Media still want press packs by post

Some fascinating information in an email from Newspress regarding the preferences of automotive journalists for receiving press information.

A survey of 400 top automotive journalists revealed that although all are using online resources for press information, nearly three quarters (71%) still want to receive press packs by post.

Okay, the traditional press pack that accompanies a new car launch for example contains a lot of information and simply putting this online as a pdf file means journalists would be faced with the cost and time involved in printing it out. 

But, shouldn’t the level of detail in a full press pack be better packaged using online resources?  Isn’t that where the multimedia options, links and search potential of electronic data come into their own?  Is this a problem of PR presentation or journalist habits? 

A smaller, but considerable percentage (30%) of respondents said they still want press releases sent by post.  This seems surprising, but I’m sure that email overload is a factor in opting for snail mail - and many of the motoring guys spend a lot of time out of the office on launches, so a pile of post may still be easier to manage.

Two thirds (62%) said they want press information sent personally to them - and only 4% want press releases made available for download only. 

Now as a distribution company, one could say, it’s not surprising that Newspress would say that.  But, from my knowledge of automotive media, there seems to be little appetite for RSS feeds and other pull means of receiving the news.

Mind you, I recall sitting in MIPAA Meet the Media meetings not that long ago, where even the idea of email distribution or visiting a website was met with gasps of horror from journalists.

The majority now seem comfortable with getting email releases - indeed, I’m sure the idea of waiting a day or two for “news” to arrive seems odd to most people.

There are undoubtedly training and confidence issues with PR practitioners and journalists over using newer technology developments, such as feeds, blogs and social media releases. 

These statistics are simply a snapshot on current preferences and I don’t want to draw too many conclusions - except to say they highlight the need for understanding individual preferences rather than making assumptions when distributing information.

A marketing PR approach

When I started my career in PR, you were encouraged to create a ”little black book” of contacts.  This was your bible and a symbol of the importance of building personal relationships. 

Subsequently, computer systems enabled contact information to be collated.  In marketing terms, this was called ”customer relationship management” (CRM).  It was led by IT specialists and ironically reduced human understanding of customers.  “Personalised” mailings were mass produced and distributed.  From junk mail to spam, the approach has been one of numbers - annoy thousands for one or two hits.

This approach has been replicated in PR where a database approach to contact management involving buying lists and distributing information as widely as possible.  It involves little effort, cost and minimal knowledge of media. 

Indeed, it means anyone can work in PR - they don’t need to have built up a black book of contacts.  Even better, the contacts belong to the company, not the individual, so aren’t at risk of leaving when they move on.  We don’t even have to maintain the list - there are companies to do that for us.

The process is mechanised - in-house and agency PR teams are tasked with issuing a specific number of press releases, like factories churning out widgets.  And, it’s measurable - add in column inches generated, multiply by advertising value equivalent - and hey presto, a £75 press release worth ten times its value in coverage generated.

The marketing approach to PR continues with a focus on puff as content.  In addition to plugging new products and services (or finding ways to make them appear new and improved), we’ve become creative.  After all, its the coverage that counts; mentions and messages.  Releases without news can generate headlines through surveys, awards, stunts… bogus and pseudo is just as good as any genuine information.

Marketers also expect PR to generate coverage for the marketing approach itself.  The campaign becomes the story - press releases about open weekends, marketing offers, adverts and new websites (or blogs). 

The consequence has been that journalists view most PR practitioners as little more than telesales people.  Emailing junk and following up with pointless phone calls.  

PR has become about pushing information - seen as “free” advertising but with the added bonus of journalistic endorsement.  Tighter time and budget constraints on journalists and publications has led to increasing PR content and a spiral of prattle.

I’m not saying that PR cannot help organisations to achieve marketing objectives.  Nor do I believe there is no place for the stunt, the survey or other creative device. 

