an on-line mystery story. Lonelygirl15’s plight has unfolded through “collaborative storytelling,” a method of storytelling where viewer comments help direct plot and character actions. Via web-diary postings, fans met the cryptic, 16-year old female “Bree,” aka Lonelygirl15. Vague details about “Bree’s” location, personal life, relationships and religion generated an Internet buzz and led millions to view postings on YouTube and MySpace.

By mid summer, message boards and fan websites were speculating about the interests behind Lonelygirl15. Were these videos trailers for a new movie, a la The Blair Witch Project? Would “Bree” be in a new fall television show? Was a corporation sponsoring Lonelygirl15? Last week the identity of Lonelygirl15’s creators and “Bree” were revealed. The Los Angeles Times worked in collaboration with amateur Internet investigators to uncover this mystery.

At the heart of the Lonelygirl15 phenomenon is peer-to-peer, online communications. In traditional forms of communication, trust, respect and openness are vital qualities of any relationship. Online communications test these qualities since many online social networking relationships contain a level of anonymity. How is trust affected when peers share deceptive online communications? Is trust compromised? Will peers ultimately turn against each other or the interests behind a deceptive message?

Answering these questions will be important for public relations professionals and communications strategists who wish to engage Interactive audiences with new products, services and ideas in the future.
Wyatt

Fire for Justice

The 34-day clash between Israel and Lebanon’s Hezbollah guerillas highlighted the longstanding rift between Jews and Muslims. And in the wake of the Pope’s inflammatory remarks about Islam and the effigy burnings and calls for jihad that have followed, there’s a conspicuous absence of solidarity between Catholics and Muslims.

Well, except for a few days after the Pope’s remarks, when Archbishop Desmond Tutu, Sheikh Ibrahim Mogra and Chief Rabbi Jonathan Sacks joined thousands of activists to pray for the Darfuri people and to pressure their governments to protect the innocent civilian population.

Using media outreach, grassroots mobilization and special events like the “Global Day for Darfur” on September 17, Save Darfur is the face of the global effort to pressure policymakers to help the people of Darfur. It is comprised of over 170 faith-based, advocacy and humanitarian organizations, from the American Society for Muslim Advancement to the Jewish Council for Public Affairs.

Save Darfur is doing something. It is making noise and raising awareness. It is rallying people of every race, religion and creed around a common cause. And people are paying attention.

But genocide in Darfur is just one of a handful of global crises gripping specific regions of the globe. World Aids Day and The International Day of Prayer for the Persecuted Church need supporters too. What about instituting a “Day for Victims of Sex Trafficking” or the “Global Day for Equal Opportunity in Education?”

Granted, it’s not about a “day.” It’s about the buzz. It’s about headlines. It’s about any press release, special event or lobbying effort that catalyzes change. That’s where we come in. It’s a grave responsibility we bear, but one that when realized, will fan the flame of justice around the world.

Communicating Crisis

Much research in our field centers on crisis communication, that is, what to do when an FDA warning leaves 70 percent of your company’s spinach harvest in jeopardy or when the U.S. Consumer Product Safety Commission recalls your $200 baby rattles citing risks of aspiration and laceration, as was the case for Tiffany and Co. in July 2006.

To the affected farmers and jewelry giants, these are indeed crises. And to the public relations practitioners on damage control 80 hours a week, crisis probably isn’t strong enough. In these instances, established theory on crisis management and terms like “corporate apologia” and “image restoration” actually matter. There are chapters in textbooks that prescribe best practices for regaining the public’s trust and limiting financial losses. Follow the six-step process and you’re well on your way.

But what about communicating crises? I mean, real crises. Crises of civil war, of death and disease, of poverty, injustice and corruption. What’s the six-step fix to these global evils?

Obviously, the formula is not quite as simple. In fact, few would suggest there is a formula at all. But if real-time news coverage and an increasingly decentralized internet really do create an imperative for prompt action, as former Secretary of State James Baker III says in his memoir, then professional communicators can do something.

Public relations managers, technicians, writers, designers and webmasters can ignite change in economic policy, diplomacy, human rights and public health.

Scholars would say we must first critically examine our strategies, and in deference to learned principles of strategic communication I would most often agree. In these cases, however, it seems most important to do something. Make some noise. Raise some awareness. Gain some coverage.

And worry about theory later.

Political Ads and Knowing your Audience

Election season is upon us and campaigns are gaining momentum. For many candidates campaign strategy will include the use of negative ads. Whether it is effective or not is the question.

