Business Storytelling

Banishing the Blogger Backlash

Earlier this week, New York City passed a law recognizing what most of us in the media industry already know—bloggers are journalists too. Until Mayor Bloomberg announced the new rules on March 2nd, access to city hall press conferences and similar events sponsored by the city were restricted to members of traditional media only. According to Norman Siegel, an attorney who filed the lawsuit resulting in the ruling on behalf of several bloggers; "Online journalists will now be considered as 21st century journalists and be treated equally to print, television and radio journalists."

Reading MediaBistro’s article on the news, I couldn’t help but wonder what took the Big Apple so long? The days when the majority of Americans turned to traditional platforms for breaking news updates are long gone. With the proliferation of smartphones and other devices, we’ve become increasingly reliant on non-conventional sources for the most up-to-date information. In fact, according to a new report out this week from Pew Research, 92 percent of Americans get their news from a combination of platforms, including traditional print, mobile and online. Only seven percent of those surveyed reported getting their news from a single platform, and those respondents pinpointed the Web or local TV news as their go-to source for information.

The Pew report further found that Americans view consuming the news as a social process; 75 percent of people who reported accessing their news online read it via an e-mail forward or post on a social network site, and 52 percent shared links with their social networks via email, Facebook, Twitter, and other sites. For those of us in the industry, this finding too should come as no surprise. We know that a blog comment or retweet from an industry influencer can be just as compelling as a feature article in a traditional print publication. In many cases, the ROI resulting from coverage in a social media channel is more actionable, as it can be traced in real-time throughout the duration of its relevancy.

So, while New York’s City Hall is admittedly a bit late in their recognition of the bloggers’ legitimacy, the announcement is nonetheless an industry milestone. By granting non-traditional journalists the same access afforded to members of conventional media, the ruling enables New Yorkers to receive their news via the preferred combination of platforms. As the media industry continues to undergo rapid changes, I’m betting we’ll see other government institutions and organizations alike follow New York’s lead and banish the blogger backlash.

--Contributed by Kate Finigan. Follow her @PRKateFin

Social Media Not So Sweet

This time of year, it’s hard to walk two steps without bumping into an eager group of Girl Scouts selling their delicious cookies.  Even if you bring your own lunch to work, it’s inevitable that a box (or 15) will creep into the office at the start of Spring.  What started over 80 years ago in the personal kitchens and ovens of the members has since evolved from the traditional door-to-door promotion of the cookies to now include viral campaigns and online marketing techniques. 

This year, not only are the Girl Scouts on every street corner, but their national organization, Girl Scouts of the USA (GSUSA), is turning to social media sites, such as Twitter, Myspace, Flickr, Facebook and YouTube, to help gain exposure for the organization and with the hopes of increasing cookies sales (which were shockingly down in 2009). 

This is a relatively new form of interacting for the scouts, and while the organization is embracing these techniques, individual scouts are prohibited from doing so.  In fact, during last year’s cookie season, there was a huge controversy when one of the Girl Scouts tried selling the cookies online.  To read about this, check out the New York Times article, “Girl Scouts Battle With One of Their Own.”

Video Killed the College Essay

When I applied to college, I took the standardized SAT test, filled out application after application and hoped that I had participated in enough extracurricular activities to make me stand out above my peers. While I strove to make my applications unique and interesting, the thought never crossed my mind to think outside the box with the actual format of my application. Today, high school seniors are almost required to be extra creative, especially if they want to get into some of the nation’s top schools. With tuition prices and competition increasing, it’s getting harder and harder to differentiate one 4.0 student from another. 

According to the Boston Globe, “Tufts University this year has become the first selective college in the nation to encourage applicants to submit videos about themselves.” While this supplement was optional to applicants, over 1,000 high school seniors chose to submit the one-minute videos, accounting for approximately 6 percent of all of the applications.

