2p to buy off motorists

The Chancellor has announced the planned 2p fuel tax rise has been postponed.  But I’m unclear about the statement:

As a result of the decision, fuel duty will remain at 50.35p per litre from October 2008. The Treasury said this was 17% lower in real terms than in 1999.

I think it means that 50.35p in 1999 was worth 17% more than it is now - which seems a bit of a strange argument to make when you want to persuade people that you’re in control of the economy.  Or have I misunderstood what Darling was saying?

Career opportunities in motor industry PR

One of the best bits of my role as general secretary of the Motor Industry Public Affairs Association (MIPAA) is getting to hear about all the latest job vacancies - and helping find strong candidates for these through our JobSearch service.

I’ve just added two new jobs which reflect different opportunities in motor industry PR.  The first is a role with Millward Brown Precis as an Account Manager.  What’s interesting about this role is that it focuses on evaluating the reputation of a portfolio of prestigious automotive brands through traditional, print and online media.  So an understanding of public relations - as well as strong analytical, writing and client management skills - is key. 

The second position also calls for excellent writing skills and direct media liaison experience, but this time as a PR Executive with Impact Press & PR Limited.  Here nationwide travel throughout the UK is on offer in handling dealer press relations for the Chrylser, Jeep and Dodge sales network.  From my own experience in automotive PR, this is the sharp end, where you need to deliver benefits of media coverage at the retail end of the industry.

We also posted a job last week which reflects all the perceived glamour of motor industry PR - as PR Manager Aston Martin Racing with Prodrive based in Banbury.  Here the job description highlights a need for someone of graduate calibre, ideally with a second language as well as relevant PR or journalism experience, proven personnel management skills and experience is required of the motorsport sector, crisis management and working with senior management personnel and high profile individuals.

Three very different opportunities, but each presents a connection with a client’s business objectives.  These may be delivering media coverage to support direct vehicle sales, proving the effectiveness of PR activities, or ensuring stakeholders achieve their respective objectives for participating in sportscar racing. 

Clearly a career in PR - not just within the motor industry - offers a lot more than the popular portrayals of party-going PR totty or Machiavellian spin doctors. 

Penny for your PR

Chevrolet’s latest PR stunt, Penny pinchers (via Mischief PR) reminds me of Borkowski’s chocolate billboard work for Thornton’s from Easter 2007, but it does have an interesting creative element - and very nearly a direct connection to the car being promoted.

It involves a billboard displayed in the centre of London where the image of the car was overlaid with over 20,000 pennies which the public were encouraged to grab.  Not surprisingly, this drew a crowd in the style of the classic American PR stunts of the early 20th century.

The money message links to the current credit crunch agenda, but the penny connection doesn’t quite meet the aim of advertising “the 769,500-pence starting price of the new Chevrolet Aveo”.

This isn’t a very memorable price and I can’t see a strong association with the particular model in the stunt (yes, the image was there, but would even those grabbing some pennies remember what is was?)  Maybe if the deposit had been 20,000 pennies, there could have been a bit more of a connection in that this was all the money you needed to ‘ave an Aveo.

Autocar mistakenly added an extra zero into the number of pennies - headlining it the £2,000 publicity stunt (20,000 pennies is £200 by my maths though).  I couldn’t find any video of the public melee either on YouTube - and I really do feel that good publicity stunts today must consider the viral and online word of mouth opportunity.  An online photo diary could have been fun too rather than the press release images which look a little posed.

Mischief is definitely coming up with some cut through ideas - such as the “does my bum look big in this car” story from April. 

However, the problems in being creative in the car industry include ensuring a real connection with a particular model.  The story may be memorable, but could you recall the brand? 

A second issue is around credibility - and the idea that the car fitting room was seriously a trial for the concept to be rolled out more widely is simply not believable.  This was only every likely to be a one-off stunt.

The billboard initiative is a clear stunt.  Mind you, it is an idea Mischief have used before - last June it promoted the Captiva with a scratch car-d.

These stories certainly have the potential to gain media coverage - but whether that translates into greater awareness, enquiries or even purchases is debatable.  That may not be the direct aim, but having a PR stunt that is talked about is only one element of successful creativity. 

The same applies in advertising campaigns - if you can’t recall the product, let alone stimulate someone on the road to purchase, you’ll only reinforce that old adage that 50% of advertising works, we just don’t know which 50%.

Who is spinning the congestion charge story?

