Archive for the ‘Communities’ Category

A study by USC Annenberg School for Communication suggests that  "Articles returned by Google News tend to be significantly more biased in one direction or the other than articles from Yahoo News." And that non-traditional news sources are a cause of that bias. Some background:

Google News, still in beta three and a half years after its launch, tracks the top stories on some 4,500 English-language news sites, updating its index roughly every 15 minutes. The ability to effectively search this huge collection of timely information has helped make Google News one of the Internet’s most popular news portals, drawing about 5.9 million visitors a month… Ranking news stories based on some measure of quality may be a step in the right direction, but to maintain its credibility, Google News needs transparency – both in its selection criteria and its list of sources.

First it was Carley’s comments at a graduation – now it’s Pepsi with CEO Indra Nooyi making inflamatory remarks regarding America’s role in the world today:

After talking of her childhood back in India, Ms. Nooyi began to compare the world and its five major continents (excl. Antarctica and Australia) to the human hand. First was Africa – the pinky finger – small and somewhat insignificant but when hurt, the entire hand hurt with it. Next was Asia – the thumb – strong and powerful, yearning to become a bigger player on the world stage. Third was Europe – the index finger – pointing the way. Fourth was South America – the ring finger – the finger which symbolizes love and sensualness. Finally, the US (not Canada mind you) – yes, you guessed it – the middle finger. She then launched into a diatribe about how the US is seen as the middle finger to the rest of the world. The rest of the world sees us as an overbearing, insensitive and disrespectful nation that gives the middle finger to the rest of the world. According to Ms. Nooyi, we cause the other finger nations to cower under our presence.

Pepsi has posted a comment and a copy of her remarks. The blogosphere is wound-up on this one. Frankly, it isn’t a great speech, it’s geographically incorrect, the metaphor doesn’t work and is offensive, and the comments are definitely controversial…

It breaks most of the rules of effective public speaking, some of which are – ensure your content, tone and comments are in line with your brand – both personal and company; ensure the topic illuminates the brand and doesn’t detract from it; focus on subject matter that is relevant to your message; use clean and clear metaphors that aren’t so multilayered that they cloud the content and your message… the list is a long one. What did Pepsi hope to gain from speaking on this topic?

More here…

Aside from all that, there is another lesson here for all communicators in that the blogosphere is an incredibly powerful medium for distributing executive’s remarks, and stimulating debate on them – so much more than conventional media. Hugh covers this.

Brands are being shaped at wire-speed in the blogosphere. Having a blog might not just be a proactive communications tactic but also vital for reactive communications. Rather than the staid press release or statement, imagine a Pepsi blog right now with dialgoue taking place and Indra engaging with the enraged community of Pepsi drinkers. She might even rally a few supporters along the way.

Transparency and open dialogue would have enabled a much better response to an unfortunate metaphor.

During a Blog 101 Workshop on Monday I was asked about pitching bloggers. I get a few pitches a day. I’ve yet to write about one of them. Most
are silly requests to link to a new web site, etailer or communications
service. Some are just the usual bulk mailings from PR people that
don’t know any better.

My simple rule is don’t waste your time unless it is carefully tailored to what we write about and you genuinely think we might be interested. We don’t have slow news days. We don’t carry a story quota. Fellow Corante contributor Suw Charman has a lengthy post on what not to do while also pointing to post on Corante by Michael O’Connor.

So, some thinking on rules for pitching bloggers:

1. Tailor it. Massively tailor it. No standard pitches.
2. Don’t post the pitch to our blog. Drop us an email.
3. Don’t ask us to link. Invite us to take a look at your material, blog, or product. We’re smart enough to figure out the rest.
4. Don’t follow-up. Read our blog – that will tell you if we were interested.
5. Most of us barely have enough time to blog so it’s unlikely we’re going to be interested in your survey.
6. If you are going to insist on pitching bloggers, only pitch people you read. Never, never pitch from a MediaMap list.
7. Be warned, we will probably post your pitch. As Michael says, the NYT can’t do that, we can.