The problem is that the typical marketing PR approach is cheap and lazy.  There is little originality.  It relies on poorly trained practitioners - who have no incentive to develop better skills when their appalling press releases get coverage, which is packaged as success for clients.

I’ve heard PR practitioners blame clients for forcing them into this method of operation.  There are those who believe the hype of Max Clifford and view PR as something able to deliver them the control over what the media reports, which they believe a Hollywood A-lister has.  Others blame the media - hey, they report this stuff, so it’s what we’ve got to give them.

Good journalists know not all PR practitioners fall into this stereotype, and there are many clients who have been educated that PR is more than false press agentry.

Does it matter that there are many others who don’t get the value of building relationships and doing the job with a focus on quality over quantity?

I think it does as it impacts on the wider reputation of PR - although the value for those who do get it right is much higher. 

Sad news of media shy McRae

It is sad news to hear that rally champion, Colin McRae, his five year old son, Johnny, and two other passengers have died in a helicopter crash. 

Colin was driving the Ford Focus in the World Rally Championship when I worked for the consultancy, PRISM, employed by the blue oval to manage PR and dealer marketing.  I wasn’t involved with the programme, but understood Colin was shy and not a natural for media relations.  However, whenever journalists were taken to the M-Sport facility in Cumbria, they were stunned by the chance to be driven at speed around the forests.  His raw talent behind the wheel was the best public relations for the youngest ever world rally champion and the Ford Focus.

Northern Rock isn’t a Wonderful Life

There’s a scene in the classic movie, It’s a Wonderful Life, which I’ve used in teaching PR students about persuasive strategies that reminds me of the current crisis facing Northern Rock.

In the scene the film’s main character, George, has just got married, but en route for his honeymoon notices a crowd outside his family’s business, Bailey Bros. Building and Loan Association (ie building society).  Bad guy, local banker, Henry F. Potter, has engineered a crisis that has resulted in customers rushing to the association’s office to reclaim their cash deposits.

The lessons in persuasion come in the form of the strategies George uses.  Firstly he denies there is a problem - only to be drowned out by sirens of police cars driving by.  As denial has failed, he counters with logic, explaining to customers that their money isn’t actually kept at the bank as it is invested in the mortgages of their neighbours.

Customers complain that Potter has offered them 50% of their investment in return for their shares in the association, so they will go to him instead.  Jumping over the counter - a symbolic gesture of aligning himself with the customers - George makes a personal appeal, showing he understands the customers’ personal circumstances.

With the support of his new bride, he then takes their $2,000 honeymoon cash and asks each customer how much money they need to tide them over. The first customer demands his full $242 - which George pays.  But other customers recognise that George is making a personal sacrifice and ask for a few dollars.

After helping all of his customers, George realises he has saved the business - and still has $2 over to place in the safe:

“A toast to Papa Dollar and Mama Dollar,” he says. “You’d better have a family real quick.”

(BTW, I’ve typed all this from memory showing the quality of the Frank Capra movie).

The crisis facing Northern Rock has similarly seen thousands of customers demanding their cash from the bank.  The message from financial experts to “not panic” has been ignored and billions have been paid back to those fearful for their savings.

Their demands have been cited as evidence of poor communications - and it is hard to credit the organisation’s public relations function when its online newsroom doesn’t even mention the crisis. 

However, I feel there is more to this than simply a need for better and clearer communications.  George’s success came through a personal connection, existing trust and making a sacrifice himself.

We rarely have any personal connection with our bank - no longer is the bank manager a person of local standing or even known to the customers.  We have little trust in banks as they treat customers with contempt and seek every opportunity to charge us for the pleasure of putting our hard earned money in their “care”.  The message “don’t panic” is an insult to people who rationally fear they will be victims here.

And, of course, customers don’t feel those responsible for the crisis are making any sacrifice  - although it is possible many employees, including CEO Adam Applegarth,  will lose their jobs.

Crisis communication is about more than conveying rational arguments.  Persuasion relies considerably on trust, which is earned through empathy and respect rather than demanded.