Although Porsche has claimed the victory in its legal challenge to the £25 “gas guzzler” London, congestion charge, it is not surprising that most of the coverage (outside the specialist motoring media) reports the story as a climb down by new Mayor Boris Johnson in deciding to scrap the levy.

Porsche has won legal damages, said to be £400,000 which, in an canny CSR gesture, it will donate to the charity, Skidz.

However, the potentially risky PR strategy by Porsche to contest the charge may not be over as there are still plenty of stakeholders unhappy at the Mayor’s move. 

Interesting to see that one of the main arguments against the charge was put forward by a report commissioned by LandRover from the Centre for Economics and Business Research. 

It is always difficult for such work to be seen as independently credible, as it is unlikely to be used if the findings run counter to the goals of the funders.  This is especially the case when the report is headed: “Green tax or white elephant?”, which doesn’t exactly present an objective impression.

Looking further at the report, its independence does not seem to mean undertaking a robust analysis of the case being examined.  It is clear from the use of language that a particular perspective is being supported.

Does this matter?  The rhetorical perspective of PR supports the view that organisations have a right to put forward their positions, and it is up to others (such as the former mayor, Ken Livingstone and environmental groups, in this case) to offer counter arguments in order for public opinion to reflect on these (often via the media and other channels of debate).

So it is not surprising that the language used to support a particular side in the debate will be carefully selected - and indeed, one of the skills of a PR practitioner lies in framing messages.

Porsche’s decision to support Kidz is framed as backing “a charity devoted to taking at-risk youths off the streets and a life of knife crime, and giving them training in mechanical skills and maintenance.”  Those are very topical messages giving the current media focus on stabbing incidents. 

PR materials (regardless of whether they are produced by businesses, charities or public bodies) do not present information in a truly neutral way.  But then neither does the media. 

To return to my opening point - there are many ways of telling this particularly story.  A triumph for Porsche, a disaster for the environment, Boris keeping his promises, another insult for Ken.  Each of these can be true and each involves some spinning.

Is Motor Play the future of motor magazines?

The press release for the launch of MOTOR PLAY - WORLD’S FIRST DIGITAL AUTOMOTIVE MAGAZINE - NOW ONLINE! claims to be the “next wave in motoring media, being the first digital magazine that features text, photography, videos and sounds in a unique format capable of bringing a brand new, entertaining experience to users”.

This is a “monthly publication” which you are expected to download and read onscreen (I couldn’t see a print option). Okay, so I’m not target market, but I found this a less interactive experience than a printed magazine in many respects.  You could click to any article from the contents, but then it was a linear process of page reading - or click back to the contents (which is over two pages).

The promised benefits of sound were frankly irritating rather than adding to the experience - being monotonous “elevator music” rather than related to, or changing with, individual stories. 

It does looks great - and clearly a lot of work has gone into this 1st edition - but another benefit of online is lost as this is only produced monthly (with a pretty standard blog giving some immediacy). 

Video is included of the new BMW X6, but it didn’t excite me much (but I’m not a geeky petrolhead getting turned on by shots of cars down windy roads or close ups of the steering wheel and dashboard).  It wasn’t exactly something I’d expect to find on YouTube being more corporate video in style.

Although the first two issues are free, Motor Play will subsequently cost 1 € per issue to download (or 10 € if you subscribe for 12 months).  The question is will anyone pay?

Despite the claims that you can “flip through the pages of the e-zine just like with a normal printed magazine”, this isn’t really the same type of experience you get with real paper magazines. Admittedly the likes of Car magazine would set you back a few pounds a month (with a current offer of 3 issues for £3).

Motor Play is an interesting development and one no doubt PRs in the UK motoring world will be monitoring closely.  The traditional motor mags already have established presences online where they set out to provide up to date news, as well as blogs and community building activities.  Does the Motor Play concept offer anything new beyond a page turning e-zine?  I’m not convinced.

Ironically, the day this release is issued is one where most of the auto PRs are out of the office as it is the Western Group of Motoring Writers’ Driving Day at Castle Coombe.  This offers the PRs the opportunity to drive competitive models on the road and track and the weather today is ideal for such “hard work”.  I’ll be joining the guys later (as there’s a dinner and we’ve a Meet the Media meeting tomorrow morning).

Surprisingly, neither the Motor Play blog nor the magazine carries any details of real people involved in the project - and I couldn’t find anything about the publication via Google - although I’m sure the auto PR world will know who is behind the initiative.  But why so shy?

Motor industry and PRWeek

This week’s PR Week has a rare feature on the motor industry - with even a mention for MIPAA.  As a “cut out and keep guide” though, the seven featured PR heads can expect their published emails to be pinging with agency pitches next week.