Lee Coffin, Tufts’ dean of admissions, explained that these videos give the students an opportunity to show their creativity, aside from standardized tests and writing assignments. She said that they help admissions answer the question, “What spark do they bring to the class [of 2014]?” Academic record, standardized tests and extracurricular activities will still play major role in the admissions process, but this supplement gives students the opportunity to show their true colors.

Coffin told the New York Times, “At heart, this is all about a conversation between a kid and an admissions officer. You see their floppy hair and their messy bedrooms and you get a sense of who they are. We have a lot of information about applicants, but the videos let them share their voice.”

James Fay, a fellow Greenough colleague’s younger brother, applied to Tufts this year and submitted the video below:

 

Going for Gold and Green at the Vancouver Winter Olympics

When I found out the 2010 Winter Olympics were going to be held in Vancouver, British Columbia (B.C.), I was eager to see how the Vancouver Olympic Committee (VANOC) was going to infuse the province’s environmentally-conscious mindset and innovative design style into the various venues.

From the beginning there were a number of aspects of the VANOC plans that impressed me, but what stuck with me – and something developers and corporate executives should pay close attention to – is how everything, from the materials for the speed skating rink’s roof to the compost bins in the cafeterias, was designed to maximize visual impact, while reducing the negative impact on the environment.

All you have to do is go to the official Vancouver 2010 site and you’ll immediately see that VANOC has a laundry list of information on the eco-initiatives for the 2010 Winter Games. This site includes helpful resources such as interactive sustainability videos (in English and French, of course), links to government and third-party energy assessments, and even a carbon offset calculator you can use to see how you can reduce your carbon footprint at the games or at home.

The Tweet Is Mightier Than The Sword

Twitter is changing the customer service game -- big time. This weekend, film director Kevin Smith proved that 140 characters can pack a powerful punch when you're dealing with a customer service complaint. Smith was flying Southwest from Oakland, CA to Burbank when he was apparently asked to leave the plane because of his large size. According to Smith, a captain and flight attendant decided he was a "safety risk," so crew members asked him to disembark and booked him on a different flight.
 
What those Southwest employees might not have guessed was that in his hands, Smith had the power to start a full-on social media war against the airline. With more than a million Twitter followers, Smith has a loud voice in the social media stratosphere, and he made it heard this weekend.  Within minutes of being removed from the plane, Smith started Tweeting: "Dear @SouthwestAir I know I'm fat, but was Captain Laysath really justified in throwing me off a flight for which I was already seated?" It got nastier as Smith got angrier. To their credit, Southwest started responding immediately. They have more than a million Twitter followers themselves, and likely understand the power of Smith's anti-Southwest Tweets.  Here's what they started with: "@ThatKevinSmith hey Kevin! I'm so sorry for your experience tonight! Hopefully we can make things right, please follow so we may DM!"
 
It seems that apologetic Tweet (and several others like it that followed) wasn't enough to calm Smith's anger. @SouthwestAir Tweeted that they left Smith voicemails to apologize -- Smith Tweeted back that he never got a call. Some of Smith's followers said they didn't think Southwest would be apologizing at all if Smith didn't have such a strong Twitter following. "They're only apologizing because Smith has a platform to express his displeasure," Tweeted @3rdVentureBro.

Fumble in the Ad Zone?

(Full disclosure: As a former New Orleanian and proud member of Who Dat nation, I watched the Super Bowl on Sunday evening in the hopes of seeing the Saints win. And they did- yay!)

For a lot of people, though, interest in Super Bowl ads is what drives them to tune in on the first Sunday in February. Brands pay as much as $2.5 million for 30 seconds of airtime, and consumers expect to be wowed by the content. Traditionally, a large portion of the appeal of Super Bowl ads lay in the fact that consumers were viewing the material for the first time when it aired during the big game. But social media has started to change this. This year, for example, advertisers used a variety of social media channels to debut their ads and test out audiences responses prior to Sunday’s event. Mashable has a great round up post here.

