Some thoughts and opinions on the Public Relations profession and industry

 
On the eve of another year, it's always interesting to look back on the past twelve months and to try and build a picture of what's happened and what's coming next.

2002 on the whole was another tough year for the PR business. But while many agencies cut numbers and even closed their doors there was some good news. In particular some research pointed to better days ahead but these were soon countered with research that found things will only get worse - the truth as always is somewhere in between!

Blogs were obviously the hottest topic in the online PR world and there was plenty of good advice on how to tackle them. Meanwhile our colleagues in the media were looking at how blogs might change their world.

Of course there was plenty of off beat PR news during the year, consultants were pushing their luck on expenses, innovative services were launched, plain talking was championed and one of our number was even incarcerated (1,793 days of probation left seemingly).

2002 was also the year that PR was strongly promoted as a tier one marketing discipline, journalists did some soul searching on the dot.com crash, and last but not least, PR became a commodity that could be tenedered over ebay...

So a tough year, but not the worst, and fingers crossed the positive indicators for 2003 hold steady. Happy New Year and here's to a great 2003.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/31/2002 02:07:00 AM

 
Well postings will be a little sparse during the Holiday period. So let me take this moment to wish you all Merry Christmas (or your own alternative!).

To finish off for the moment, PR Week have a review of 2002, and their look back at the year makes depressing reading! Enron and Worldcom destroying corporate reputations, Agencies baring the brunt of a slowing economy with widespread lay-offs and closures. That pretty much sums it up...farewell 2002!

PRWeek have also published their PR lists for 2002 (Adobe Acrobat required) which is a fantastic look at the year. Highly recommended.

Till next time!
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/24/2002 05:01:00 AM

 
Nestle has a long and proud history of regularly shooting itself in the foot.

It's most virulent opponents have seized Nestle's attempts to aggressively market infant food in the third world and turned it into a global lobby.

There are many strategies for dealing with Non-Govermental Organizations (NGOs) but I don't think making ridiculous financial claims on disadvantaged countries would be one of the first to jump to mind for more PR people.

But that's just what Nestle is doing. It is demanding a payment of $6 million from Ethiopia for the nationalization of one of its subsidiaries back in 1986.

Ethiopia is on the brink of another savage famine. Nestle is a wealthy, multi-billion dollar, global conglomerate. Anyone see the disparity.

Not content with hurting their reputation through this claim, Nestle are now saying it's a point of principle!!!! To put this all in perspective, according to a CNN report, the average person in Ethiopia makes less than $2 a day, while the Swiss giant makes about $6 million every hour.

There's some great content on the web around this, check out CNN for the latest news. And the UK Guardian has two excellent pieces looking at this disaster from a PR perspective. They are written by journlist Julia Day and a second story from PR-consultant Mark Borkowski.

posted by Tom Murphy at 12/23/2002 06:40:00 AM

 
Maxim?

According to a survey carried out by Media Life Magazine, over 50% of respondents picked Maxim as the magazine that has the greatest influence on other publications. US Weekly came in second with 21% of the poll.

Unsurprisingly, Martha Stewart was chosen as Media Villan of the Year with 56% of the vote.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/23/2002 05:52:00 AM

 
Season's Greetings. Although PR Opinions is *not* a blog about blogs, there is some interesting stuff on blogging in general which I've found over the past couple of days. I simply post it for your perusal!

The Washington Post has a piece on Blogging Going Mainstream. It references a recent article in the UK Independent that asks if the current popularity in blogging has anything to do with the higher than usual unemployment rates in Silicon Valley and a lot of technical people with lots of time on their hands. Interesting, but I think that's wide of the mark.

Infoworld has a reader poll on blogs this week that has some interesting findings (particularly given Infoworld's "technical" readership). The question they asked was:

"Do you or your company publish a blog (Weblog)?"

3.6%. A. Both. My company and I both maintain Weblogs.
7.2%. B. Yes. My company publishes a Weblog.
4.8%. C. Yes. I maintain a personal Weblog.
43.4%. D. No. Neither I nor my company publishes a Weblog.
41.0%. E. None of the above, "what's a Weblog?" or "why should I?"


posted by Tom Murphy at 12/23/2002 05:46:00 AM

 
We've come to that time of the year again when the planning process rears its ugly head.

Planning is indeed a challenging “science”. So here’s a welcome distraction.

For the more technical amongst us, you may have noticed recently the formal death of IBM’s PC operating system OS/2. OS/2 was once touted by IBM and industry pundits as the product that would take the wind out of Microsoft’s sales (sic).

While reading about the formal demise of OS/2, I happened upon a detailed history of the operating system (bear with me there is a planning angle here!) and there were some very interesting details on the assumptions IBM made while planning the launch of the IBM Personal Computer in 1981:

1) IBM expected to sell 275,000 Personal Computers over the five year product life (They received 250,000 orders before the product was formally introduced and another 250,000 the day it launched)
2) Small business would be the predominant purchaser of the PC
3) Large business would stick with mainframes and dumb terminals
4) A few departments at large firms would use PCs for local, non-connected work
5) The PC would be used for one task only – all day long – never more than one.

So the moral is, no matter how badly you plan, you’ll probably have a better batting average than IBM at the launch of the PC. And I think you could say they were very successful!
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/19/2002 12:52:00 AM

 
As we begin to wind up yet another year. It's always a good time to evaluate progress and look forward.

In this spirit, Euro RSCG Worldwide [Flash Alert! Flash Alert!] have cleverly published their "Top Trends for 2003" which is a very interesting look at some possible trends that will affect marketers over the coming year(s). (Thanks to Richard Bailey for the link)

On a related note, the Knowledge Capital Group, a firm that specializes in analyst relations services, publishes a regular newsletter with news and opinions called AR Insider.

If you are working with analysts it's worth getting. Their latest missive looks at the annual review of analyst subscriptions and has some solid advice. [Though as a side note, I think their ratios which states that if you're selling a product for over a $1M then you should be spending five or ten times more on AR than PR is a little inaccurate!]

I particularly like their article this month on OMBs (One Man Bands) or those analysts/pundits who set themselves up as industry experts.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/18/2002 05:30:00 AM

 
Your mission (as a PR professional) should you wish to accept it, is to understand how, why and when your audience(s) find information and use information. We seem to be in a temporary lull in terms of understanding how online and offline come together.

During the dotcom boom we all drank the Kool Aid, the Internet was taking over, we'd be working, communicating, socializing and shopping online without leaving our warm beds. Then the crash came, the Internet didn't look so attractive anymore, maybe it was a fad after all.

The truth, as always, is somewhere in between. PR people will communicate online and offline, with both environments playing a major role in your communications activities.

While we understand offline pretty well, we still need to hone our online understanding and how the two intersect.

Among the questions we have to answer are what tactics work, where are the audience and what do they want?

It's further complicated by the fact that different markets and geographies will most probably have different habits.

With that in mind, the New York Times has a fantastic piece on how retailers are finding that getting the online - offline mix correct is critical to the success of their business.

"..the fastest growth appears to be coming from retailers that have mastered how to use the Internet in conjunction with catalogs, stores or both."
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/18/2002 05:13:00 AM

 
November 1995 was the month that the Internet became more than just an online library for PR professionals everywhere.

It was the month that Intel's Pentium flaw became a mainstream news item thanks to newsgroups on the Internet.

The story wasn't news in the technology community where EETimes, having found out about the flaw in the newsgroups, had already ran, according to Howard High at Intel "a fair, balanced piece".

But when CNN stumbled over the same newsgroup postings during Thanksgiving, they ran it as a major story and it was picked up by every major magazine and newspaper across the globe. In the end it cost Intel $470 million.

Although Intel made some mistakes after the CNN story broke (such as refusing immediate replacements) overall the incident had a positive outcome in terms of awareness and the added benefit for Intel of direct interaction with end-users.

But there's no doubt that the Internet demanded a lot more respect from communications professionals from that moment on.

December 2002 may be remembered as the month blogs began to seriously impact reputation.

John Podhoretz at the New York Post has an interesting piece on how blogs were responsible for leading the charge against Trent Lott and his praise for 1948 segregationist presidential candidate Strom Thurmond.

Podhoretz credits blogs with driving the story onto the media agenda after it had been pretty much ignored by traditional media outlets.

It may not be *the* defining moments for blogs, but it's a strong indication that their importance is rising and you need to understand the implications for your clients and your business.