The article concentrates on ‘lifestyle PR’ highlighting the industry’s focus on launching new models and reaching out to customers who are unlikely to read motor magazines or car features in newspapers.

I’ve never quite bought the idea that ‘lifestyle PR’ is a “Holy Grail” - as it generally means appointing an expensive “creative” external consultants to come up with some wacky idea to get mentions for motors in publications aimed at women in particular.

There is undoubtedly more choice when buying a car than ever before, and as most offer similar features decisions are not based entirely on logical comparisons for example, of fuel economy.  So the focus shifts to emotional connections and persuading people that they need a car to match their self-image or lifestyle.  Moving up the Maslow hierarchy maybe or reflecting persuasion via peripheral processing (Elaboration Likelihood model).

PR Week claims this requires greater knowledge of “consumers than carburettors”.  But is this helpful?  I’ve seen many creative agencies try their hand at delivering “lifestyle” coverage for motoring brands.  Most come up with ideas that have little to do with the actual car being promoted, precisely because their teams know digglysquat about what is interesting about the particular vehicle.  Hence, their creative concepts are distinctly forgettable, with the danger that it is the celebrity or idea that is recalled, but not the car being launched.

Of course, outside insight can be very helpful, but many agencies simply covert the motor industry’s PR budgets and deliver superficial campaigns that may increase cuttings, but do nothing to motivate buyers.

A couple of years ago, I conceived a model for motor industry PR, which identified a need to deliver in three key areas - people skills, product knowledge and PR processes.  Traditionally specialist motor industry PR practitioners have been excelled in terms of their product knowledge, making them mechanics, or when combined with people skills (largely in working with motoring media), they’d be enthusiasts.

I would put the creative consumer PR agencies primarily at the people apex, as socialites. They have good relationships with non-motoring media, but lack sufficient knowledge of what the company needs to communicate.  

Agencies pitching on the strength of their specialist knowledge of new media or evaluation, for example, are dominant in PR processes - they’re bureaucrats, or diplomats if they also offer strong people contacts.  If they’ve knowledge of product as well as PR processes, I’d term them technocrats.

My argument is that it isn’t enough to be a specialist in any of the three key areas - or even a combination of two of them.  What the motor industry needs - and this can be applied to other sectors - are PR practitioners who combine specialist knowledge of all three and therefore are competent ambassadors for their organisation or client. 

It was interesting in the article to see mention of a number of vacancies within motor industry PR - what we need though, is less of the idea that you need to be a petrolhead mechanic to work in house, and greater recognition that the real value of motoring PR comes when a knowledge of consumers is combined with an understanding of the automotive business.  And, by the way, this would involve recognition that most engines today feature fuel injection not carburettors. 

Deciding what’s useful for PR online

The MIPAA new media workshop is taking place on Friday, our 3rd year of focusing on developments in the online arena.  I’m looking forward to hearing the latest thoughts of Antony Mayfield of iCrossing whose presentation at our first event in 2006 stimulated my plans to launch the Greenbanana blog.

This year, I’ve also devised some case studies on PR and new media as a group exercise.  Drawing on real life PR disasters - or opportunities to learn - I’ve identified typical situations practitioners may face in order for the workshop attendees to develop effective solutions. 

Often the new media focus in PR, and marketing, is on using various tools; setting up Facebook groups, getting a presence in SecondLife or establishing a blog.  But the real challenges are in deciding if these are relevant, likely to generate interest, or if they could create more problems than they solve.

The final element of our course is an expert panel with media representatives from The Car Enthusiast, Parkers and Auto Express.  The debate will no doubt range from  how PR practitioners should best interact with media sites to issues of evaluation - how do you decide which are the best sites to engage.

I was interested to see the Daily Telegraph has published a list of the 20 most useful car websites.  Equally interesting is the press release from 4Car, claiming to have topped the list.

The Daily Telegraph list does not appear to have any scientific basis - and doesn’t actually (on the website at least) present a ranking of “most useful” or “best”. 

Okay, being first listed might technically enable 4Car to state it topped the list - but was it the intention of the unnamed author of the article to rank the sites? 

And, what exactly does “most useful” mean?  It is lazy journalism, in my view, to simply come up with a list without any attempt to have a methodical approach of analysing the sites.  In this case we can’t even say it is a personal choice, as the author isn’t identified.

