Catching Flack

It’s not everyday that our friends at the New York Times offer press release writing tips, but they did so today in a story headlined, “Need Press? Repeat: ‘Green,’ ‘Sex,’ ‘Cancer,’ ‘Secret,’ ‘Fat’”

The Times took as a starting point a press release about the alleged toxicity of shower curtains to explain how PR agents lard their press releases with eye-catching words such as “green” and “cancer” and “toxic.”

As the Times notes:

Those who make their living composing news releases say there is an art to this easily dismissed craft. Strategic word selection can catapult an announcement about a study, a product or a “breakthrough” onto the evening news instead of to its usual destination — the spam folder or circular file.

Well, duh.

This is another darn-good example of the chasm that exists between journalists and PR. As a group, journalists seem to think that media stories are chosen based on their inherent merits, and that pitching, spin and prior relationships have nothing to do with it. PR people know better, and spend much of their time trying to game the system so that their [usually little] piece of news gets an out-sized amount of media coverage.

Now don’t go jumping to the conclusion that all you need to do is add sexy words to make even the dullest release into a big news splash. It takes more than that. In the case of the toxic shower curtains, the release included references to a research study, a press conference at a high-profile New York hospital, and most importantly, it was about an everyday consumer product.

But the story does, unwittingly, point to a truism of media relations: that the competition for scarce media attention is fierce, so you can’t just drop your press release into the stream and expect it to get picked up. Instead, you’ve got to include as many attention-grabbers as possible [ideally, without going overboard].

In addition to emotionally charged words, other attention grabbers include:

• Exclusivity
• Interesting photos and graphics
• Behind-the-scenes access
• Access to hard-to-reach business executives
• Compelling research data

This is a little weekend item about Maui Jim, the sunglass maker. I’ve had Maui Jims for several years now, but I continue to be blown away by their commitment to customer service and how it makes me feel about their brand. They’re not cheap (mine cost about $200 and they can run much more than that) but for the price, you get a relationship with a company with exemplary service.

The latest example: a couple of weeks ago, a friend sat on my sunglasses and badly bent the arms. They were unwearable. For most glasses, that would mean either replacement or an expensive repair. But Maui Jims are different. Originally made for fishermen in Hawaii, they’re now a global brand with its main U.S. facility in Peoria, IL. That’s where I sent mine for repair. I included $8.95 for return shipping.

They came back today. It would appear that Maui Jim’s repair department simply popped my non-prescription lenses out of the bent frame and popped them into a new frame. They came back to me two days after they were repaired, literally as good if not better than new, and for no charge other than shipping.

On the repair statement enclosed with the glasses were these simple words to explain the decision to provide me with brand-new frames: “goodwill gesture.”

It’s been awhile since a viral video has made the rounds online as fast as the Gatorade “ball girl” video (above). Cool use of viral video, but here’s my question: the Gatorade branding is so subtle, does it work? If the idea is just to get us talking about Gatorade in a new way, how do you measure the effectiveness?

Here’s a Chicago Trib story about the video. Thanks to Sarah Risdall for the links.

****

Update: In case you are interested, here’s an article on the making of the Ball Girl video.

You know that at some point, you’re going to have to start producing video about your company for the web. It’s actually a lot easier than you think: you need a digital camcorder and video editing software and then someplace like Youtube to upload it to.

Why? Because using the web to watch video is exploding. It’s one of the best ways to get your message across, it’s low-cost, and it’s more interesting for people than a lot of text.

Don’t believe me? Here’s an interview with U.S. News and World Report’s David LaGesse, who says that USN&WR’s web site is featuring PR-created video more than ever. “The idea here is that journalists need to drive people online and people like to watch video clips. If you can help with that, all the better,” he says.

One thing you may find you need at your company is someplace to serve as your “studio.” Sybase, the enterprise software company, figured this out, and had a very creative solution: there was this windowless conference room that no one liked using, so voila, it’s now the video studio, complete with a neutral background wall, lighting and video equipment. You can check out a Sybase video at their page on Youtube: http://youtube.com/user/SybaseInc.

