Edge Communications, Inc. - Blog

The Case for Transparency Couldn’t be Clearer

The Federal Trade Commission didn’t make many friends recently when it decided that bloggers touting products might be – how to put this politely? – on the take from product suppliers, and so ought to just come right out and say if those plugs were more like payola.  The Internet Advertising Bureau very nearly had a seizure, huffing and puffing and threatening to do, well, something.  Bloggers far and wide weighed in, mostly saying unkind things about the FTC and the various commissioners’ mothers. 

 

All in all, not pretty. 

 

During this brouhaha, it wasn’t really clear to me whether bloggers were irked because the FTC was calling at least some of them out for dubious practices (promoting goods and services for which they were surreptitiously being paid) – or because the feds were questioning the integrity of the blogging community at large.  What we didn’t hear from even the most esteemed bloggers was a simple statement that transparency is a good thing.

 

It is.

 

The salient lesson for public relations is that transparency isn’t an option.  It would be unthinkable for us to hide who we work for, even if we wanted to – but why we would we want to?  We lead with our client affiliations for pretty much the same reason athletic teams wear uniforms.  Every news release, every op-ed, every phone call, every pitch letter, every tweet carries the client’s name.  That is the point, after all, isn’t it? 

 

Certain mega-PR firms concoct bogus front groups now and again; that’s not a transparent thing to do, and savvy clients are wise to run the other way if they sense that an agency they've hired (or are considering hiring) engages in PR-by-smokescreen.   

 

Blogging is supposed to be an empowering exercise for the author, a source of nearly infinite fresh voices for consumers, and a liberating force for the Internet.  So who let cloaked pay-to-play in the door?

 

10 Little Words… Give or Take

There’s a snarky dance of longstanding, involving members of the media, bloggers and those in the PR community who commit offenses against the English language.  You can find the latest pirouette in Robin Wauters’ screed from TechCrunch (10 Words I Would Love To See Banned From Press Releases).  It’s a mix of valid points and cheap shots, and I couldn’t resist a bit of editorializing. 

I really meant to do a search of TechCrunch for instances of “impact” being used as a verb, but there are limits to snark, I suppose.  Anyway, here goes:

1) LEADING / LEADER

You know the kind: “Initech, the leading blah in blah blah blah, has partnered with Initrode, leader in blah blah blahblah blah blah blah.” Every single time a press release carries either one of these words in the first sentence, I cringe. Why? Because if everyone is leading, no one is. Period. PR people, next time you start writing a news announcement, ask yourself if you really should be using the words ‘leading’ or ‘leader’ just because it’s easy and everyone is doing it.

We don't care what other companies say about themselves.  While one could argue that the word “leader” is overused, it's still appropriate for many of our clients, because "leader" doesn't imply size or scale or anything other than a compelling technology that merits attention.  A "leadership" position also implies thought leadership, which means "ideas worth listening to."  Should we call our clients "followers"?  

2) BEST / MOST / FASTEST / LARGEST / BIGGEST / etc.

Emphasizing the strengths of the company you’re pitching is obviously a good thing. But does anyone realize how meaningless these terms become when they are followed up by something so blatantly untrue or tied to a small niche that it’s just painful to read? I’m specifically thinking about press releases that commence with something like “Initech, the largest manufacturer of red staplers engraved with our company logo, has just won the Buzo Award for the most uncreative use of the word ‘largest’ in the history of mankind.” Handle these words with care.

I agree with this, mostly.  While we rarely say "biggest" or "fastest," those should be statements of fact, not modifiers that can't be substantiated.  In that case, not using those terms can mean withholding information.  Why do that?

3)  INNOVATIVE / INNOVATION

The mother of all voidness. How many truly innovative products are launched on a yearly basis, regardless of the sector? How many times have you seen something get the ‘innovation’ label without merit? Unless you or your clients find a cure for all cancers, simply stop using it, starting today. Now that would be innovative. 

Should be used sparingly, yes... but there are times when it applies. Again, its use by others shouldn't invalidate our claim, if we can back it up.  How many ways can one say “new”?  Are we now into blacklisting words?  Surely, using terms that already exist is preferable to making up new ones – right?