There are a lot of questions facing PR practitioners in deciding which online tools to use and which bloggers, websites, etc to target. Of course as individual readers/consumers we might comprise our own top 20 lists, which may be idiosyncratic to us.  But as professionals, our approach ought to be more robust - so I hope there aren’t too many taking the Daily Telegraph list as having any great relevance.  Despite 4Car seeking to use it as endorsement.

Excuse me whilst I extrapolate

Time for another daft press release from insurance company esure, that uses extrapolation and a dodgy survey.  This time it claims “Sneezing fits cause more than 2 million incidents of dangerous driving on UK roads”

Quite where the figure of an “approximate 24 million motorists” who will be “affected by distracting symptoms” - that’s 72 per cent apparently - comes from isn’t entirely clear.

But that’s not the best of the torturous mathematics, it is estimated:

in excess of 2 million UK motorists (7 per cent) have had an accident, near miss, or momentarily lost control of their car as a result of sneezing while driving.  And it’s not just those behind the wheel who need to be wary of hay fever symptoms, in-car passengers were found to contribute to more than an estimated 670,0003 accidents, with sudden sneezing distracting the driver.

Throw in some more numbers… 

20 million in the UK (I presume that’s people) suffer hay fever symptoms and worrying 21 per cent of motorists that suffer from hay fever take their hands off the wheel as a result of frequent sneezing.  More than half (52 per cent) of motorists surveyed admitted to closing their eyes momentarily when sneezing and almost one third (30 per cent) admitted to taking their eyes off the road to search for tissues in their car when they are experiencing symptoms.

However, it’s not just hay fever sufferers that should be aware of such dangers as several other in-car factors were found to trigger a sneezing fit, including dust on the dashboard (32 per cent), perfume (25 per cent) and in-car fragrances or air fresheners (24 per cent).

Frankly these figures end up being meaningless - if you combined these “results” with earlier surveys by the likes of esure and Sheila’s Wheels, the likelihood of you having an “incident of dangerous driving” (whatever that contrived phrase means) must be at least 100%.  If it’s not our shoes, or our sunglasses, we’re distracted by hair in our eyes or bugs buzzing around inside our cars.  (Search this site for either brand for earlier examples of annoying releases)

Of course, esure cannot stop at the statistics and throws in a rent-an-expert, in this case, Professor Brian Lipworth professor of Allergy and Respiratory medicine, Ninewells Hospital and Medical School, Dundee.  He’s the author of a very long list of academic papers with snappy titles such as ” Treatment with diuretic augments the hypokalaemic and electrocardiographic effects of inhaled albuterol” and “Relationship of skin prick reactivity to aeroallergens and hyperresponsiveness to methacholine and adenosine challenge”

Seriously, why would such a well-published professor wish to be linked to such a press release that does little to address the issue of asthma allergy, which seems to be his core topic?

But he is quoted using the same old mathematical extrapolations:

“Hay fever sufferers can sneeze up to 50 times per day when they are affected by it - meaning that it’s not unlikely for a sneezing fit to happen while driving. When you think that sneezing once while driving at 70mph could mean travelling almost 300ft with your eyes closed, it’s clear that this is a very dangerous issue that could potentially lead to a fatal accident.

I shan’t bore you with the regional statistics that are also included to persuade the local newspapers that this “story” is relevant to their readers.  Nor the “top tips to help reduce in-car sneezing.”

However, I will comment on the odd use of numbers inserted into the text - these are presumably meant to be superscript references, but haven’t appeared as such and so would be better placed in brackets.  The result otherwise is simply confusing.  In the notes to editors, these references supposedly back up the cunning calculations evidenced in the release. 

So that 7 per cent from the esure multiplied against government data of number of licensed vehicles (in 2006) leading to a very rough “over 2 million” back of an envelope calculation.  We learn that MyVoice surveyed one thousand UK drivers of which, 2 per cent admitted to “an accident or ‘near miss’ as a result of a passenger sneezing” - as if anyone could really remember such things.

And finally, the kind PR people at Mischief PR (the most straight talking agency in the industry) divides the UK’s population (taken from the Office for National Statistics, Mid-Year Population estimates, 2006) by one-third as Allergy UK in 2008 estimate this is the percentage of the UK population affected by hay fever.

What I really dislike about these types of press releases - apart from showing the mathematical limitations of too many PR practitioners - is that they undermine genuine research and data that many organisations need the public to understand.

Such silly surveys can seem like something harmless that simply generates press coverage (and unfortunately they do), but I fail to see that they really achieve client objectives beyond counting column inches - and more importantly, they continue to support a real lack of understanding of numbers in PR and wider society.