Steve asks about which bloggers can you trust when it comes to pre-briefings and the like. One could equally ask which journalist can you trust… While I’m concerned that people suddenly start treating mainstream bloggers as a news service, here are some thoughts:

1. Understand why you are pre-briefing bloggers. If it is just to be hip and cool, don’t do it.
2. Restrict your pre-briefings to major bloggers who are acting as news drivers. Spend time identifying the news drivers. The more you expand the scope of briefings, the more likely the news will break before you want it to.
3. Read and get help understanding SOX and SEC disclosure guidelines. If you are pre-breifing on material information for publicly traded companies you might find the US Govt has you wearing a little ankle bracelet before you know it.
4. Understand that we are not media – so it’s much harder for us to pay attention to all the logistics around embargoes and the like.
5. Ask whether we are interested in being briefed at all.

This begs the question of why a blogger would want to be pre-briefed. Frankly, I have little interest. The corollary is in big media. The opinion and editorial journos at say the Post, NYT or WSJ wouldn’t be that interested. The news folks might. So, while the simplest answer to "can you trust a blogger" is, "that all depends" – the issue of pre-briefing goes much deeper than that. Suddenly the PR person really needs to understand the blogosphere, bloggers and their needs and not overlay prior practices – that worked for the media – on this new influencer set.

At what point does Apple realize that it’s customer base is bigger than ever before and that we don’t like this kind of behavior. We love you. Please be nice to other people. We don’t like it when you wield the power we have given you this way:

John Wiley & Sons, a leading publisher of technology books, said Apple Computer has removed all its titles from the shelves of Apple stores in apparent retaliation for the upcoming publication of a biography of Apple CEO Steve Jobs… The Merc

Steve Jobs has no problem with free speech. You are free to say whatever you want about him or Apple, and, if he is displeased, he is free to retaliate by whatever means his pique dictates… Good Morning Silicon Valley

For people who believe that any press is good press there is no better example than this of why you are, and have always been, wrong. Not only has Apple alienated loyal followers like me, but it’s probably driven up sales (and at least awareness) of a book that they didn’t want anyone to read.

Dan has more on this…

Steve has an interesting post on transparent interviews. This is something David and I have been chatting about for awhile.

Wouldn’t it be great if not only communicators but also journalists posted all transcripts from interviews? And with the advent of Podcasting, just post the verbal if you don’t have time to transcribe. So, no excuses. (And make them available via an RSS feed).

But, it’s wrong to expect journalists to conform to live posting of the interview. In fact it’s ludicrous to respond with "Mr. Reporter, send me your interview questions and I will post my responses on my blog." No matter how powerful you are, any journo worth their salt is simply going to tell you to take a hike. This kind of arrogance will only damage relations with the media and lead to a very polarized dialog. Neither of which is desirable. This response is probably the last resort of the pissed-off Exec or company.

The starting point is being clear up front that you reserve the right to also record the interview and post the transcript on publication of the story. And they reserve the right to do the same.

Media advantage comes from breaking stories and news and its only fair that they get to preserve that. But that doesn’t mean the transcript can’t be posted on publication of the story. And at that time, the interviewee gets the right to point to that transcript and question the reporting.

And now, rather than difficult calls with the media – and all the normal excuses – the interviewee and PR pro gets to correct it in public. I’ve heard so many excuses:- "My editor changed my story". "I didn’t write that bit". "He might not have said specifically that, but that’s what he was saying". "Let me look at my notes and get back to you". "I’m on deadline and can’t find my notes right now – can’t this wait". "Send a letter to the Ed if you have a problem with the story". "I’d be happy to print a correction – in 5pt type in the bottom left hand corner of page 9,000". "Bummer". "I’ve written plenty of good stories on you guys so get over it". What, you are going to complain every time I write something you don’t like".

But be warned, more than often when I’ve questioned a quote I’ve gone back to a transcript, stepped back, and seen how the journalist got there. And discovered I was wrong. (Saul did this here). So, record those interviews and transcribe them where possible. But more importantly, make your point very succinctly and clearly. And make it again if you think it wasn’t clear enough. Communicating is a tricky business. What is often thought of as a misquote can in reality be the result of trimming a 10 minute diatribe to a sentence. That’s tough. Interviews definitely favor the expert communicator.

The most important outcome of the blooging between Saul of the NYTimes and John Batelle is that the conversation is taking place. Interviews were once very final events. Now they are conversations. Like Fred, I didn’t read the NYT piece – I did read the conversation.

So while transparency in media relations is going to lead to lots of whingeing about journalistic tone and bias I’m willing to put up with that if it means more accurate reporting and more transparency. And more conversations.