Statistics lesson for Sheila’s Wheels

The latest release from Sheila’s wheels, that old favourite of dodgy extrapolation (and patronising women) is QUALITY TIME TO GO – and I’m afraid it’s time for another PR lesson in statistics.

To be interesting and relevant, it helps to have a majority of respondents supporting the point you are making.

In this case, research revealing “that almost half (45 per cent) of mums believe busy lifestyles are threatening the amount of time they can spend with their families” – means the majority (55 per cent) do not believe this – so there is no story here.

Likewise, “More than one in ten mums (11 per cent) offer their children lifts specifically so they can spend time talking to them” – so 89 per cent do not.

Surveys and statistics need to be used wisely by PR people if they are to have any value and not undermine the ability of the public, and journalists, to make decisions about important matters. 

Whether or not mothers are talking to their children in cars is frankly of little interest to anyone – but abusing statistics in an attempt to grab a bit of press coverage serves to belittle the value of real data for public relations practitioners who may genuinely need to convey numerical information.

PR for 4×4 & MPVs loses out to CO2

Although the release announcing the demise of 4×4 & MPV driver magazine claims it is “the recession’s latest victim”, it is interesting to note that its editor and art director are planning to pursue “new motoring publishing ventures together, including a magazine dedicated to low CO₂ cars.”

I am supervising two dissertations of BA PR students at Bournemouth University who are looking at the environment in respect of press releases and editorial coverage in the motoring sector.

Both have found a huge focus from both the PR and media side on “green” aspects of vehicles in the past months – perhaps not surprisingly.  They are exploring other issues such as prevalence of “greenwashing”, message framing, journalistic-decision making and roles as gate-keepers and so on.

I’m not convinced that the public or other stakeholders of the automotive industry are yet recognising the motor industry as having a reputation for investment and delivery in environmental terms.

But that is clearly the direction that communications in the specialist motor sector is heading.  Whether it is down to the recession, environmentalism or market forces, the end result is pretty much the same – at least in the immediate future.

Why PR is the real key to a top brand

According to the Telegraph’s report on the annual Business Superbrands survey, the decline in respect for the BA and BBC brands is caused by poor crisis handling in the past year.

This fits well with the idea that a brand is a promise – normally made by marketing – and its reputation is how well it keeps that promise – which involves public relations, particularly if there is a gap between what is said and what is done, leading to issues and crisis management. 

Google topped the poll and the article quotes:

Matt Brittin, at Google UK, said: “We’re very pleased to be recognised for this award. Together with our partners, we have worked hard to make our advertising platform as effective as possible in helping businesses of all sizes to grow and prosper – benefiting their brand, not just our own.”

So the success of Google’s reputation among business people is apparently down to its advertising platform – which doesn’t quite tally with why the brand came top with the public in the same TCBA survey last Summer. 

Making promises is easy, delivering on them is much harder.  Marketing can definitely raise the profile of a brand and ensure it is top of mind among those participating in such surveys.  The rest of the organisation then needs to deliver on the promise that is made.  And, if marketing over-promises, or the organisation under-delivers, it is the public relations function that will need to ensure the reputation of the organisation is not impacted.

That’s why I believe that PR is the real key to a top brand.

Social media experts and PR

I’ve just read Jalopnik’s post: Scott Monty: Ford Social Media “Expert” A Bit Of A Twit – which contains a great point in relation to Monty’s role:

But at the end of the day, Ford will have to ask itself — did that money spent sell any more cars? Our best guess is no — but maybe a couple more PR people doing real work might.

I believe that PR people can be using social media to do “real work”, but the interesting thing about the “social media expert” route that Ford took is that it is fronted by one individual, who has certainly connected with the SM fraternity, but has he connected with the Ford brand and its publics?

Scott Monty doesn’t have robust understanding of the automotive industry and its history – which can be useful, but is also dangerous when some of the things he says come over as naive to those who are informed.  I’ve also found him rather marketing-puffy in his posts – but put that down to a cultural difference in style.

The heart of automotive PR has always been about building relationships – whether with traditional owners clubs or specialist motoring media – and this is predicated on a genuine love and understanding of companies and their vehicles; with historical context a key element.

So it isn’t surprising to see the specialist automotive media – even online – not engaging with Scott Monty.  They have relationships with the PR team at Ford – and they’re not convinced that Monty does.

Media Bistro has some debate on this point, with Scott Monty fans arguing his corner.  David Armano at AdAge picks up on the interface of the personal and corporate online presence.  To a large extent this has always been a potential issue for PR practitioners in industries such as automotive as the media know you are representing one company and for many in PR, their career path has involved brand switching.

But it is different online.  How would Monty disconnect himself from his Ford online presence if he decides to move on – which he undoubtedly will at some point. Can he readily untie the legacy and leave something meaningful to the company. 