Media offered conflict of interest

A press release entitled: Motoring Magazines and Newspapers set to profit from Internet presents a very odd proposition in my view. 

In the face of challenges in generating advertising revenue, Carparts-direct.co.uk is touting the concept of Revenue Share Advertising (RSA).  This is apparently a “partnership programme” involving adverts placed in magazines - but revenue generated from 10% earned on sales generated (for purchases made from links in the adverts) rather than the advertiser paying for space. 

The release claims the “publisher has the same interest as Car Parts Direct, that is, to create sales through adverts, advertorials and promotions” - indeed, it is claimed the scheme will ensure the advertisements “appear in the best sections” of motoring titles for publishers with 500,000 minimum print run.  That is, the target is “best selling motoring magazines as well as National and Regional Newspapers.”

The lost-opportunity of selling advertising space is presented as “no costs to the publishers whatsoever - only income”.  Also any conflict of interest in titles offering up prime spots for adverts in which they gain financially is questionable ethically.

The scheme also ignores the fact that it isn’t the business of a publication to generate the sales - that is the job of the advertiser, through creative work and managing an effective conversion of response process.  No way is this a “win-win partnership” - rather it appears to just be about obtaining cheap space.  Although I suppose compared to a lot of PR as marketing or press agentry approaches, which seeks to get “free” publicity, publications would generate some income under this scheme.

It could also be argued that if publishers are confident in the power of their titles to generate sales, they would support this shift, but like a lot of talk about payment for results in respect of PR campaigns, it ignores the fact that people do not respond to communications in a simple Pavlovian way.

What is most worrying from a PR perspective is that the Notes to the person concerned include a statement that: “newspapers and magazines will be provided with promotions and press release material (the sample is the dreadful release that I highlighted from this company last month).

This implies “editorial” would be directly part of the promotion, ie advertorial, which if not clearly labelled as such, is totally unethical and misleading to readers. 

Although I think this particular idea is daft, it does further highlight PR’s digital challenges and how notions of editorial coverage are being put under increased commercial pressure.

It also makes you think about whether press releases that are purely puff for products aren’t already following this approach - without any income generated for the publishers.  But at least the decision to publish such information is not about financial kick-backs.

BusinessCar highlights PR’s digital challenge

Looking at the new BusinessCar Digital Magazine, it is clear that publications are increasingly about brand management rather than information distribution.

This is particularly true for business-to-business titles, where a loyal market of readers exists.  These readers aren’t just interested in reading the latest news, but will be making purchasing or other decisions as a result. 

With such active participants, there is more opportunity for interaction and maximising pull rather than just push aspects of online (and offline) contact.

What does this mean for PR practitioners - and journalists?  Well, clearly neither should just focus on transmitting or reporting “news” information when there are many other opportunities for influencing the behaviour of, and engage with, “readers” (if we can call them that).

“Journalists” need to deliver added value beyond reporting news or providing feature articles.  That might mean, as the contents list of the BusinessCar website shows, authoring blogs, providing analysis, offering useful tools or insight into issues, such as the upcoming corporate manslaughter bill.  

Greater “reader” engagement with a media brand also offers opportunities for PR practitioners.  But this means shifting the perspective away from simply writing press releases or using other tools, such as car launches, to generate “coverage”. 

It will also increasingly involve closer integration with marketing colleagues as the media brands no longer separate out “advertising” into something that is entirely distinct from editorial.

There are lots of opportunities for business partnerships on both sides - but with PR’s traditional perspective of working only with journalists to generate “free coverage” head on, practitioners might feel such extension is the role of marketing.

As journalists get closer to their readers, the PR world can no longer see its role as working exclusively with the gate-keeper.  If it does, then journalists will increasingly have more in common with marketing colleagues, who traditionally interface with consumers. 

Where does that leave PR’s supposed USP in terms of media relations skills? 

On the one hand, more PR practitioners need to realise that the P stands for public not press relations - so understanding the psychology of active publics and their influence on our organisations is essential. 

On the other hand, we need to adapt with the press themselves and ensure our expertise remains focused on their changing needs - which also means a wider, business-perspective, particularly online.

The digital challenge presented to PR practitioners is about much more than generating online coverage or engaging in social media as Brendan Hodgson also highlights (link via Judy Gombita).  It offers a real opportunity for PR to demonstrate its business relevance - if it isn’t to become increasingly irrelevant to journalists as well as organisations themselves.