Mike’s Points

I have seen into the future (of public relations, of course) . . . and it is good.

It is filled with strategy-focused communicators.

It is filled with people who know the difference between affect and effect, and can spell correckly.

It is also filled with media relations professional who know more than a thing or two about the professional media — and the BadPitchBlog has nothing to post about.

It is filled with professionals who are familiar with a range of PR-like tactics and techniques. There will be no need to differentiate between “social media releases” or “social media newsrooms” and traditional news releases and newsrooms. We will know what’s best for communicating our clients’/employers’ messages in formats each of our media targets want them. As experts in communicating and dealing with people (i.e., social science), we will have the right tools for clients and employer’s needs — and recommend the right tools based on needs, not just because we can.

We will not be afraid of new tools of communicating or new audiences (i.e., bloggers). We respect all we encounter — whether online or in person — and don’t think of them as a “media hit” or a WOM prospect.

So, what do you see as you gaze into the future of public relations?

– Mike

Crystal ball image courtesy of SSQQ (self-proclaimed as “Houston’s largest Social Dance Studio”).

Yes, this is old, but like Marie/Flackette and Todd, I’ve been busy (even shoveling snow here in SE Michigan). But that’s likely not why you’re here, so . . . for an update on the YouTube copyright saga, see here.

Now, in a logical and common sense world, in every decision we, clients and other corporations make, we weigh the positives and the negatives. The risks and the rewards. The opportunity costs. (There’s that social science theme again.)

Technically, I would agree that YouTube is in the wrong for allowing users to air copyrighted material from The Daily Show With Jon Stewart or David Letterman’s Top 10 Lists.

But, if unless those uncopyrighted, illegal re-broadcasts are taking money away from Viacom and the producers, portraying the particpants in a negative light, or otherwise doing some harm, what is the problem?

Could it be that these unauthorized re-broadcasts are cramping CBS’ own use of YouTube?

I’m no lawyer and am definitely open and eager to hear both sides of the argument. However, unless you can show where harm is being done, the only thing that these other YouTube broadcats — and similar unauthorized re-broadcasts/re-use of copyrighted material — are doing are giving more people more opportunity to hear, see and enjoy Viacom-owned material.

And, I would think, increase Viacom’s audience share. If there is harm done, then go after them. (I realize that, to protect a copyright, you have to try to prosecute everyone — even churches — but there has to be some common sense involved.)

Again, it is about using common sense, and weighing risks (such as possible negative publicity, even though you are legally right) with rewards (obtaining evangelists for your brand).

– Mike

For your reading, learning, browsing and thinking pleasure, I offer:

Account planners can be your friend, PR; Colin McKay/Canuckflack

24-Hour News Cycle (R.I.P.); Mike Manuel/MediaGuerrilla

Five Lessons for Viral Video Campaigns; Todd Defren/PR Squared

I Get Letters from Idiots, Michael Brooks/HistoryMike

– Mike

(UPDATED Feb. 11, approx. 9:15 a.m. with examples below, marked **. These examples either involved me, or my current employer.)

More and more I’m convinced that public relations should be categorized as a social science in colleges, universities and in the professional world. Not in “Communications.” Not part of the journalism or English curricula. (I’m also convinced that journalism is more of a trade than a profession that requires a degree. Ask, and I’ll explain why.)

At its roots, public relations — and, I suppose, advertising and other marketing communications — is about communicating to people. (Very similar to one of my two college majors, economics.) Social media like blogs, online communities, boards, etc., is a couple steps closer to a true social science than traditional marcomm activities.

While I’m still a firm believer that corporations have the most significant control over their brand, you can employ a bit of social science thinking to work with others (not use others) to try to communicate your brand to others.

Unfortunately, many in our professional don’t have faith in their fellow mankind or don’t know how to work with others to accomplish their social media efforts. And, they resort to fake blogs* or use services like PayPerPost (legit, but definitely not as credible as true, objective, third-party blog posts).

They’re afraid to lose control of the message. But, in traditional media relations, we do that all the time in working with the media. There’s definitely value in having a reporter publish a story about your company, but there’s also a level of risk.

So, why should working with Joe/Jane Blogger be any different?