Of course I realize I am preaching to the converted :-)
[Comments]
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/17/2002 12:46:00 AM

 
MORI (Market & Opinion Research International) the UK's "largest independently-owned market research company" (Ref: www.mori.com) interviewed UK financial and business journalists during the Summer of 2002 and found that the top ten sources of information (in order of preference) are:
1) Telephone conversations with company executives (not PR)
2) Company Public Relations Personnel
3) Personnel interviews with company executives (not PR)
4) Press Releases
5) Articles about companies
6) Financial Analysts
7) News agencies
8) PR Agencies
9) Websites
10) Company annual reports

The most interesting thing I see in the study is how highly press releases are ranked and secondly that financial analysts have gained one place in this year's top ten.

For all the criticism aimed at press releases, they still play a role in press relations - in fact they gained one place this year.

It seems that the issues that have surfaced about a small number of (albeit high profile) US financial analysts hasn't affected their profession's credibility in the UK at all.

There's a lot more interesting (UK) research at the MORI site. Worth a look.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/16/2002 08:27:00 AM

 
There's no question that rumors present a quandry. Rumors can be very damaging to your reputation and your business.

But what if the rumor is positive? What if it's creating buzz and anticipation around future product launches long before you're prepared to talk about them. What if these rumors come from people who are truly committed to your company and your products?

Should you strong arm the offenders? Should you ignore it and secretly delight that people love your firm enough that they are willing to speculate about future revenue earners?

We've discussed Apple before and it's clear that their approach is to crush the rumors and their sources.

To a certain extent I can understand that they are sensitive about the intellectual property around their designs. After all their innovative design has translated into improved sales and survival.

I think the news that Apple is suing a contractor who Apple say stole company trade secrets and posted them on the web is fair enough. They are running a business and they have the right to protect it.

However, hopefully they will take a more casual line with the Apple enthusiasts who share their rumors and ideas ahead of major Apple events. There is a difference between espionage and enthusiasm, I hope Apple will find the balance.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/13/2002 08:03:00 AM

 
Thanks to PR firm G2B Group, their newsletter had an interesting link to an interview on Cyberjournalist.net with Jimmy Guterman on the demise of Media Unspun and also on Blogs. According to Technology Marketing, Guterman is now looking after a new weekly online column called "Media Notes" over at Business 2.0

At the Supernova conference, Dan Gillmor gave a talk on Journalism 3.1 that covered how blogs and journalism are converging. BoingBoing has blogged the talk here.

Finally, Susan Trainer at Trainer PR got a great mention on Dave Winer's popular Scripting news. Nice.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/12/2002 03:02:00 AM

 
Scott Adams casts his sharp eye on journalism...

posted by Tom Murphy at 12/12/2002 02:34:00 AM

 
The term “Buzz” has been around since the first bloom of the dot com bubble. Buzz is simply a cooler term for that old favourite “Word of Mouth” – an idea what has been around for decades. And let’s be honest there’s very little difference.

What is different is that the Internet potentially creates a perfect environment for powerful Buzz or Word of Mouth 2.0 (WOM 2) if you prefer.

But let’s step back for a moment. The promise of word of mouth is that people will discover information from respected sources and because they are respected, people will want to find out more. Is this not one of the basic tenets of Public Relations?

It seems to me that if any profession is ready made to manage and create buzz, it’s PR.

So why is PR not driving the discussion? Why is it “Internet” marketers who are running with the idea?

I say it’s high time we take the lead on WOM 2, understand how it works, how it’s measured and how we can integrate it into our plans and tactics.

I don’t believe that WOM 2 is about false postings to bulletin boards – it’s unsophisticated, can normally be easily spotted and it removes on of the core requirements for WOM 2 - namely the medium must be a respected source – not a stranger. It’s also why companies that hire beautiful people to loudly discuss new consumer electronics or movies in public also miss the point.

WOM 2 is about understanding who the influencers are and providing them with new ideas and products. The people aren’t necessarily your traditional media, they could be a customers, a partner or even a supplier.

So, to kick things off, here’s some essential reading:
- Professors from Yale and Harvard have conducted a study to try and measure WOM 2. You can read about it here.
- Marketing Profs have an article on “Monitoring Buzz”
- Here’s a short piece from Business 2.0 on Building Buzz
- Seth Godin’s “Unleashing the idea virus” looks at Buzz and Viral Marketing
- Emanuel Rosen’s “Anatomy of Buzz” looks at how to create and leverage WOM 2

There’s no excuse why you can’t start looking at how you can build WOM 2 for your clients.

Let me know what you think

posted by Tom Murphy at 12/11/2002 01:34:00 AM

 
Back in September I mentioned a fantastic feature that appeared in New Yorker magazine about the world of Hollywood PR. Unfortunately the New Yorker doesn't publish features online but the UK Observer yesterday re-printed the feature and it's now online. Do youself a favor and have a read!
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/09/2002 12:41:00 PM

 
PR news is getting harder to find online.

Last week, the excellent O'Dwyer's announced it was following the example of The PR Network (tempremental site) by adopting a subscription (albeit for a small sum) based service. Its decision has removed one of the best (free) places on the Internet to find out what's going on in the PR business. PR Week does publish one in-depth story online a week (and the PR Week Worldwire is worth subscribing to), but the fast starting Corner Bar PR seems to be unfortunately grinding to a halt.

So where do you go for PR content? The Holmes Report still has some great content, and you could do worse than checking out the links on the left where Phil Gomes, Kevin Dugan and Richard Bailey regularly fill their PR blogs with great news and views. You should also bookmark James Horton's Online-PR website which includes a huge number of PR-related links.

Finally the PR services firms are a good source of PR editorial. In particular, MediaMap's Expert PR and Press Access' the Scoop run regular features and how-to's.

If you have any additional suggestions let me know.
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/09/2002 12:36:00 PM

 
I don't know about you, but I conservatively estimate that probably 60-70% of my e-mail is now spam. If you're working in PR and you post press releases with your e-mail address on a website, you are probably facing a similar toll.

While products such as Cloudmark are helping remove some of the clutter the weight of spam continues to grow and it impacts everyone's ability to effectively communicate over e-mail.

With that in mind it's always pleasing to hear that some spammers are getting a little of their own medicine.

Alan Ralsky is acknowledged as one of the world's most prolific spammers and recently anti-spam advocates have been signing him up to every direct mail service they can. The result? His new plush house is besieged with paper spam. He's so annoyed he's threatening legal action against the anti-spammers. Mike Wendland of the Detroit Free Press reports.

(In Mike's original story, he writes: "Ralsky agreed to this interview and the tour of his operation only if I promised not to print the address of his new home, which I found in Oakland County real estate records" - hee hee hee nice way around the issue....)
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/09/2002 05:08:00 AM

 
Morning. I am in the midst of culling large volumes of e-mail and catching up on news and blogs.

Thanks to everyone who dropped me a line in my absence both those who are delighted that I haven't yet shuttled off this mortal coil and even those who wish I had :-)

Here are some stories that piqued my interest recently....

- O'Dwyer's have announced a subscription for their online PR news, though at $20 per year it seems reasonable

- Mattel are experimenting with the power or blogging. They've launched Barbie's blog (I kid you not) [FLASH required]

- Fellow PR blogger, Phil Gomes has a very interesting article on Mediamap looking at Instant messaging and its implications for PR - recommended reading for all.

posted by Tom Murphy at 12/06/2002 04:55:00 AM

 
You will have noticed that PR Opinion have been very very quiet for the past ten days.

Mea culpa, I had meant to post a note to the affect that I was leaving on vacation, but of course in the rush to get everything done, I forgot.

Normal service will be resumed shortly......
posted by Tom Murphy at 12/05/2002 07:05:00 AM

 
OK, so this is our twenty third addition to the Flash Hall of Shame. It's an institution created to recognize truly unnecessary use of Flash to make Websites as unusable as possible.

When we visit websites, we visit them to learn, to find information, in short to discover more about what the company or organization does, is or wants to be.

If you want to find out more about the Zimmerman company, call them. Don't bother going to their web site because if there was ever a case of form over function this is it. I'm sure it cost a fortune, the music is chic and cool, but as I often think to myself after a trip to McDonalds, where's the beef?

Make a coffee, slip on your headphones, and enjoy the calm, information free zone provided by the Zimmerman website. (I particularly love the PR section).
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/20/2002 12:46:00 AM

 
There's been a lot of response to two recent articles.