Negative ads are generally used to juxtapose issues of competing candidates, and expose the public to those issues. The goal is to sway favor away from the candidate being attacked and towards the candidate who issued the ad. However, there is research to suggest that negative ads can serve the opposite purpose. Negative advertisements can activate the voting public’s interests. It may serve to mobilize voters to seek out information on the candidate being criticized.

These possible reactions to negative ads reinforce the mantra of knowing your audience. Knowing who you are communicating with is vital to effective communication. Campaign strategists can save time, money, and energy by researching audiences and information outlets to find the most effective ones for their candidates. Spending a little time researching can help you avoid the pitfall of having to cover the same audience more than once.

The attached article discusses the use of negative advertisements by the Democratic and Republican parties during this election cycle.
http://news.senate.gov/stories_sen/333_ds_16821544.jsp

Just Lettuce Be

I liked Californian Richard Rorex’s response to the current spinach “crisis.”

"I eat spinach-based salads quite often. As far as worry about E. Coli, no. I even like hamburgers rare and definitely my steaks barely warm. I figure that if I haven't been affected by food poisonings in the last 70 years, the next 35 are a breeze."

Despite Rorex’s indifference, there is some cause for concern. To date, more than 100 people have come down with serious diarrhea, according to the Center for Disease Control. One person has even died from eating leaves laden with the menacing E. coli infection.

To contextualize, that’s one in 3 million Americans who had to spend the majority of last week near a bathroom. Sixteen of those experienced acute renal failure; that’s one in 19 million. And yes, one person died. Meanwhile, 300,000 people will die of cancer in the U.S. this year; 17,000 will die as a result of drunk driving; 15,000 will die of HIV/AIDS. Even more upsetting, in Africa, more than 12 million children have been orphaned by the AIDS epidemic while millions face displacement, starvation, rape and mass slaughter each year at the hands of Janjaweed militias in Darfur.

Not to minimize the danger posed by bad spinach – I threw my half-eaten bag out and won’t rush to replace it – but I guess I just feel sorry for the public relations departments at places like the FDA, California spinach farms, farmers’ trade associations and supermarkets. The constant barrage of phone calls from the media, seeking fuel to flame the fires of public panic, must get annoying. They must know there are more important battles to wage, more constructive ways to fill airtime.

But the public isn’t interested in real crises. They’re too busy flipping through Rachel Ray’s latest for a spinach-free recipe to whip up for dinner. Perhaps the next generation of public relations practitioners can do something about that.

Dealing with the media--Is humor the best medicine?

White House press briefings suddenly seem to be a lot more fun.

Yeas and Nays, a Washington Examiner column, recently examined press briefing transcripts comparing current White House spokesman, Tony Snow, to those of his predecessor, Scott McClellan.

Comparing transcripts from both spokesmen during their first four months on the job, "Yeas and Nays" discovered that under Snow, the White House press corps has laughed 330% more.

“It’s not that Tony’s necessarily a laugh riot,” says Ron Hutcheson, who
covers the White House for McClatchy newspapers. “But he engages, and it’s a lot more fun to be in the room with somebody who’s engaging reporters.” Hutcheson says that McClellan, on the other hand, “was just cautious, cautious to a fault. He would retreat to the talking points and it was almost as if he didn’t listen
to the question.”

While Snow's rapport with the Press Corps, reporters typically known for their cynicism, may not result in positive news for the White House, it serves as a good example that the media can be the PR practitioner's most important public.

In media relations, it's important for the organization's spokesperson to be personable and dynamic, offering interesting sound bites that go beyond the talking points.

Building strong relationships with reporters can often determine the success or failure of a communications campaign. If reporters know that they can trust you as an easy-to-reach, reliable source, your organization has a better chance of getting its voice heard during breaking news or a crisis.

Cultivating relationships with media takes time and effort. However, when an emergency situation arises, your pro-active efforts will be worth the investment. It's important to remember though, that media relations isn't all fun and games.

As Snow comments, "Well, I do like to have fun, but at the same time you don’t want to be doing stand-up as the spokesperson of the president and the leader of the free world."

The tone of your relationship should be determined by your organization. Humor can help deliver messages, but the spokesperson represents his or her organization. As a practitioner of public relations, it's absolutely vital to not only know the audience, but also to understand the situation completely. Humor may be appropriate at times, but would we still be buying Tylenol if Johnson & Johnson had tried to make reporters laugh during the cyanide crisis in 1982?

~Adrienne