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