First up, Thomas Charlton and his career ending interview with Inc. has caused a lot of interest and we're trying to find out any additional information on his departure. Trayce Zimmermann who's a boxing publicist loved the mix of boxing and technology! Trayce thought the mixture might have been a bit "tough" for Inc and given the feedback on the magazine's online bulletin board it would seem that's the case. Trayce is the recipient of the most interesting PR vertical market award :-)

I also had a lot of feedback on the story about Springbok PR closing its doors.

James Horton, who looks after the well known Online-PR site, commented that while in the past many in the PR industry had pondered if the conglomerates would fall apart over time, he believes that: "the large firms will remain because they can serve large accounts. They will, however, have offices that fall apart regularly, which they will close or replace with new teams. And, they will continue to buy mid-sized firms to bulk revenues."

I'd agree with much of that thinking. However during the end of the last decade there were fears expressed that independent firms were becoming a thing of the past. Now, in a difficult economic climate, smaller firms have an advantage over the large conglomerates in terms of flexibility and a smaller cost base. I expect we will see an expanding number of independents who are growing quickly. And that has to be good for the PR business. Full stop.

And on the subject of small independent firms, Phil Gomes who hosts his own PR blog, has jointly founded a new independent hi-tech agency G2B Group. We wish him the best of luck!
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/19/2002 02:02:00 AM

 
It's been a while since we last nominated a Flash Hall of Shamer. However Ernie Reno's insightful interview into how he's single-handedly saving the PR industry deserves a mention. So please welcome Avatar Communications to the PR Opinions Flash Hall of Shame.
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/19/2002 12:41:00 AM

 
> The Council of Public Relations Firms has come to the defence of Nike Inc. in its appeal to the United State Supreme Court, where it is asking that California's recent ruling that Nike's discussion of public issues is not protected by the First Amendment and the Constitutional guarantee of free speech be overruled. Read all about it here.

> Just when we thought (sadly) that Corner Bar PR was dying, they have posted some new content. It's a story on Online customer service.

> The Indianapolis Star interviews Eric Reno, founder of Avatar Communications. According to Ernie, "PR people never understand what we want. Many have no writing skills. They don't understand how the communication process works. And they can't explain to companies why hiding the truth only hurts their cause and that telling the truth makes getting their message out so much easier." Never let a good generalization get in the way of the truth Ernie.

> Fraser P. Seitel over at O'Dwyers explains why timing is everything in his selection of PR Boob of the Week.

> Also in O'Dwyers is the latest PR salary survey, which finds that in-house practitioners are (on average) earning more than their agency brethren.
Lies, damn lies and statistics....
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/19/2002 12:37:00 AM

 
The Dallas Business Journal reports that Springbok (Cohn & Wolfe) the technology PR firm based in Dallas-Fort Worth has closed its doors. While not a tier one dot com PR brand like Niehaus, Ryan Wong (RIP), Springbok was well known and is yet another casualty of the technology downturn...or are they?

I wonder if Springbok had not been re-christened "Springbok Cohn & Wolfe" would they have closed their doors or would they have simply re-structured to survive in a more harsh economic environment? When your parents have standard corporate 'ratios' for fees, profit etc., decisions are often taken centrally that would not be taken by independent firms.

Can we expect widespread culling of the 'independent' shops that were bought up during the boom - just becuase they don't meet the new corporate ratios?

If that's the case, will a new generation of independent firms rise from the ashes to further reduce the return that the Advertising agencies - sorry holding companies - will get from their investment in PR?

Let's face it, the establishment of a new PR firm (outside expertise and bringing clients on-board) is trivial in terms of cost and time. Maybe the Ad Agencies have been duped.

Certainly by closing these PR firms they are directly increasing competition against their remaining brands. Consultants made redundant in this environment will look to take some of that business with them.

Maybe we can look forward to a new generation of independents rising from the ashes. I believe diversity is good. Diversity breeds innovation and competition. If the survivors of Springbok and other firms decide to strike out themselves I wish them the very best of luck. [Comments]

Supplemental: Since I posted the Springbok story is has emerged that UK firm/conglomerate Chime, the third largest 'Marketing Services Group' has warned of dismal financial results.....mmmm

posted by Tom Murphy at 11/15/2002 02:06:00 AM

 
Once upon a time, in a sleepy land far, far away from here, there were two public relations companies. One firm was called Silly & Sons and the other was called Clever & Sons.

Both firms needed more revenue and so they decided to look for new business. Silly & Sons spent lots and lots of money on expensive printed material and sent it to every company throughout the kingdom. They then followed up their direct mail with a phone call. When talking to a prospect, let's call her Ms. Innocent, the firm's representative, let's call him Mr. Silly, was told that no material had arrived. Mr. Silly found this hard to believe and told the prospect so. Ms. Innocent reaffirmed that no direct post from Mr. Silly's firm had arrived. Mr. Silly questioned whether Ms. Innocent had carefully checked her mail. Ms. Innocent had and was sure no direct mail had arrived, and wasn't too happy that Mr. Silly had insinuated during their conversation that she was a little incompetent managing her mail.

It was all to no avail however as Ms. Innocent didn't have an immediate requirement for Mr. Silly's PR services. A couple of days following their call, Mr. Silly's package arrived - it had been delayed because of insufficient postage. That wasn't the end however. A couple of weeks later, Mr. Silly sent more direct mail, this time to Ms. Innocent's boss, Ms. Boss. Ms. Boss forwarded the package to Ms. Innocent who was amused to see Mr. Silly had sent a form that allowed Ms. Boss to rate her current PR campaign and staff and insinuated she'd do better with Mr. Clever's help.

While all this was going on, Clever & Sons' representative, Mr. Clever, also sent some well produced direct mail to Ms. Innocent. He followed up with a well targeted e-mail and a courtesy call. Ms. Innocent told Mr. Clever that she didn't have an immediate requirement for Mr. Clever's PR services. Mr. Clever was disapointed but finished their phone call by passing on an editorial opportunity he had found while researching Ms. Innocent's company.

Now I hope you have been listening to our story carefully, because here is a question. If Ms. Innocent has a PR requirement in the future, who do you think she will add to her short list, Mr. Silly or Mr. Clever? Just in case you're confused it'll be Mr. Clever. He may not have done enough to win the business outright but he's certainly on the short list. Poor Mr. Silly will never be retained by Ms. Innocent.

I know I have written this before but it NEVER ceases to amaze me how poorly PR people commuicate. It really beggars belief.

Here's another examle, a colleague of mine was recently recruiting for a PR position (a unique task in today's environment) and he received over sixty applicants. Of the sixty, only three took a couple of minutes to find out the name of the person in charge of recruiting the position, and only a couple more did any research on the firm before submitting their application.

If we can't effectively communicate our (or our firm's) USPs, how do we intend to do it on behalf of a third party? These aren't isolated incidents.....nor are they fairy tales.
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/14/2002 01:39:00 AM

 
I have stumbled across a fantastic story that I am amazed I haven't seem posted elsewhere.

The November 2002 issue of Inc has a cover story entitled "Are you a tough enough boss?" accompanied of a photo of Thomas Charlton, CEO of Tidal Software.

The story has some outrageous quotes and anecdotes and tells of how Charlton broke into cupboards, forced long hours and a whole range of other stuff he did to 'revitalize' the company. He comes out of the story a little too testosterone for me but...

I head over to Tidal Software's website and bing! there's an announcement that the company's founder Gary Leight has taken over as Tidal Software's CEO on November 8 2002!!! While Charlton's face is plastered on the front of every copy of Inc.

But worse there's NO mention of why, how, or where Charlton is. He's been purged from the website (including Google's cache).

The message board at Inc is full of lively comment and even includes a posting purportedly from Shelly Gordon the external PR consultant for Tidal. But while she says that the article misrepresented Charlton she doesn't mention his disappearance from the company.

Anyone know any more? It's intriguing!
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/13/2002 09:33:00 AM

 
- Following on from the piece yesterday on ethics in PR. It's emerged that fourteen leading US PR groups have met informally about supporting PR's role in business. O'Dwyer's reports that the group will focus on ethics, disclosure and transparency. The groups involved include PRSA, IABC, NIRI, The Institute for PR, PA Council and Women in PR. More details here.

- PR Week reports that large organizations are increasingly looking for one integrated agency for all their marketing needs. If it really is a trend I'd sell your stock in the large firms...