Having personality for the brand is important, but Monty isn’t Bill and his last name ain’t Ford.  I’d prefer to see other faces from Ford having engaged in social media – there are great engineers and designers, for example, who are the guys who really will sell cars and ensure a future for the company.

As with certain blogger outreach initiatives there is still debate (see recent posts by Mack Collier and Jenn Mattern) over the value of focusing on “influencers” in social media rather than those who actually connect with real stakeholders, be they of beer or car companies.

It is currently relatively easy to build a reputation in social media for being in social media, but I think that converting online chatter into return on investment in respect of reputation, sales or stakeholder satisfaction should be the true measure of social media PR.

Social media PR advice for newbies

There seems to be a somewhat belated Eureka moment for many PR practitioners regarding online and social media – perhaps stimulated by tougher economic times. 

Looking at some comments on a survey that I created for MIPAA, this area is identified as both a key concern and a development need by many at least in motor industry PR.

But are there shortcuts and easy returns for newbies and their clients? Is expecting to leap into this new area reasonable or fair?  Should those of us who’ve spent hours across months and years getting to grips with how it all works and pioneering or championing responsible PR in social media, be open and generous in welcoming these late-comers?

Is it right that they simply sign up to Facebook and LinkedIn and claim to clients to be au fait with social media?  Clearly that’s what clients expect as they turn to their existing PR consultants for help as they too have finally recognised they need to understand Twitter, Facebook, etc.

I am happy to share my own knowledge, since most of what I know is derived from the generosity of others online.  I feel part of a community and hope that the newbies will see this is the essence of the online world.

It is easy to see why everyone is suddenly getting interested – mainstream media has been twittering on about Twitter – so clients are asking about it too.  The Social Media Demographics as identified by iCrossing show phenomenal growth of use, particularly in the UK. 

Mainstream news is certainly driving traffic online – in the Autumn, comScore linked financial concerns to increased online interest.  Although it is debatable whether the banking websites recognised the new media PR role that should support these publics.

At a recent MIPAA workshop, Edmund King confirmed that the recent snow conditions had driven huge traffic to the AA website.  I used to work for a competitor breakdown organisation, and the potential for social media with such organisations where there is a natural constituency of people looking for advice is phenomenal.  I like the AA Patrol Podcasts for example, which could be really useful for guiding car maintenance from your mobile phone.

I’ve also been running some training courses on brand and PR recently for Lions Clubs International across the UK.  Organisations like the AA started out as motoring clubs, and LCI is still a global network of clubs doing great work in their local areas.  Again, there is a constituency of members, possible members and supporters who could benefit from online social media connecting with their real world activities.

For me, this is what other organisations need to consider if engaging in social media – who is going to care that you are talking with them and how should you do this?  What is the organisation’s primary objective and how will social media help realise this.

Simply being in Facebook (or Facepack as one friend calls it) or setting up a Twitter account isn’t enough.  Social media takes an investment of time and will work best if you are offering something that is really helpful to your existing customers or online publics.

Yes, the audiences are there – but they aren’t passive recipients.  They may be looking for you – but you’d better deliver and be prepared to engage in a genuine way.

So welcome newbies – but please take some time to learn about what you’re doing here, or your clients will become fed up with Facebook and tired of Twitter, very quickly.

No degrees of separation – PR’s small world

Marc Wright of simply-communicate.com has written an interesting profile of Toni Muzi Falconi.  This is a small world moment for me as Marc is one of the speakers at a forthcoming MIPAA workshop: The New Influencers – and Toni of course, is the originator of PR Conversations, which is my second blogging home. 

In PR – especially online – it often seems that everyone knows everyone.  So we’re either all connectors, or there really are no degrees of separation here.

Jade Goody, PR and the media

Am I alone in feeling increasingly uncomfortable at the way Max Clifford is using his considerable skills as a publicist to help Jade Goody secure her children’s financial future before she sadly dies of cancer?

Jade has never been shy of the media since she was evicted from the Big Brother house in 2002 – indeed, her magnanimous response to the vitriolic treatment she’d experienced from the tabloid press clearly helped establish her as a “reality star” and enabled her to build a successful business.  That was until she revisited the BB experience with disastrous consequences in 2007 – and again with the Indian version last year when her cervical cancer was confirmed live on television.

I noted a comment by Rich Simcox on a post by Jon Slattery: Jade sells posh papers as well as tabloids says Max Clifford but is she “Freak TV?:

What I would object to, of course, (and I think this is roughly the point Nick Jones was making last night) is if Jade was being manipulated and exploited by the papers for their gain, not hers. But she’s got Max Clifford, ffs, who quite frankly is a genius.

So, this story throws into sharp relief the old question about the role of PR in journalism and whether there is any such thing as an ‘ethical PR’ practitioner.