Sybase uses video to create a “richer media experience” and to make its products and services more tangible to customers, says Mark Wilson, VP of Corporate Marketing for Sybase.

I learned this while talking to Wilson for my latest PR Management Roundtable webinar, sponsored by Bulldog Reporter, which is scheduled for Wednesday, July 2 @ 1pm ET. It’s called “Management Secrets of High-Performance
PR Departments: Traits Every Communications Team Must Embrace in Changing Times,” and in addition to Mark, I’ll also be joined by Matthew Broder, VP of External Communications for Pitney Bowes. I’ve already talked to both of them about this subject and can assure you’ll learn a lot from these experts if you can join us.

There has always been a steady stream of media people making the career transition into PR. But with the serious financial and business model problems plaguing most major media, journalists who once looked down their noses at what they call “the dark side” are starting to think that things might not be so bad over here (btw, I prefer to call it “the beige side”).

I was at a PR party recently where there were several mainstream journalists in attendance, and I swear, they all seemed to be scoping out job opportunities. What really struck me was that in place of the usual snickering about PR, they seemed to be on their best and most respectful behavior.

So I was not surprised when I opened the latest issue of PRWeek and found this Page One headline: “An Unstable Media Landscape Has Journalists Seeking PR Positions.”

Here’s an excerpt:

In the greater Atlanta region, journalists seeking PR jobs are becoming so common that Diane Lore, VP of digital media at GCI Group and former Atlanta Journal-Constitution features project editor, helps to administer a “second life club,” producing educational e-mails and organizing regular gatherings to inform ex-reporters, editors, and those who are contemplating a career switch, about the opportunities in PR.

A fourth-generation journalist who jokes about “the stages of grief of leaving journalism,” Lore said she was encouraged to leave by her father, a newspaper employee for three decades.

“The money is not there, and because of the constant filing for the online presence now, the pressure is so much higher,” she said, adding that 50 to 60 people are on the journalist group’s e-mail list and about 20 attend meetings. “No one goes into journalism for the money, but you do expect it to be fun. So if you’re not having fun and not making money, then why do it?”

…

Of the former reporters and editors interviewed, including former member of Hearst’s Washington bureau, Eric Rosenberg, now Ogilvy VP and senior media relations strategist, nearly all said that staff layoffs, buyouts, or restructurings weighed considerably on their decision to leave journalism. Many former journalists, including Christa Segalini, SAE at Beckerman PR, formerly of New Jersey’s Courier News, also cited better pay, steadier hours, and a more attractive career path, as reasons to seek PR jobs.

I have one question: what good is it to be a “senior media relations strategist” if all the mainstream media people come over to PR. Who will we pitch?

It’s not every day you see someone walk the talk. There’s a lot of posturing out there in the business world, a lot of saying one thing and doing another.

Not so with KMart CMO Bill Stewart. Make that soon-to-be-ex-CMO Bill Stewart.

Stewart announced last week that he will leave the retailer on June 30 to become a full-time volunteer with Equality for All, which is leading the campaign against a ballot initiative to ban gay marriage in California.

Stewart told Advertising Age:

“We’ve had a great run and come a long way toward our goal of getting America to take another look at what we have to offer,” Mr. Stewart told Advertising Age.

But he said he felt personally compelled to go in a different direction because of a historic vote approaching in California. “It was something that personally was so important to me that I felt I needed to do everything possible,” he said.

Here’s a follow-up on Monday’s Catching Flack post about whether it’s better or worse for PR that bloggers are now being offered journalism training from the Society of Professional Journalists.

The vote so far on the poll: 14 for trained bloggers, 3 for untrained. I was glad to see some people vote for “untrained” — I’m not necessarily in favor of anarchy, but there are pluses and minuses to both points of view.