I wonder whether, by the time customers have finished with Northern Rock, its cash assets and share price will be worth as much as a single Mummy and Daddy Pound.

BBC highlights risk assessment

The BBC has reported its report into last year’s Top Gear crash.  It focuses on ensuring competent people are employed to undertake risk assessment of activities being undertaken and also providing adequate evidence of written record sheets or “third party verification” of such assessments.

David Phillips has been writing a series of posts on risk management for PR practitioners - which offers some useful considerations.  Crisis management is often seen as being prepared to respond when something has gone wrong - but being able to assess risk and take action to avoid it becoming a crisis, is just as essential.

I believe that alongside competencies in managing reputation and relationships, there is a third R - risk - that needs to be part of PR’s corporate role.

Blocking or blogging

If you send me an email with the word Diploma in the subject line, I won’t get it.  Rather frustrating since I teach the CIPR Diploma course, but most of my students are bright enough to remember this golden rule.

David Henderson notes his spam filter sends press releases straight to the trash folder.  I perversely like the idea that all press releases should go direct to spam, not passing go and definitely not picking up £200.  Why?  Because it might make PR practitioners realise that media relations is not a direct marketing function and there is no room for junk PR. 

Chicken Yoghurt writes ”a message for representatives of PR and advertising companies” in press release format highlighting how irritating it is to be viewed as simply a channel for promotional purposes.

Most bloggers aren’t really that different from credible journalists in terms of having a purpose to their writing.  This might be to convey news, or to interest even entertain themselves and others.  Few decided to set up as a billboard offering a free plugging service.

If you want a pure promo - that’s called advertising - then you’d better have something that is genuinely interesting or news, then take the time to understand who you are targeting.  That means being genuine - and recognising whether or not your approach will be welcome.

As Tom Coates notes with his view on press releases: This is not a brothel

Having said that, I’m sure if I was touting round a chance to drive a shiny new sportscar model, hot from Frankfurt, some bloggers would be less resistant to my approach. 

Steven Davies (who was accused by Tom Coates as causing him to drown in press releases) posts positively about receiving an O2 Cocoon phone to review.  I’m not clear what the deal is here (loan or gift), but an advertising agency, VCCP, is behind the strategy of a blogosphere launch.

Philip Young finds himself applying different rules on receiving a freebie O2 Cocoon phone compared to his days as a journalist when such goodies were seen as “part and parcel of doing my job”.

Maybe “traditional journalists” have developed a hard shell to what most bloggers view as intrusive contact.  And like in any exchange relationship maybe your reaction depends what’s on offer and what is expected in return. 

The issue may also be that bloggers feel they are developing communal relationships rather than commercial ones.  To take up Coates point - they want to feel admired and be loved for who they are rather than feeling viewed as a cheap squeeze.

Go Green bandwagon

There’s a lot to be said for helping motorists reduce their environmental impact, but the latest press release from Kwik-Fit, promoting the UK’s first green car service, focuses on carbon offsetting ahead of the service issues it alleges will “turn your car into a greener machine.”

Go Green, which is hidden in the MoT and servicing section of the company’s website, offers to “motorists with a convenient way of neutralising their motoring carbon footprint for up to six months – by giving £10 to an independent carbon offsetting company on their behalf.”

So paying £29 on top of a normal interim service, offers a few additional checks and a tenner to plant a few trees.  Does this really amount to creating a “green machine”.

There is real danger in using such sloganism around environmental issues -  Go Green possibly does offer real tangible benefits, but it feels more like a sales or press agentry initiative.

Yet again we see the lazy carbon offsetting approach employed.  As a motorist, you can offset carbon directly by signing up to one of these companies, do it when buying a new car (eg VW), offset through the fuel you choose (that’ll be BP’s Target Neutral scheme) and again with your car insurance (eg ibuyeco).  And, let’s not forget, you can pay for it all with your Barclays Breathe offsetting credit card.  Hey, you can not only be neutral, but with all the offsetting options, as a car owner you can claim to be carbon negative!!