Jade is not directly being exploited by all the coverage being generated and this is arguably the only way that she can realise a valuable trust fund for her young sons. 

I don’t think Clifford is a genius and find him unctuous in his media appearances explaining his role in getting maximum money for Jade.  He and the press are spinning stories by the minute – presenting donations, such as a wedding dress from Harrods as generosity, rather than a contra-deal for publicity.  It is classic Bernays; old-fashioned press agentry where everybody wins (although Jade’s is a hollow victory).

Don’t get me wrong – I’ve always been fond of Jade, as she battled with the terrible hand she was dealt in this world.  She’s made mistakes, but always accepted the consequences.

We are all complicit in the current headlines, as we know the stories are being created and communicated to earn Jade every penny.  She deserves the millions from magazine deals for a rushed wedding, to be followed by christening of her boys more than any footballer’s wife or Z-list celeb.

But it doesn’t feel right to me that in our society, a young woman’s tragic death – and the legacy left to her children – comes as a result of the worst form of public relations.  Again, what does it say about the morality of newspapers and those brands who are taking Clifford’s calls for “creative” ideas?  Or those who are buying the papers?

The counter side though is that Jade has raised debate about cervical cancer, its diagnosis and treatment.  Charities such as Cancer Research UK report young women in particular have taken action as a result of Jade’s story.

Cervical cancer causes the death (in Jade’s case at just 27 years of age) of 1,000 UK women each year.  Their stories don’t make the headlines – and many will face their own financial nightmares as they come to terms with their tragic fate.

It seems sad that Jade has to sell her story in this way – but I cannot criticise her for it, nor for maximising Max’s contacts.  It is sad, but not half as sad as anyone dying of cancer.  I just hope that with all the hype, she is able to find the time to tell her boys how special they are, and that they will remember their mother as much more than the tabloid stories.  They will deserve better than Max when the time comes to say goodbye.

Council press officer is "what is wrong with this country" or is he a PR twunk?

The case of Royal Marine Joe Townsend vs Wealdon council has become a classic media tale of hero and villains – with one press officer, Jim Van den Bos,  foolishly putting himself in the role as chief villain according to television’s Noel Edmunds (a client of PR consultant, Mark Borkowski):

The Guardian’s James Donaghy sort of defends Mr Van den Bos, writing:

I wouldn’t want to be Jim Van den Bos right now. He’s Wealden district council’s press officer. You may know him from such press releases as Compost Awareness Week and The National Lottery: Crowborough’s Christmas Present. Jim liked a quiet life. But then, unaccountably, he did something no sane man should ever do. He played with Noel Edmonds. And Noel Edmonds, it is increasingly clear, does not play.

When dealing with the producers of Noel’s HQ regarding the Joe Townsend case, Van den Bos apparently “sneered” down the phone that Wealden district council did not appear on entertainment shows. Whether or not anything Edmonds broadcasts can be considered entertainment is a moot point, but what is certain is that this rattled Edmonds’s cage like it had never been rattled. On Sunday night’s show he delivered a blistering tirade aimed at Van den Bos claiming he was at the heart of what was wrong with this country.

Cheered on by a crowd of craven salt-of-the-earths waving pointy foam hands, Edmonds continued: “Do you know something, Mr Van den Bos? I know I’m right,” and cited the trifecta of Clegg, Cameron and Brown as backing his cause. The consummate orator, he built to the natural emotional climax: an unveiling of a space age all-terrain wheelchair for Townsend – a moment straight out of Phoenix Nights. It made for breathless television. And it was deeply odd.

Poor old Jim must be wondering what hit him. He didn’t sit on the planning committee; he doesn’t make policy, nor enforce it. He just writes vapid, soul-destroying prose like everyone else who works in publicity. Just by reading his own work every day, he’s been punished enough. Now I imagine him living on the run, drinking water from toilet bowls, sleeping in hollow logs, a fugitive living in fear of the wrath of Edmonds’s foam-handed storm troopers. He knows he’s right, Jim. Don’t fight it.

Whatever the shortcomings of Wealden district council in this specific case (and, on the face of it, it seems a horribly cruel and petty decision) can we really be comfortable with Noel Edmonds as a kickass crusader on local issues? Noel’s HQ seemed a bit of mad fun when he was just dealing in fatuous truisms and homespun platitudes, but now he’s actually calling people out by name, declaring them “at the heart of what is wrong with this country”. That is possible, of course, but isn’t it more likely that Van den Bos is just a dreary PR twunk who got a bit snotty on the phone one afternoon? It does happen.

The “enemies of reason” blog also offers a bit of support for Jim.  Personally, this seems to be another example of PR people not really understanding the best way to react to the media – which is not to cause them to go ballistic.