- In one of the most imaginative agency selections, Hewlett Packard (or HP as they like to be called) has selected Hill & Knowlton (FLASH Warning), Porter Novelli, and Burson-Marsteller as its global agencies of record. Big is as big does...

- Cheap PR? Throw a good party...

posted by Tom Murphy at 11/12/2002 01:16:00 AM

 
If like me you earn your living providing Public Relations services for your client or employer, I'm sure you get annoyed with the macabre covert activities of self-proclaimed 'spin doctors'. The questionable ethics of many PR 'verticals' affects us all and makes our jobs harder and more mis-understood.

During the weekend two particular articles brought PR ethics into focus. Firstly, Richard Bailey provided a link to this article in the UK Observer newspaper that looks at the dawning of an Age of Integrity. (Wouldn't that be nice).

Secondly a friend passed on an article that appeared in Ireland’s Sunday Tribune newspaper. Unfortunately they don't post content online, but I was so stunned by it, I thought it would be worthwhile to post some of it here.

First by way of introduction, Graham Norton is an Irish-born comedian who has a very popular show on UK TV. He is very talented and very entertaining. (IMHO).

Recently he gave his first ever stand-up performance in New York and the Sunday Tribune (a national Irish newspaper) was interested in reviewing the performance.

Marion McKeone was given the assignment and she contacted Karpel Group (Warning Flash Intro!), a New York-based PR firm retained to look after Norton’s New York appearances, to obtain tickets for the event (as it was sold out). After weeks of phone calls, Karpel informed her that there were no press seats available.

McKeone attempted to contact Norton’s UK representatives, TalkBack Management, a firm that represents sixty leading UK and Irish writers, actors and other performers – and represents Graham Norton.

Melanie Coupland, head of (McKeone said of Coupland, “(Coupland) isn’t only a graduate of the KGB school of Media Relations – she’s probably its star pupil.”) TalkBack Management was travelling with Norton and was “way too busy to deal with the matter” if McKeone needed any further assistance she was told to contact TalkBack directly.

After contacting TalkBack, McKeone was told that no tickets would be available because they want ‘British’ media to focus on Norton’s new UK TV show and not the stand-up performance. Although McKeone pointed out that the Tribune was an Irish newspaper, the TalkBack rep insisted that there was no difference and that they considered the Irish media as part of the British media – a terrible international faux-pas.

McKeone thanked him for his time and told him it’s OK because a friend of hers had a ticket for her anyhow.

Five seconds later, the previously unavailable Coupland was on the phone. The conversation was at first very civil. Coupland pointed out she’d prefer if McKeone stayed away and if she complied, she would consider allowing The Sunday Tribune to review a future unspecified Norton performance in New York. She also pointed out that any attempt to review the current event would certainly prove ‘unhelpful’ regarding future access to Norton.

McKeone then asks Coupland why she is so determined that McKeone doesn’t review the event – at this point Coupland explodes. Here are the excerpts from the conversation as printed in the Sunday Tribune:
“Who the hell do you think you are? Don’t think I don’t know what you’ve been up to, ringing up everyone, trying to review this when we’ve made it clear we don’t want reviews. Why are you doing this to us? I’m going to sort you out”

McKeone at this point tells Coupland that she’s taking notes and provides a sample of what followed:
“How dare you. How dare you. Don’t you dare interview me. I don’t want to be interviewed by you. Don’t you dare, you… you…”

- “I’m not interviewing you I’m just taking notes.”

“Yes you are interviewing me. You are. Stop interviewing me. Stop interviewing me now. Stop it now. Now. Do you hear. You’ll be sorry. How dare you interview me.”

- “I’m not interviewing you.”

“Yes you bloody are. Stop it. Stop it now. Who do you think you are threatening to interview me? You’re finished. Given me your editor’s name. Now.”

- “Certainly it’s M..”

“Give me his name. Now. Now. How dare you threaten me.”

- “How did I threaten you?”

“Don’t’ you talk to me. Don’t you even think about speaking to me. Give me his name now.”

- “It’s Matt Coop…”

“His name, his name, his name. Give me his name, his number, what’s his number. You’re going to be sorry. His name, give it to me now now now.”

Finally the details are passed on.

McKeone contacted TalkBalk before publishing the story in order to provide Coupland with an opportunity to respond. She was on holidays. McKeone suggested that the exchange would be included in the piece she was writing and therefore, she really might want to call her to provide her (Coupland’s) perspective on the incident or to put it in context. She never did.

---

After I managed to close my mouth, many thoughts ran through my mind.

I think there is a lesson and a reality check for Public Relations practitioners.

The strong arm tactics, which seem to be rife in the entertainment business globally, are a dangerous path to thread. They will work as long as your client is in vogue, but when things go downhill, there will be a lot of journalists only too happy to redress the balance. You can imagine the conversation when the 'star' asks their publicist, "why are they writing this about me?" and the publicist shrugs, knowing full well that it's the result of their bullying approach to media relations.

I look forward to the day that these ‘publicists’ are exposed for what they are. I look forward to a time when entertainers have to play by the same rules as everyone else. I thought this piece was a welcome first step in the process.

We should all remember that what goes around, comes around. If you don't treat people with respect, you won't get respect in return and when things turn nasty it'll come back to haunt you.

Let me finish with some advice for Graham Norton. Your representatives are doing you a disservice. Get a grip on them before they destroy your reputation.

What do you think?
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/11/2002 02:47:00 AM

 
The economic downturn causes a number of issues for PR. Obviously the large reduction in magazines and staff is one result but so is the explosion in telesales advertising/conferences/supplements calls - particularly for the in-house PR people.

Now don't get me wrong it's a very hard job and I wouldn't fancy it, but after your fifth pushy telesales call of the day your sympathy levels fall below zero.

Recently we've started having some fun wth the pushy reps using the telesales 'counterscript'. It's a bit of fun, though your 'assailant' may not enjoy it.

The Counterscript is here.


posted by Tom Murphy at 11/07/2002 08:12:00 AM

 
- Marketing Sherpa has an interesting case study on how MAPICS, a software firm, re-engineered their PR activities..
- Technology Marketing always has some good articles, currently they've a number of interesting opinion pieces on...three tales of analyst influence...why trade shows are still important...
- MarketingProfs has an interesting piece on the art of using a human voice in online communications
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/07/2002 01:50:00 AM

 
The currency of Public Relations is information. That's why most of us have contracted Information Glut Overload or IGO. :-)

I have thousands of documents, notes, bookmarks, contacts and e-mails. I like to think I can mine those files for relevant information when required. In fact streamlining that process is something I spend a lot of time working on, but to the best of my knowledge there's no single cure for IGO - none that I have found anyway.

To reduce the symptons of IGO I use a myriad of different information management tools and although it takes longer then I'd like, they work OK.

That doesn't mean I have stopped searching for the cure for IGO of course. I am always looking for a cure.

As I was reading Dan Gillmor's weblog, his piece on tools for connecting information grabbed my attention.

He wrote about a new company called Groxis who are about to launch a new software product that builds graphical relationships between documents, websites etc. It's an interesting idea, so I visited their site. I read up a little and signed up to be informed when the Preview release was ready.

This morning I got an e-mail from Groxis. To download their preview release I have to pay $99. There's no trial version. Now I am relatively tech-savvy and if playing with information management tools has taught me anything, it's taught me that the majority of them suck. That's fine when I discover this fact through the trial version. But asking me to discover this after forking out $99 to a company with no track record... mmmmm.

I don't think that this is the best sales strategy for a start-up software vendor. If it does what it promises then it's worth every cent.....

How do you manage IGO? Any recommendations?
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/07/2002 01:16:00 AM

 
According to new research from Consumers International, the global federation of more than two hundred and fifty consumer organizations in one hundred and fifteen countries, consumers must use "extreme caution when soliciting information from certain sites."

Does anyone think this research was a sensible use of resources?

Is this news for anyone?

If so, can you please make yourself known, I have an amazing new product for you, it will solve all your problems and is available for only three payments of $19.99. Thanks :-)


posted by Tom Murphy at 11/06/2002 07:42:00 AM

 
Comdex
The technology industry's global bellweather event continues to feel the effects of globally reduced marketing budgets. Comdex is still shrinking, less vendors, less floorspace and the organizers are still manfully bailing water by boldly stating visitor numbers will remain even with last year. Sure they will.