Let’s face it people - all this carbon offsetting does not neutralise your motoring habits.  There are ways you can reduce your impact through vehicle choice, driving behaviour, car sharing, and most importantly, reducing the amount you drive.   

If you are interested in “climate friendly projects”, then donate a few hundred pound direct to a good cause - and cut out the middle men who are making millions from salving your conscience.

Because they - and the companies who offer these carbon offsetting schemes - are largely looking at this as a marketing opportunity.

The Marketing Manager’s Yearbook contains an article by Sean Fleming from Clarity PR who claims in respect of being carbon neutral: “where there’s a headline-grabbing issue there’s a marketing opportunity, and some organisations haven’t been slow to recognise this. By adopting the green-is-the-new-black approach you can look well informed, responsible and trustworthy. Or your actions could all too easily look like a cynical attempt to exploit the situation. Getting the balance right isn’t easy”.

He goes onto state that by becoming carbon neutral, “you can completely negate the harmful effects on the environment of a given activity”.  He does caution businesses to be genuine, but as an ex-journalist turned PR he claims:

There has been a backlash in some sectors of the press, aimed at those of us in the marketing services sector choosing to adopt an environmentally aware position. The chief allegation is that we are cynically jumping on the green bandwagon in an attempt to curry favour with clients and prospects, and win more business! We don’t actually care about the environment, and as soon as the next bandwagon rolls by we’ll be on it PDQ. Or, others have claimed, our motivation is guilt – we hope to expunge our bloated consumerist lifestyles, our urban 4×4s, what have you. You have to wonder about journalists that insist on trotting out such clichéd stereotypes; do they live in neighbourhoods where the burglars all wear striped jumpers and carry sacks with “swag” written on them?

Being critical of offsetting isn’t just journalistic griping, there are serious logical objections to such initiatives.  I believe most companies are using offsetting as a brand message or to stimulate business.  We know this, because the marketing departments are behind the idea to offset.  This isn’t environmentalism on the quiet, but “look at how green I am” promotion.  As David Phillips would argue - it is about bling rather than values.

McCanns need PR not pitbull publicist

The Guardian notes that the parents of Madeleine McCann are seeking a new PR representative following the resignation of their current spokesperson, former Liberal Democrat candidate, Justine McGuinness, who was recruited via headhunters in June.

The rumour is that ex-News of the World and Hello! editor Phil Hall will get involved having been in regular contact with the couple since Madeleine disappeared.

Now running his own PR firm, Mr Hall is understood to be considering taking over media handling, which has escalated since last week when the couple were named officially as suspects in the disappearance of their missing daughter.

Initially, the British government sent support to Portugal - with former tabloid journalist, Sheree Dodd, and ex-BBC news reporter, Clarence Mitchell, assisting the McCanns.

Although the Guardian says a new PR strategy is being sought, it looks like the same old ex-journo media relations approach to me.  I appreciate a lot of people believe having been a journalist is the best training to manage media relations, but this case shows there is a lot more to public opinion and personal reputation than whipping up a media frenzy.

Indeed, the biggest mistake was surely using marketing-like campaign tactics.  Of course, acting swiftly to get Madeleine’s image circulated was essential - but seeking to build grassroots relationships with experts seems to have taken a backseat to setting up websites and generating high profile media stories.

The British public were swift to stick up posters and make donations to a fund - which doesn’t appear to have had a strategy for making best use of the money raised. 

Engaging high profile PR advisors, alongside a legal team, distances the McCanns and weakens public sympathy.  The focus seems to be more about the campaign, and now the parents, rather than on Madeleine herself. 

The public needed to empathise with the McCanns as ordinary parents, admittedly ones who made a terrible mistake in leaving their children alone. Otherwise, it is inevitable criticism was going to develop. Many of the claims you can find online are pretty disturbing and reflect a rush to judgement by many. 