To clarify, the story involves Royal Marine Joe Townsend, a seriously injured soldier whose grandparents are seeking to build a specially-adapted bungalow for him on land adjacent to their property. Wealdon Council (in Sussex) carries several statements on its website regarding the case (interesting that none includes a named contact for further enquiries): January 28, February 4, February 9, February 10

Clearly the council has to consider planning regulations – but it definitely failed to consider the risks to its reputation in not seeking to work with the family in this case.

Interestingly, Wealdon Council’s Communication Strategy document can be found online – although it lacks any reference to crisis communications.  It is hard not to deduce that there is little evidence of strategic understanding of public relations among Jim and his colleagues.

Let’s hope the current tizzy remedies that fact as I know many council press officers and PR practitioners are committed to the highest standards and invest in studying for professional qualifications as evidence of this.  As Sussex isn’t far from the centre where I teach in Guildford, maybe we should see if Jim wants to sign up for next year’s CIPR Advanced Certificate course.

When there’s no love between PR and journalists – a sorry Twitter tale

Last night I attended Meet the Professionals, an annual event at Bournemouth University where 1st year PR students get a chance to talk with local CIPR members.  One of the conversations I had related to being helpful to media and the value of the relationships being built, on both sides.

I’ve always made it a rule to answer media enquiries promptly (by which I mean immediately if the phone rings or an email arrives), even if I have to confirm that I am unable to help or give a time by which I will get back to the journalist.

So, I found this post National Post reporter has total Twitter melt down (via Judy Gombita) shocking in terms of the attitude of the PR person involved, and so many of the commentators.

Clearly not a lot of Valentine’s love going on there.  In fact, there appears to be an apparent lack of understanding between PR and journalists, or a change in attitude since I was taught about media relations. 

Some commentators seem to think it is okay to ignore a media call for 24 hours, or indeed, to see journalists as only worth talking with when you’ve a story to “sell”.  Journalists have deadlines and don’t expect to wait long for a PR person to call back – why should they?

I’m also rather bemused by the “shock, horror” expressed over a journalist swearing at a PR person.  It isn’t acceptable, or professional – and pretty stupid when recorded online via Twitter – and it certainly doesn’t contribute towards building relationships.

But, from the media’s perspective, the role of a PR person is to assist them in their jobs.  Being flippant via Twitter isn’t going to win anyone any friends.

A couple of days ago, I posted about the relationship between PR, journalist and client.  Would any client expect a PR person to ignore a call from a journalist?  Is that an acceptable strategy even if you’d prefer not to talk to someone, eg if the story is a bad news one?

I don’t think so.  Frankly, journalists have a job to do – which is to produce copy to increasingly short deadlines.  They frequently need the help of PR practitioners to check facts or get quotes, etc.  That’s our side of the deal – and what clients pay us to do.

The media are not there simply as outlets for organisations to get free publicity as some PR people seem to think.  But, they will report newsworthy or interesting stories – especially if you have a professional relationship meaning you don’t send journalists fluff or call them with meaningless spammy calls.  That’s also part of the deal.

I don’t expect journalists to swear at me – but appreciating the pressure they are under, I wouldn’t take it personally if they are short on the phone, especially if I’d been a bit slow in calling someone or promised something and not delivered (as if I would!) 

It is no wonder there is a joke that goes:

Q: How long does it take a PR person to change a light bulb?

A: I don’t know I’ll get back to you on that one.

If you find that funny, maybe PR isn’t the right career for you.

Friday 13th – deja vu?

I’ve just spotted the press release: Will Friday 13th be unlucky for you? from Green Flag (a vehicle breakdown service that is now part of Royal Bank of Scotland).

This gave me a sense of deja vu – not least because I wrote a blog post on the topic in April 2007 – when Norwich Union issued a press release on the same story.

For me the story is much older as in about 1992, I worked for National Breakdown Recovery Club, which was later rebranded as Green Flag, and Friday 13th was one of the stories that I wrote.  I’m sure it wasn’t original then.

I still have my press release and cuttings it generated (including national newspaper coverage).  However, my story was the exact reverse of this one which claims that breakdowns on Friday 13th are below average.

It seems to me to be more of a story to show that breakdowns were higher on Friday 13th since this fits with the perception of the day as being unlucky.  Is it a story to say there motorists are not experiencing bad luck on this day?

I wonder if Green Flag will receive the negative feedback I recall from those who objected to propagation of the superstition over paraskavedekatriaphobia (fear of Friday 13th) – which apparently is a sub-set of   triskaidekaphobia (phobia of the number thirteen).

Wikipedia has some interesting insight into this phobia which is says is a very modern phenomenon, saying:

the superstition is rarely found before the 20th century, when it became extremely common

Rather like Friday 13th breakdown stories then.