Comdex was the focal point for more wasted marketing dollars than any other seven days in the calendar. There's no doubt it hosted many of the the tech industry's most important announcements, parties and keynotes, but right now I don't think it figures in the plans of many vendors. When companies like Gateway and IBM have dropped their exhibition stands for hotel room suites (even if we're talking Vegas suites!) it's time to try and re-energize Comdex, not just milk the same old format.

Getting your point across
When you're looking to create that killer quote, it's always useful to remember the use of color, imagery and humor. How about the headline from AdAge that more U.S. homes have outhouses (671,000) than TiVos (504,000 to 514,000)! Excellent - I have remembered that statistic at least twice as long as any other I've heard in the past six months!


posted by Tom Murphy at 11/06/2002 07:35:00 AM

 
As a profession we really don't know if we're coming or going. It seems as though everyone has a different opinion on the matters of the day and the best PR approach to solving those issues.

This is once again highlighted by a piece in O'Dwyers where Bob Truitt, who heads a Connecticut-based firm, Truitt Partners, (couldn't find a website!) believes that good PR writing is essential in restoring corporate trust. (ahem).

This reminds me of all the recent pieces about how the press release is dead.

It's a very mixed up world out there. My take is that writing is important but I don't believe you need to be a pullitzer prize winner. I also don't think writing is as important as honesty and a good strategy. Just my two cents...[Comments]
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/06/2002 12:27:00 AM

 
No doubt by this stage you've recieved your latest Ross Irvine spam on his latest work of art: "The internet (sic) is not a technology; it's a mindset."

As usual it's worth a look....
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/05/2002 12:21:00 AM

 
Thanks to Dave Winer for a link to Googlism. I'm not sure how it works technically but just type in your name, company etc and find out what the Google search engine throws up in handy neat phrases.

It's the brainstorming tools to beat all brainstorming tools - you'll never have to outsource tagline creation ever again :-). PR according to Googlism:

- pr is a fact of business life
- pr is ruining public schools
- pr is not an oxymoron
- pr is more holistic and universal than
- pr is growing
- pr is a dead duck
- pr is central to corporate brand
- pr is image building
- pr is local
- pr is not marketing's stepchild
- pr is being used to boost florida tourism since september 11
- pr is such a disappointment
- pr is a good service to let others handle
- pr is profitable
- pr is busted
- pr is not documented
- pr is fun program
- pr is a powerful online marketing tool
- pr is easy
- pr is a success
- pr is not a hard sell to computer world's
- pr is not the problem
posted by Tom Murphy at 11/01/2002 01:13:00 AM

 
- Renay San Miguel at CNN takes a shot at PR people using fear as a ploy for pitching client stories
- A new PR firm in Boca Raton covered in the Sun Sentinel - I make no other comment - thanks to Richard Bailey for the link
- When Publicists Attack - Anne Nicole Smith is being sued by publicist for non-payment of fees
- The Sydney Morning Herald reveals the secret of success for PR agencies in Australia: Be Small and Be Local!
- An insight into how PR in India has been affected by the recent spate of corporate misdeeds
- An interesting profile of NASCAR's PR boss, Jim Hunter from the AP
- $500K per annum for PR job at DBS Group Holdings in Singapore
- The Boston Globe's business editor jumps to the Weber Group - while the business columnist at the Detroit News jumps to Ford
- The Arizona Daily Star has a staggering special report on a man who, prior to murdering his two college professors at the University of Arizona, prepared and sent what the AP describes as a press packet to the newspaper, outlining his motives for the cold-blooded killings. It's a truly disturbing read.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/31/2002 01:29:00 AM

 
We all know that in an online world, security measures to protect sensitive corporate data from the outside world are essential. But did you ever think media organizations may try and uncover your confidential data? Sound unlikely?

According to Deborah Branscum, twice in the past few weeks, Reuters in Sweden has leaked corporate financial results BEFORE the results were released publicly. Now my immediate reaction was - it was leaked. But one of the firms in question, Intentia, plan to file criminal charges and say there was an unauthorized entry to their systems via an IP address belonging to Reuters prior to the publication of their interim report for the third quarter....

Read more at Deborah's Buzz Weblog and at the two firms in question, Fortum and Intentia.

UPDATE: Deborah has an update on the story on her blog today, also we carried out a non-scientfic experiment here yesterday and were able to pull up previous announcements without knowing the URL because of Intentia's use of standardized HTML naming conventions, e.g. if all financial press releases are named "Year_Quarter_ Financial_Results.html" then if you know the next quarter is Q3 2002, and if they have put the results up early, just type "2002_Q3_Financial_Results.html" (or whatever their naming standard is) and bingo up come the results. Sounds like a more rational explanation alright.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/30/2002 12:54:00 AM

 
While I was on the road over the past couple of weeks I finally got a chance to read, The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR by Al and Laura Ries. I have written and re-written this piece innumerous times. I'm still not sure I'm happy with it, but I present it for your consumption.

In reviewing "The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR" I think the best outcome (for PR) from the book is that it encourages discussion around the merits of Public Relations and in particular PR's role and effectiveness in a world where the vast majority of marketing dollars and kudos still goes to advertising.

In my own humble opinion, I believe successful marketing requires a multi-discipline approach. I have for over a decade been a strong advocate of Public Relations, but I don't for one minute believe that PR on its own (except in extraordinary circumstances) can achieve an organization's entire set of business objectives. Instead I believe that advertising, direct marketing and other tools such as CRM all play a part alongside PR.

I think this is one of the book's weaknesses. Its arguments sound very like the version of events you'd expect to hear from a kid involved in a fight. It's all very one-sided. According to the Ries' Advertising is bad, PR is good. But like any good PR campaign, context is an important element of credibility. Nothing is this simple.

There's no question that advertising has failed in many cases to grow or halt the decline of brands and businesses, but it's a little too simplistic to claim that all these commercial failures are simply down to advertising. There are always multiple factors in the success or failure of a business.

Having said that, there is no question that the advertising business has been driven by excess for far too long. There has clearly been an absence of focus on tying spend back to business objectives - whether sales or awareness related. Not that our business is compeltely outside the greenhouse on that score.

It's a risky strategy to tie your product launch solely onto PR. Factors outside your control can negate PR and that's why I'm a firm believer in an integrated approach.

Where the Ries' score highly is the discussion on the size of US advertising budgets. It is absolutely unbelievable the amount spent of advertising.

I also thought the dotcom chapter was interesting. The ultimate case study on why it's impossible to build an instant brand - it's the customer stupid. But let's not forget that our beloved PR brethren took serious money in promoting these failed ventures. Indeed we are lucky that much of the arrogance shown during the period has failed to damage our business - even if many practitioners' pretentions to be 'management consultants' were exposed.

If you're in the PR business it's worth a read, however if you're looking for a strong analytical comparison between Advertising and PR I don't think this is what you're looking for.

The fact remains that if you want to offer your client or employer maximum bang per buck, while effectively managing expectations, you're better being honest about the strengths and weaknesses of all the marketing tools. Remember, King Canute got wet.

John Crudele, the New York Post colunist gives his two cents on the book over at O'Dwyer's.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/30/2002 12:23:00 AM

 
Now stop me if you've heard this one before. At a recent journalist event I attended, the media representatives told the ensembled PR practitioners that their top pet peeves were:
- People following up press release to see if they (the journalist) got it.
- People pitching them with no idea of what the magazine covers
- Poor contact information on press releases and web sites

I am guessing this isn't news to anyone reading this web page. In fact this isn't news to anyone who has worked in PR for the past decade. But guess what, it's still happening. How? Why? Is there a generation of PR trainers out there who still preach the old school of "always ring to follow up a press release"??? Who and where are they?

A recent article in Marketing Sherpa reiterates these same issues.

Can anyone please explain how after all this time and all these articles, our maligned profession still makes the same mistakes? I really would like to know the answer!
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/29/2002 07:39:00 AM

 
As E-mail's effectiveness declines due to volume companies are investigating better ways to catch you online. The latest effort is from Relevant Reach Inc. They think that it's a great idea to let software vendors insert private communications inside an application (that you have paid for). Through this new channel, vendors can cross-sell you products etc. oh and you can ask questions.

So let me see, I am getting thousands of e-mails, I have sixty friends on my instant messaging clients and now I can get messages through my applications as well.