If You Tweet It, They Will Come…And Arrest You?

I’ve discovered a lot of ridiculous and sensational stories on Twitter over the past year – the balloon boy hoax, for example – but when I found this one about a man being arrested for a stupid little tweet, I thought it was worth rehashing.

On January 6th, 2010, U.K-resident Paul Chambers was stranded at the Robin Hood Airport(South Yorkshire, England) due to heavy snow. Annoyed and frustrated by the closures and grounded flights, Chambers decided to vent his (understandable) anger via sarcastic tweet. His message read; “Robin Hood airport is closed. You've got a week and a bit to get your *&^% together, otherwise I'm blowing the airport sky high!!"

One week later, Chambers was arrested under the U.K’s Prevention of Terrorism Act and interrogated for seven hours because he was perceived as a major “security threat.” This mild-mannered guy has since been released on bail, but is currently suspended from his job and banned from the airport for life.

This is really extreme, of course, but worth noting. After all, our tweets are not private, they’re public. It may seem obvious, but it's worth repeating.

This doesn’t mean that you have to overly censor yourself or cancel your Twitter account, of course, it just provides a friendly reminder that sometimes you need to ask yourself (especially if you're using a corporate account), “Am I ok with the public seeing this?” And, if the answer is “no,” then you may want to rethink it.

“Get the door, it’s…Candor?”

Last April, the PR and marketing folks at Domino’s Pizza were forced into overdrive when a YouTube video surfaced of a few employees doing some decidedly unhygienic things to food they were preparing. In an article on the ensuing PR crisis, New York Times reporter Stephanie Clifford noted that the company’s reputation among its core consumers went from positive to negative in just a matter of days. Domino’s initiated an aggressive PR and social media strategy to address the fallout, including a video apology of sorts from its CEO and the creation of a Twitter account to address consumers’ questions about the issue. Still, the damage was done and suffice it to say that the video, and Domino’s reaction to it, became a much studied topic among PR students and practitioners alike.

But that was last April and now Domino’s has moved on to a new PR/advertising strategy; namely, admitting that its products are pretty unappetizing. In a ubiquitous TV commercial, both high ranking executives and hourly employees discuss the company’s decision to “face our critics and reinvent our pizza from the crust up.” The ad features scathing comments from consumers ranging the gamut from “Worst Excuse for Pizza I ever had,” to “Domino’s pizza crust to me is like cardboard.” It concludes with company employees reiterating that they are facing this criticism head on, launching the “Pizza Turnaround” and promising to do better. This absolute candor, while incredibly refreshing from a consumer perspective, is a bit surprising when examined through the lens of our industry.

In a Washington Post article on the campaign, industry executives suggest there are some major risks associated with issuing a mea culpa as an advertising strategy. For example, by accepting that their pizza is awful isn’t Domino’s effectively admitting that they’ve lied to consumers in previous campaigns that boasted better ingredients than their competitors? And, by publicly promising to make a much better pizza, Domino’s is holding itself accountable. If consumers aren’t swayed by the addition of new spices and improved crust, they will most certainly let the company know. And then what?

Taco Bell’s Trainwreck

By now you’ve heard of it.  Heck, you might even have tried it.  Yes, I’m talking about the Taco Bell diet.  It’s the “diet” that, according to the official site, “is not a weight loss program.”  Interesting.  I can count the number of times I’ve eaten at Taco Bell on one hand, but I still know that something doesn’t feel right about this.

Technically, Taco Bell’s Drive Thru Diet just takes existing menu items and replaces the cheese, sauces and guacamole with salsa and calls it “fresco.”  This erases about 20-100 calories per item.  If you’re watching your calories and have a penchant for fast food, this could very well help you out a bit.  But to call anything from Taco Bell a “diet,” when even the website admits that it’s not true, is just poor marketing. 