Here are a couple ways to successfully engage bloggers about your company, product, service, etc. 

Enlist bloggers to review your product. People who blog are naturally opinionated — why else start a blog if you don’t want a soap box or have a cause. So, ask them to give you feedback. Don’t ask them to blog about it. Let them know that if they do blog about your product, you’ll offer their readers a discount or other something special. But, be sure they know that you do value their credibility and objectivity. So, even if you don’t get publicity (i.e., a post), you’ll still get objective product feedback. That’s always valuable. And, if you do get blog posts out of it — afterall, these are opinionated people you’re dealing with — then you’ve achieved two positive results.

Remember: Be careful on the perceived value of anything you send bloggers. Their credibility is important. You don’t want to be seen as buying their positive feedback. If you’re in doubt about the perceived value of a product, make sure bloggers know that what you send them is a loan (and you will pay for them to send it back). If the product price is low, say $15, that’s likely nothing that will be perceived as undue influence if they keep it. (For an example, here.**)

Offer bloggers an opportunity they normally may not have. Offer them access to your company, to beta test a product, or to attend a special event. And, then let them blog about the opportunity as they want. You want their credible, unbiased opinion — you don’t want a paid hack. Better to err on the side of less than more in terms of any type of compensation or expectations from you. (For an example, see here.** Note that expenses were paid, not time paid.)

Our job entails determing the how in communicating a message as much as what that message is. Get to know your audience and those who reach your audience, and figure out how best to reach them.

– Mike

*Note that the link takes you to a Google News search without “Edelman.”

They say (whoever “they” is) that it’s more cost effective to retain current loyal customers than it is to generate new loyal customers.

Along that same line of thinking, is it best to start with the right brand positioning and try to promote it or rebrand — that is recreate — yourself?

It seems as if Brian Connolly and the others behind the famous?/infamous? Strumpette blog are trying to rebrand the blog.

If you’ve perused the PR-type blogs you’ve undoubtedly come across the strumpette blog. Early on (still now?) it has a reputation for lashing out against some bloggers and companies involved in social media. And, it often labeled those posts as “satire.” (Search for yourself. I’m not providing links here. I’ve done that enough.)

But, of late, has strumpette been turning over a kinder, more civil and credible leaf?

Former PRWeek Editor and now author Phil Hall with his regular Friday “gospel” posts?

And, with at least one, seemingly nice comment?

The above couple examples and other actions by strumpette has me giving a second thought about strumpette. But, is it too late? Can we really trust the seemingly honorable, or at least civil intentions of strumpette?

If I correctly read the vibes from strumpette and if those vibes are sincere, I wish BC/AC luck in their efforts. However . . . if strumpette really is serious about rebranding itself, shouldn’t it have gone down that road from the start? If it’s really trying to rehabilitate its image, wouldn’t it have been easier without the tone of the early posts?

Or, would strumpette had obtained its level of self-proclaimed high traffic volume and notoriety without the posts during the first year of its existence?

Not sure I know the answer to any of the above. My best attempt at answering is this: Be true to who you are or what you want to be, whether a company, individual or blog. If you want to rebrand yourself, it’s much harder to successfully accomplish that task when you have to re-educate your audience.

There’s definitely something to be said about how first impressions stay with you.

– Mike

No, not Edelman! (Geesh, just about every blogger you read who posts about a new job post says he/she is joining Edelman. Not me, I’m moving on to some place better.  )

I’ll make this short and sweet: Officially effective today, I’ve joined Hanson Inc. as a messaging strategist. Essentially, it’ll involve less traditional PR and media relations than I’ve been doing, and more social media/blogger type work; more diverse writing than what I’ve regularly done in the past; and more strategic input into clients’ direction, working with clients and/or their traditional agencies.

Hanson is like many of the firms who are involved in social media: low profile, but doing excellent work. The kind of excellent work that you don’t read about.

It’s a fantastic opportunity, and comes at the perfect time in my family’s life. (For background, see my more personal, parenting-focused blog.)

I’ll be eternally grateful for the opportunities I had during my 12+ years at LMG, and wish everyone there only the best.

Okay, now that I’ve stroked my ego by blogging about me, go on about your regular blog reading.

– Mike