Eh no thanks guys, if I need to contact you send me your e-mail or web address. Read more here.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/29/2002 07:33:00 AM

 
As the PR profession is called upon to manage more than pure media relationships, understanding your audience, how they are influenced and how they communicate becomes essential. Terms such as 'one-to-one' and 'permission marketing' have been much abused over the past couple of years, but that doesn't mean they're irrelevant.

Indeed the tools for more effective communication are already in place. Databases, e-mail and Web technologies all provide an infrastructure for communicating the right message to the right audience at the right time. It's just we haven't had time to refine who or what we're communicating.

Recently two pieces of research on technology industry analysts have passed through my in-box. Now there are already a lot of people communicating with analysts. But the amount of insight into the industry analyst community is growing and becoming far more sophisticated. The more we learn about our audiences the more we understand them and the better we can communicate with them. It's the CRM dream.

So technology analysts.

SageCircle a firm that specializes in products and services around Analyst Relations (note the bias there :-) completed a survey on the influence of analysts to the technology purchasing community. They found that analysts rated second only to technology buyers' own peers when it came to influencing purchase decisions. Personally I think that's very high but it's interesting all the same. They also found that Gartner comes in #1 in the influence stakes, that published analyst research is the biggest influencer (over consulting) and that typically research from Gartner, Meta and Giga is used by larger organizations.

Biz360 , which provides tools to help you gather and analyse media information also recently published an analyst-focussed body of research, though in this case the focus is on analysts' impact in the press.

A couple of interesting findings. Smaller publications use analyst references more frequently. The most widely quoted analysts firms are: IDC, Giga, Forrester, Gartner, AMR and Meta. Though with 35% of all mentions IDC comes out tops - this could be driven by the volume of numbers IDC publish of course!

The most widely named firm in the trade press is again IDC, followed by Gartner, Meta, Forrester, Giga, AMR and Jupiter. While in the business media, Forrester leap frogs to number two.

Of course when you look below the pure numbers, Gartner are quoted more frequently in-depth (quotes, opinions, findings etc.) while much of IDC's volume is reference to research numbers.

But this type of research helps to build a detailed picture of the target audience. Have you started analyzing your customers? [Comments]
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/22/2002 07:28:00 AM

 
Sorry been slow posting this week again due to work demands! Normal service will be resumed fairly shortly....
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/22/2002 07:04:00 AM

 
Contradicting the recent spate of positive PR studies, research from Silicon Valley PR firm, McKie Headstrom has found that PR spend in the Valley is down and won't improve in 2003. On the bright side respondents reported increased coverage and eighty nine percent of respondents said they were satisfied or very satisfied with the return on their PR investment.

There are in-depth reports on the study in Technology Marketing and O'Dwyer's PR Newsletter. You can request a free copy of the study directly from McKie Headstrom.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/18/2002 05:33:00 PM

 
Following on from the Microsoft snafu, Steve Ballmer, Microsoft's CEO has been quoted saying "If (the false Switch testimonial) that's right, I will certainly castigate the offender" in an article in Australia's The Age newspaper.

Also, Deborah Branscum has an interesting entry on the Microsoft episode entitled: "Bashing Microsoft a Love Story"
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/18/2002 05:23:00 PM

 
The difficult trading conditions are continuing to cause problem for PR firms and publishers alike. It's reported that Manning Selvage & Lee have let go thirty consultants and closed their global technology practice while Porter Novelli has cut forty positions.

After a lot of rumors of its demise following substantial layoffs over the past few weeks, Computergram has been bought (saved?) by UK research firm Datamonitor plc. It's good news that the news service won't be lost...bad news the money ran out.

In the UK a new survey from accounting firm Willott Kingston Smith found that salaries in the top thirty UK agencies have climbed ten percent over the past twelve months, though ominously they expect those figures to begin to fall in the coming year.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/16/2002 05:32:00 AM

 
Following on from my two Microsoft stories yesterday, Richard Bailey writes: "you'd think they (Microsoft) were the most incompetent and irresponsible marketers ever - judging from the many gleeful accounts of the pulling of the Apple switch ad (see Tom Murphy and Dan Gillmor for the background)."

Now maybe Richard has taken me up the wrong way but I don't think Microsoft's marketing is incompetent or irresponsible. I never meant to give that impression.

IMHO Microsoft are one of the most effective (product) marketing organizations on the planet. But Microsoft's achilles heel is that they are very very agressive as an organism. And this agression has meant they have never fully replicated their product success in the corporate world and also is the driving factor behind blips like the faked Switch campaign. And there's the rub ladies and gentlemen, its a fake. It was a mistake and they should be commended on their speed of correction but it doesn't change the fact that it happened. It also doesn't change the fact that in Microsoft's most recent Marketing report they get two stars for the blogging program but lose one for the Switch episode.

For the record, many moons ago I worked on a Microsoft PR account and I have never before or since come across a more professional, passionate and effective PR machine. But let's get some perspective, if I praise them when it's right they should be knocked when it's wrong. No one's perfect. Just look at the spelling, grammer and waffle on this page.... [Comments]
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/15/2002 02:24:00 PM

 
So Microsoft is working with bloggers and gaining a competitive advantage. It's legitimate and rewards their innovative marketing. But then they go and undo all that good work with sloppy, unimaginative and ill-advised tactics.

Apple’s Switch campaign – which I think is quite compelling advertising – is obviously annoying Microsoft.

And as I discussed last week, when companies feel threatened they do the oddest things.

In this case Microsoft initiated their own "Switch" campaign - but of course this time it detailed Mac users who had switched to Windows.

One problem, they weren’t real users, they were Microsofties – using stock photography trying to pretend they were real people. Doh!

If the Internet has taught us anything, it has taught us that manufacturing untruths is a very very dangerous business.

Of course at the first sniff of trouble (They were rumbled on Slashdot) Microsoft removed the page, but the wonderful Google has cached it and Dave Winer has a screen shot!!
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/14/2002 06:28:00 PM

 
Microsoft is one of the most effective product marketing organizations on the planet. Full stop.

While it's corporate marketing and public affairs activities can sometime err on the wrong side of agressive, their product PR machine is astonishingly effective. They monitor blogs in all their target markets and have a full proactive outreach program to the bloggers. Nick Denton points out just how fast Microsoft are.

Mitch Ratcliffe raises concerns that Microsoft will be able to exert undue influence on bloggers who don't have the training to cut through the noise.

Doc Searls gives his, always readable, tuppence on the matter.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/14/2002 06:16:00 PM

 
I’m sure you have by this stage heard about Ross Irvine’s latest missive on PR and the Internet. It’s been posted to every PR mailing list I’m on. Ross’ focus is primarily focused on activism and NGO’s but it’s relevant to a wider audience.

Ross does make a lot of very valid points in the piece, entitled “PR Kittens” though sometimes I wish he would reduce the number of crass generalizations about how incompetent PR people are online. While I would agree our profession is not a stellar online performer, I find some of his views a little patronizing for my taste. However having said that, you could do worse than have a read of it, at the very least it’ll provoke a response. He has other opinion pieces on his site which are also worth a browse.

posted by Tom Murphy at 10/14/2002 06:07:00 PM

 
I read on the pages of O’Dwyer’s that Mediamap will no longer be using Bacon’s database and will instead replace it with its own media database.

Now you would think that for something this fundamental to their business that Mediamap would take a couple of minutes to inform their customers, wouldn’t you?

According to some colleagues who use the service, Mediamap haven’t said a word. These same customers were also disgruntled at Mediamap’s complete lack of communication over their new Performa product (a CRM for press relations) it seems that the only information on Performa has also been found in the trade pages, whilst the company has made little or no effort to brief paying customers.

No doubt they’ll be flabbergasted when subscribers leave their service. As I'm sure we're all sick pointing out... a little communication is a good thing.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/14/2002 06:06:00 PM

 
Richard Bailey has a regularly updated UK-focused PR blog running here. Richard’s blog predates all other PR blogs that I’m aware of.

posted by Tom Murphy at 10/14/2002 06:01:00 PM

 
I have been a little slow posting over the past week as the day job has taken precedence - c'est la guerre....

Anyhow, there’s lots to catch up on with Microsoft showcasing the very best and worst of online communications, a new online piece on 'PR and the Internet' and a newly discovered UK blog and Mediamap's great communications practices....
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/14/2002 06:00:00 PM

 
Well all that good news about PR spending increasing and clients loving their agencies - it was a little too good to be true, wasn't it?