On his blog Scalable Intimacy Mike Troiano writes that, “Where once you could focus on driving the product reality by shaping market perception, now you must also gather market perception to shape the product reality.”  Wonderfully phrased, this rule that becomes more and more important everyday, as social media, cellphones and other new ways of communicating continue to burrow into our daily lives.  The people who determine market perception are more empowered by the minute, and when something isn’t right, they’ll make that known.

Case in point: According to AdAge, the words now most closely associated with Taco Bell are “fat,” “stop,” and “joke.”  Social media is puncturing their message like a million tiny needles.  The reality of the public’s perception is that it’s a difficult thing to change and even more difficult to trick.  Had Taco Bell approached their health food offering differently, as McDonald’s has, things could have been different for them.

Working in PR, there are lots of lessons I take away from this.  Transparency is key in all communication and companies that understand this are most likely to win the support of their audience.  Not just transparency with the public, but with the press and with their agency partners as well.  You can’t slap an audience in the face by making ludicrous claims about a product or service.  Respect and loyalty are built gradually and messaging must be consistent, or it will be called out.  As one online commenter stated, “It is pretty difficult to convince consumers that you have a diet plan after several months of telling them to stay up late for their "fourth meal" of the day.”

Contributed by Jim Fay.  Follow him @JGF3

Why the Law and Facebook Aren’t Friends

The insatiable urge to use social media sites, like Facebook and Twitter, comes from the excitement and novelty of connecting with people we might otherwise not know, but it also begs the question: where is our common sense?

It’s a loaded question, I know, but the time has come to demand more from people and ask them to start using their brains instead of just their keyboards.

What finally brought me to this conclusion was the unbelievable story I heard about jurors becoming Facebook buddies while a trial was still underway. I heard about it from a coworker, who ended up forwarding me Adam Ostrow’s Mashable post, “Jurors Becoming Facebook Friends = Grounds For Appeal?”

The story goes a little like this: Baltimore Mayor Sheila Dixon was on trial for embezzlement – she was accused of stealing gift cards intended for needy children – and was later convicted on December 2nd.  The Facebook issue was raised – after the verdict was declared, of course – when Dixon’s attorneys became “suspicious” about the jurors’ online activities and started looking into whether or not these individuals were contacting each other outside the courtroom.

The Baltimore Sun article explains that the lawyers discovered about half of the jurors had become Facebook pals. In direct violation of the judge's orders, they also found out that these friendships were made during the trial and the jurors had participated in ‘prohibited communications’ with each other (and outsiders) throughout the process.

The interactions were pretty absurd; jurors wrote on each others’ walls, had comments talking openly about the trial with outsiders, and a couple even met for Thanksgiving dinner! Yes, it’s touching that former strangers could establish friendships online and even share the holidays together, but it’s the wrong circumstance.

Think people. Sometimes you don’t need to post everything for everyone to see. Even if you only have a dozen friends or you're new to Facebook, you should know enough to realize that it's not ok to blab about the details of a trial. Ever. The jurors’ Facebook activities were definitely out of line, but this convoluted situation does (at the very least) raise some important questions:

• How did the defense lawyers gain access to the jurors’ Facebook pages in the first place?
• Can this trial be considered fair if the jurors lose their privacy and personal freedom in the process?
• Were the jurors knowingly violating the judge’s orders or has Facebook become so ingrained in their lives that they didn’t realize the consequences of their actions?
• Does this really establish ‘just cause’ for an appeal?

This case will definitely set a precedent for upcoming juror selection and trial proceedings, there’s no doubt about that. It is also a firm reminder to all of us that we need to step back and think about what we’re posting, sharing or tweeting. And, sometimes it’s just not ok to share.

-Contributed by Gretchen Doores  You can follow her on Twitter: @canadiangal84

Read The Baltimore Sun article, “Juror contact in '06 with Dixon, witness could cause mistrial” for more information on the ensuing juror controversy.