Trained:

• More thorough, less opinionated
• Better written and probably more accurate
• Broader coverage
• Potentially more accessible
• Potentially more mainstream
• Possibly more narrow in coverage
• Higher ethical standards
• Less likely to take freebies and give favorable coverage in return

Untrained:

• Rely more on being opinionated than on fact-gathering
• Possibly harder to work with
• Lower or perhaps non-existent ethical standards
• More likely to take freebies in return for favorable coverage
• Harder for PR to plug in to a professional working relationship

Everyone in New York, and every baseball fan, knew the Mets were going to announce the firing of under-performing manager Willie Randolph. It wasn’t a matter of if, but when.

It turned out that when was at 12:15 am early Tuesday morning on the West Coast, which was 3:15 am back where it mattered, New York City.

The man who fired him, GM Omar Minaya, justified the timing by saying he waited until the Monday night game in Southern California ended and Randolph had a chance to a) get out of his game uniform, b) shower up and c) meet Minaya off-site. Pretty corporate sounding. Since the game ended around 10:15 pm, the timetable seems sensible and rational.

Which just goes to show how far “sensible and rational” go when you’re making a public announcement.

In New York, and across the sports world, the Mets and Minaya have been ripped for the “middle of the night” firing and announcement, as if the Mets thought they could sneak the news by everyone while they slept. Instead of management getting credit for making a long-overdue decision that is probably the Mets’ only chance to salvage their season, the story became the ineptitude of Mets management, as symbolized by their dark-of-night manueverings.

Sometimes, you can’t control timing. But in this case, the whole thing was up to Minaya, and he whiffed. If I were his PR counsel, I would have said:

• Don’t fire him on the West Coast, it will look like you’re trying to run away
• Do it with dignity at your home ballpark or at least in New York
• Feed it right into the heart of the news cycle so they can chew on it and then move on
• Have your messages ready regarding a) the value of Randolph’s past contribution and b) why the team needed a new leader now

Grocery store giant Safeway found itself between a rock and a hard place yesterday, and it didn’t do a very good job wiggling its way out.

Here in San Francisco, there was an event to talk about corporate efforts to reduce smoking. Safeway participated and announced that it would ban smoking in and around its corporate offices.

But would Safeway take the truly courageous step of discontinuing the sale of cigarettes at its stores? Are you kidding? Here’s what the Safeway rep told the audience at the event:

Safeway has no plans to quit selling tobacco because it does not dictate what legal products its customers should buy, and ceasing cigarette sales would put the company at a competitive disadvantage.

Oh really? Gee, I didn’t notice guns and ammo for sale at my local Safeway. Nor, for that matter, can I buy shoes, computer equipment or plumbing supplies. Obviously, a grocery store and all other retailers choose their selection of merchandise from the universe of products to sell, and at Safeway, highly profitable cigarettes make the cut.

Since this is so obvious, why bother being dishonest about it? For that matter, when your company is one of the largest purveyors of cigarettes, why participate in a corporate event like this at all? You can’t win, but you can make yourself the target for criticism such as this.

Blogs are the Wild West of new media opportunities for doing PR. Unlike old media, run by journalists with decades of experience and set ways of doing things, blogs are in their infancy, and even the ones run or written by former old media journalists are more or less unburdened from following the ethics and best practices of traditional journalism.

Here’s what I want to know: is this good or bad for PR? Would better-trained bloggers be good for generating publicity or buzz, or bad for it?

I’m prompted to ask these questions after reading an AP story about a new Society of Professional Journalists program that provides journalism training to bloggers. If you’re interested in attending, btw, there’s one next week in LA next week — more info here. You can read more about this program below.

On one hand, PR people are trained or at least somewhat experienced in working with the traditional media and working within their ethical guidelines. On the other hand, there have been numerous examples already of companies making creative use of bloggers, such as the cosmetics industry’s liberal policy on handing out free samples to friendly bloggers.

So — which would you rather work with? Take our poll and leave a comment about how you voted and why!

 Loading ...

(more…)