These days we all expect the worst. Hot on the heels of the demise of the Hurwitz Group, Upside magazine has closed it's doors (Thanks to Phil Gomes for the link) as has Mutual Funds magazine.

Mutual Funds magazine isn't a shock to anyone, I mean it might as well have been titled "Setting up your dot com business monthly", but Upside had been through some bad times and seemed to have managed to come out the far side. It'll be missed. The website's still online, visit while you can.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/09/2002 12:38:00 AM

 
If you look at any group of children, for the most part, they are happy in each other's company. They play, they chase and they will generally amuse themselves happily. However, once they become intimidated, worried or frightened, things change. Once they're uncomfortable they try to put things right by deflecting their fear onto someone else and before you know it they are accusing someone that "my daddy is bigger than yours".

Now you might be wondering why someone so absolutely unqualified and inexperienced as I in matters of child affairs is attempting to unravel the mystery of childhood, but there is a lesson for all PR practitioners in there. Bear with me!

Companies who aggressively target their competitors through their marketing are letting themselves down. They are saying to the world, "all is not well here", worse they are telling the world they are afraid of their competitors - and they are taking the time (and money) to point those competitors out to their potential customers.

That's not to say it's always the wrong strategy. In carefully planned circumstances a smaller player can get excellent mileage from some well aimed arrows at a larger, incumbent vendor. But on the whole, IMHO it's a strategy to be avoided.

Of course scaremongering is not a tactic exclusively reserved for client companies. I am often amazed at the number of PR agencies who openly diss their competition in pitches and even in social settings.

The first thing I do following one of these outbursts is go and talk to the other agencies, because they are obviously doing something right to draw such vitriol!

So here's the message: Focus on what you and your firm or client do well. Deliver on that and you'll be closer to succeeding. [Comments]
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/07/2002 12:57:00 PM

 
Following the Thomas L. Harris study that found PR budgets climbing again, the Patrick Marketing Group have also released favorable research. According to their survey on marketing budgets (which interviewed 250 executives) the number one sales & marketing action to be implemented in the next twelve months is PR, followed by direct mail, e-marketing, tradeshows and advertising. 71 percent of those surveyed quoted PR. In other findings, 49 percent of respondents expected their marketing budgets to be bigger in 2003. So it's not all bad news :-)
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/03/2002 10:54:00 AM

 
Over the past couple of days there have been interviews published with two of the PR industry's luminaries. First last Monday, the Chicago Sun-Times talks with Dan Edelman about the changing face of Public Relations and then today Harold Burson talks to The Commercial Appeal in Memphis about the need for corporate conscience.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/03/2002 01:05:00 AM

 
So you have embraced the brave new world of the Internet. You think it provides a real medium for communicating and influencing audiences and maybe even fostering new one-to-one relationships with journalists, customers, partners and other relevant publics.

So, what's the first step? Lie. Yep, grab yourself an 'alias' and post untruths about competitors or unsubstantiated boasts about your firm or its clients.

At least that seems to be the growing trend amongst many of our brethern. The race to create 'online buzz' - the supposed nirvana for all communication programs - has continued unabated regardless of the economic conditions. But they mostly fail. Why? Well they are obvious, biased and are patently flogging a specific agenda.

I highlighted some examples of this online espionage here previously, most notable the Bivings Groups' efforts for Monsanto. But there are even more ridiculous examples out there.

The Movie producers (who claim to be the most righteous when it comes to protecting THEIR rights online) are one of the most common offenders. From hiring actors to talk about films in bars and restaurants (pleeze) to posting false film reviews (Sony) and posting 'excited' messages to notice boards on the more popular Film websites.

It's a great case study on how not to spread buzz. The website owners have traced all the posters' IP addresses back to the movie studios - who claim they don't sanction it - and they post the SAME message to different websites - DOH!

On top of all that, the movie studio flacks (and I use that term most advisedly) seem to think that the essence of 'buzz posting' is bad grammer, bad spelling, lower case and URL's for film trailers. It really beggars belief.

So let's all be realisitic. Good communications begins with an understanding of what your audience is looking for. Not lies but information, not subterfuge but value. It's too easy to expose the liars online, if you're going to try it, make sure you have a clear response for the angry 'consumers' when you're found out. And here's the LA Times story that inspired this Tuesday morning rant... [Comments]

posted by Tom Murphy at 10/02/2002 12:13:00 AM

 
According to a story in Information Week, the tech analyst firm, Hurwitz Group has closed due to overwhelming debt. Seemingly analysts were told on Monday that it would be their last day, and clients have not been informed. The website is inaccessible.
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/01/2002 02:53:00 AM

 
The Boston Globe reviews the "The Fall of Advertising and the Rise of PR"..... Twenty years on, the Chicago Sun-Times revisits the Tylenol scandal and includes an interesting sidebar on the "brilliant PR response"..... Here's something to give you indigestion MediaChannel.org's "PR UnSpun"..... Reuters report that the European Commission (EC) has suspended a five year, twenty two million Euro contract with a French PR firm, Ascii. The steps were taken to avoid any suggestions of impropriety as it was discovered the firm employs three former Commission spokespeople [Reuters]..... AT&T has named Constance Weaver to the company's Board of Directors as Executive VP of PR..... Fleishman-Hillard is the only PR firm named among the top 100 companies for working mothers..... And, finally the Toronto Globe and Mail has a story on how PR can help keep employees loyal...
posted by Tom Murphy at 10/01/2002 01:23:00 AM

 
PR Industry...errr...enjoys robust growth?
Amidst the doom and gloom surrounding the PR business in the current downturn, here's some research that bucks the trends.

The tenth annual Thomas L. Harris/Impulse Research PR Client Survey which surveyed 1,540 participants across twenty four industries found internal PR budgets up twenty four percent, whilst budget for external agencies grew nineteen percent.

Other good news is that internal PR owners satisfaction with their agency is up five percent.

A very interesting and IMHO worrying statistic is that spending on Internet communications is down from thirteen percent in 2000 to five percent.

Finally the top read industry publications are PRWeek, Advertising Age, ADWEEK, O'Dwyer's Newsletter and PR Strategist. [Comments]
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/30/2002 12:47:00 PM

 
The ultimate press release.....
Now there are some basic requirements from a press release. I'm sure you know them. The "When, Who, How, What and Where' yardstick is always a useful place to start. But not everyone follows these guidelines. Oh no. For some people keeping the news a mystery is what's important.

On Friday I happened upon one of the best examples of "confusion" as news. The press release in question was issued by Corum Group and it's definetely worth a read, in the same way you are tempted to glance at the wreckage of an accident on the other side of the road...and don't forget to check the quote...it's a masterpiece.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/30/2002 02:55:00 AM

 
Newly discovered PR & Marketing Blogs....
I've come across some PR and marketing blogs recently, John Mudd has a regularly updated PR blog.... Rick E Bruner's Internet marketing/advertising weblog.... Robert Loch's Internet Marketing Strategy and News... bBlog, "the sales, mktg and business weblog" and of course Anne Holland's SherpaBlog
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/27/2002 06:18:00 AM

 
"Are webloggers journalists or just writers?"...
That was a question posed as part of a very interesting panel discussion which recently took place at the University of California Graduate School of Journalism. The panel included three journalists, Dan Gillmor, Scott Rosenberg and J.D. Lasica, two long-time bloggers, Rebecca Blood and Meg Hourihan and an audience of over seventy people. A report on the panel is available at the always excellent Online Journalism Review.

posted by Tom Murphy at 9/27/2002 05:32:00 AM

 
How is your IR and PR mix?...
With the ongoing corporate scandals, the focus on governance and communications has never been tighter. So how do you manage your IR? How do you integrate your IR and PR activity? Yesterday I happened upon a study [PDF] conducted earlier this year by Businesswire and Investor Relations Business magazine, which found that 71 percent of companies hadn't consolidated PR and IR. More surprising (to me anyway) 16 percent of companies said that their PR function reports to the head of IR. Have a read of the study, it's clear the need for co-operation between IR and PR has never been greater.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/26/2002 12:58:00 AM

 
E-mail isn't dead yet.....
The advent of e-mail has changed the professional lives of PR people irrevocably. It's faster, more efficient and easier to manage than phone and fax, but it has also brought additional pressure, information overload and spam. Spam is the big worry, as the volume grows, so E-mail's effectiveness is reduced and it becomes harder to rise above the noise. (By the way Cloudmark continues to impress!)