I’m not sure a “big hitter” who will seek to manipulate media headlines is the right strategy at this time.  The donated funds should be used to help organisations throughout Europe who are expert at looking for missing children in order to reassure donors that their money is being spent wisely. 

I believe the McCanns, and the family/friends who have been courting the media, need to step back and stop slating the Portuguese authorities.  Diplomacy rather than generating aggressive media coverage must be a better approach. 

They certainly don’t need a headline hustler repeating the strategy that has fed the British tabloid beast and alienated so many, particularly those who could be useful allies.

What the McCanns really need is public relations in its widest sense - not press agentry or a Pitbull publicist at the gate.

Why shortcuts are stupid

Seth Godin reflects on the story that a Search Engine Optimisation (SEO) company is claiming to be able to make online bad news about a company disappear.

PRWatch reveals similar services offered as a technological solution to ”make sure that your company and key executives are being portrayed favorably online by burying the negatives and maintaining a positive online image.”

This is the same attitude that has seen PR practitioners seek to edit Wikipedia entries.  Some clearly feel there is an easier way to getting positive Google juice than earning it.

Of course it is frustrating when negative information is readily available - and if such perceptions are incorrect, professional, ethical PR strategies are needed.  Most organisations are open to having factual information corrected via legitimate dialogue.

But seeking to rewrite history smacks of Orwell’s 1984.  I recently wrote at PR Conversations about PR Jobs of the Future - speculating how PR practitioners need to prepare for an unpredictable future. 

Karen Hegmann viewed a need to PR practitioners to avoid rehearsing “corporatespeak” and grasp the human side of technology to be a real winner.  If we don’t do this, can we hope for anything more than a future working like 1984’s Winston digging out the trail of things our bosses don’t like and changing them?

Or should we believe such actions will be readily exposed and companies will come to recognise there are no shortcuts to a strong reputation.

Remarking on remarketing

I’ve increasingly noticed the term “remarketing” used in the motor industry as a euphemism for secondhand sales.  This appears to have superceded the terms used, nearly new and previously owned. 

These alternative words are selected to distance the process from the image of the secondhand car salesman, the shifty Arthur Daley or The Car Lot in EastEnders.

Much like the debate about whether public relations should be rebranded as reputation management, corporate communications, etc - this seems to me to be looking through the wrong end of the telescope.

The negative perceptions about public relations and secondhand car sales cannot be addressed by a bit of linguistic propaganda.  In fact, this obfuscation makes people wonder more about what is being hidden.  A new lick of paint is not the answer.

Indeed, once people start to talk in such terms, they sound like a contestant on Radio 4’s classic “Just a Minute” - aiming to avoid repetition, hesitation or deviation.

Definitions of remarketing imply this is a strategy aimed at what the Boston Consultancy Group Matrix might consider a dog and attempting to make it a cash cow or even a star.

Remarketing: marketing activity intended to encourage renewed use of a product in which market interest has declined

In car terms remarketing is defined as: the resale of a used vehicle and all of the various services.

What is particularly odd about “remarketing” in the car world is that it means nothing to the outside world.  I cannot imagine anyone ever saying that they have bought a remarketed car - or a previously owned one come to that.

Of course, the industry needs to manage a vibrant market for such vehicles, if it is to stimulate demand for new car sales.  Does “remarketing” make this side of the business sound more important internally?  Is it more about the status of those involved in shifting older metal?

I think “remarketing” is an ugly word that communicates nothing.  Surely the art of selecting an alternative phrase should be that it is an improvement. 

Of course, some older vehicles are considered as classic, collector models, historic or even vintage.  This gives them an air of exclusivity - and higher market value.

I like the French term: “voiture d’occasion”, which to my English ear sounds so much more special than buying a secondhand or remarketed vehicle.