Some thoughts and opinions on the Public Relations profession and industry

 
- 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