But the spammers haven't won yet. A survey just published by Digital Impact Inc. (excuse their Flash) shows that that 79 percent of respondents have a neutral-to-positive view of e-mail marketing and 71 percent have purchased a product or service based on e-mail marketing. Rather than killing e-mail, spam is benefitting those who utilize permission marketing techniques and target e-mail commuication at people who care. There are lessons there for PR.

On a related matter, MarketingSherpa have published "The E-Mail Marketer's Guide: Hard Data for 2002" that looks at the use and success of e-mail marketing. Among the findings, e-mail marketing accounted for 15 percent of online sales last year - an increased of 12 percent year-on-year. 64 percent of Internet users check their e-mail at least twice a day and about one third of all e-mail is spam. You can purchase the report here.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/24/2002 12:13:00 AM

 
"The secret to lying is telling people what they want to hear..."
Thanks to Dave Winer for a link to a very interesting story from the San Francisco Chronicle on the dot.com craze. Nothing new there you might think, but this one looks at the role the media played in the hype. Very interesting piece.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/23/2002 12:45:00 AM

 
Unspamming yourself...
If you put your e-mail address at the end of a press release, or if you are on mailing lists or have your contact details on a web site, you are, no doubt, getting spammed.

There's nothing worse than coming into the office and spending half and hour adding another fifty addresses to your junk filter. At the same time you have to be careful, because as a communicator, any legitimate e-mail is important.

What are you to do? I've found Cloudmark and although not perfect, I have to say I am impressed by it. It's easy to use, free (so far!), and has already caught all my existing spam and is very good at catching new spams as they arrive.

It works by monitoring the spams you are getting and matching those with the spam lists of other users. So without doing anything you are getting an always up-to-date spam net.

You can download it for free from the Cloudmark web site.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/20/2002 06:51:00 AM

 
Different strokes for different folks..
If you ever wanted a graphical illustration of the diversity of the PR business, then the latest issue of the New Yorker is just for you. "This is going to be big" is a feature on Hollywood's PR mavens. It's an intriguing insight into a world of PR that doesn't come close to the work and challenges I face every day - but it's all the more interesting because of it, and you might even pick up something useful from it. It's not available online, and it's in the current issue (September 23, 2002). < Recommended >
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/20/2002 02:58:00 AM

 
Audio Blogging....
It had to happen, Jeremy Allaire of Macromedia fame, tests Blogs you can hear.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/18/2002 05:39:00 AM

 
Putting news on the wire...
How many of us have spent a lot of time evaluating the different newswires. Selection normally comes down to personal preference as the differences on the surface are hard to spot. Jon Boroshok takes a look at the different newswire services and wonders does it matter?
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/18/2002 05:37:00 AM

 
Care and feeding instructions....
"Like it or not, we need each other. You need us to cover the products you're responsible for, whether they're your own creations or you work for a public relations firm responsible for getting coverage for your company's products. We need information from you in order to get our stories done."

For anyone working with the media who hasn't seen the Internet Press Guild's guide to "The Care and Feeding of the Press" it's definitely worth a read.
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/18/2002 12:14:00 AM

 
Flash Hall of Shame #21...Dogmatic
Words fail me
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/18/2002 12:10:00 AM

 
A time to stop and face the (shower) curtain....
Although far and few between, there are some occasions when a PR professional has to stop and evaluate is there any point fighting what is inevitably a losing battle. After all there are only so many times you can defend the indefensible.

I think PR representatives for former Tyco Chairman L. Dennis Kozlowski must feel they are looking down the barrel of a gun. Dennis' personal expenses are no laughing matter - $6,000 for a shower curtain, $2,200 for a wastebasket, $1,650 for a (paper) notebook, a $17,100 traveling toilette box, a $445 pin cushion, $5,960 for sheets and the piece de resistance $1m of company funds for his wife's birthday in Sardinia.... [more]
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/18/2002 12:04:00 AM

 
Searching for solace...

The reality of life online, and something that affects most PR people, is that the greatest source of web traffic (globally) for most web sites comes from Google. Although there are always exceptions, Google reigns the search engine world.

Of course we shouldn't lose sight of the reason why Google is #1 - simply it's fast, it's easy and it's accurate.

As with all market leaders, not everyone agrees that Google's leadership position is such as good idea and Google has achieved the highest possible compliment - their own NGO! Google Watch's mission is to "look at how Google's monopoly...". They have released their policy document: "PageRank: Google's Original Sin".

Doc Searls doesn't buy the argument and IMHO until something better comes along I'd agree with Doc. If you need to find something in a hurry Google is the best means of filtering the Web. And of course you can do it by e-mail :-)
posted by Tom Murphy at 9/17/2002 08:43:00 AM

 
Come together right now

Over the weekend I spent some time re-reading The Cluetrain Manifesto. I am sure that many of you have already read it, for those of you who haven't I recommend you purchase it.

The Cluetrain has, in many respects, become a victim of it's own success. For some people it has become part of the dotcom culture, but to dismiss it lightly would be a grave error. The Cluetrain Manifesto has a lot to offer communications professionals across all marketing disciplines.

Personally, my only (small) gripe with the book is that it can come across as a little too idealistic. It tends to ignore the realities of heavier workloads, increased pressure and less support.

But it excels at challenging you to evaluate how you are communicating, how you are trying to engage your audiences and the effectiveness of your efforts. The Cluetrain encourages you to step back from the usual (and familiar) corporate speak and to instead engage with people one-on-one. If ever there was a theme for PR on the Internet, this is it.

As it states in Thesis 26:
"Public Relations does not relate to the public. Companies are deeply afraid of the markets."

If you don't have it, buy it. If you have it, read it again.

Finally I can't finish without mentioning The Gluetrain Manifesto which takes a satirical look at the Cluetrain. In particular their version of the Cluetrain's 95 theses always brings a smile to my face:
1. Markets are conversations. Conversations are markets. Markets are he as you are we and we are all together. - Indeed

Read on....

posted by Tom Murphy at 9/16/2002 02:39:00 AM

 
The Internet is dead, long live the Internet

It's probably eight years since the Internet really began to infiltrate the mainstream. From its discovery by the masses to the hype and subsequent failure of the dotcom entrepreneurs, the Internet has rarely been out of the news. But now it no longer demands the airtime or column inches it once did.

This is probably the strongest single indicator that the Internet has successfully taken its place alongside our traditional media outlets. An air of realism has taken hold. It's now clear that unlike the more outlandish visions of the pre-bust dotcoms, we won't be spending all day in our bedrooms working and playing online. In fact we kind of like meeting people in person.

The early expectations for the Internet have been tempered by human behaviour. The Internet has revolutionized communications and as communicators we now have a whole new set of challenges and opportunities. But guess what, traditional face-to-face contact continues to be the most effective means of communication. People still buy newspapers, listen to the radio and watch TV. Just as in the past, the advent of radio didn't kill print, the Internet has changed the balance of the media landscape but not removed the incumbents.

That said the Internet does have one other unique characteristic that makes it different to the incumbents. And this characteristic will continue to challenge Public Relations practitioners long after webvan, sock puppets and the Industry Standard fade from the memory. Innovation.

Working with TV, radio and print the major challenge is keeping on top of new contacts and programs or titles - particularly in the current media climate. But the Internet as a media hasn't stopped evolving. There are continual new developments that affect how we reach audiences. And while we must remain cogniscant of new websites and online writers, the innovation I am talking about is more fundamental than that.

The popularity of the Weblog is a good example of Internet innovation that can positively or adversely affect our clients - and it won't be the last. All PR professionals will need to keep on top of new technologies, channels and means of reaching audiences.

Adding further complexity to the mix, every industry is different, every vertical market is different. And these differences are not necessarily as simple as different web sites, because automotive suppliers may use the Internet differently to software developers. Different tools, channels and web sites.

Do you measure the success of your different tactics online? Do you know how people find your client's site? More than any other media before it, the Internet demands we track, measure and evaluate activities closely. Not just in terms of PR's performance and ROI - though that's essential - but in terms of how and what your clients' audiences are doing online.

The Internet has provided Public Relations with a dynamic media outlet, that offers more accurate data on the success (and failure) of PR campaigns than ever before. But it also presents challenges.

Get a head start and understand how your clients' audiences are interacting online. Finding out and testing new techniques could be one of the most valuable exercises you ever undertake. [Comments?]


posted by Tom Murphy at 9/16/2002 02:37:00 AM