4)  REVOLUTIONARY

Much like the above, terrible word to be using in press releases. What exactly about your product is going to make people leave their houses to demonstrate, oppose their government, riot, etc.? Oh, sorry, you mean the company you’re pitching is not going to change the world but it is going to completely change the way an industry thinks about your business? Safe bet: it’s not going to. Likely you’re just doing the old ‘wishful thinking’ routine, and everyone knows you are.

 

 

Totally agree.  A useless word.  You won't find it in our news releases.

 

 

5)  AWARD-WINNING

Trust me, telling anyone willing to listen that you’ve been recognized with this or that award won’t be providing you with any goodwill right off the bat. There are exceptions to this rule, but very few (they include the Nobel Prize, a Pulitzer, a Crunchie  or a Europa Award). Basically it’s like going around a party informing everyone that you’ve had sex with a human being last week: I’m sure it matters to you a great deal - and hopefully to the other person as well - but the rest of us likely don’t give a hoot. We also think it’s kind of sad that you are looking for someone to confirm or recognize your accomplishments that way. A tip: unless you’re announcing that you’ve actually won an award (which by the way is only very rarely newsworthy), leave it out.

Probably the silliest inclusion on this list.   Awards are facts, and many of them matter.  They exist for a reason and any company that doesn't leverage third-party validation is simply brain-dead.

6) DISRUPTIVE / DISRUPTION

Newsflash: a product or service is only very, very, very rarely disruptive. If there is a truly ground-breaking one, it’s also never disruptive out of the gate, for it can take years or even decades to turn an entire industry upside down. The fact that you’d use the word in a press release speaks volumes about your ability to tell your head from your ass: anything truly disruptive doesn’t happen overnight, and you can’t capture ‘disruption’ in a news announcement pushed out at a given time and date. Besides, if something is genuinely disruptive I’m sure it will require little push from PR people or firms to get the word out there.

 

 

Overused, true.  But the categorical statements above are as lazy and ill-considered as the behavior they're critiquing.   We have introduced some technologies that did, in fact, prove disruptive in their markets.  Are we compelled to discuss them in hushed, self-effacing tones because others are hyping junk? 

 

 

7) CUTTING / BLEEDING EDGE

In the same boat as the words ‘innovative’, ‘revolutionary’ and ‘disruptive’: so often misused in the past that it now looks like you’re practicing your skills to write quality satire when you use it to tout a company or product in a press release.

 

 

The only edge we use, typically, is in our name.  This one's pretty much spot-on.

8) NEXT-GENERATION

Overused. If you have an updated version of your product to announce, why not just say so? I simply cannot understand what people are trying to tell me when they say their new release is ‘next-gen’. Is it too advanced or complex for me to use and will only young children have the ability to understand what you’re doing when they grow up? Did your previous product version stink so bad that you needed to skip an entire generation of iterations to finally get it right?

 

 

See "disruptive," above.

 

 

9) STRATEGIC PARTNERSHIP

Partnering with other companies can be good - and newsworthy too, though not often - but it doesn’t help you get more attention or goodwill when you announce a strategic partnership, agreement or relationship. We’re assuming it fits in both your strategy and the one of the company or companies you team up with, otherwise you wouldn’t be forming an alliance, right? It’s not like your agreement suddenly gets a whole other dimension because it’s labeled ’strategic’, honestly.

Hello?  We don't make up these terms.  If our clients have signed a piece of paper calling a relationship "strategic," we will as well.  I don't quite get the concern.  Should we call these "non-strategic"?  Not all deals rise to this level, but those that do should be labeled as such.

10)  SYNERGY

Simply defined, synergy means that the whole in combination is greater than the sum of the individual parts working on their own. Used properly, the word can describe the magnified effects of two drugs taken together, parasites that enforce each other’s destructive effects and compounded health risks due to toxic chemicals. When applied to corporations, it means a financial benefit that a company aims to realize when it merges with or acquires another corporation. As history teaches us, there’s rarely any synergy involved when companies melt together or one takes over the other (cough, AOL-Time Warner). PR people, you’d be doing yourself a serious favor banning this one from all future press releases.

No argument here.  One of the worst words ever coined.

 

Don't Get Kicked in Your Career

See Edge's very own Lilli Cloud speak on "Knowing Your Brand" at PRSA's event last month.

The Los Angeles event named "Don't Get Kicked in Your Career:  Recession Strategies for Employment Empowerment and Career Advancement" was an empowerment program that gave tips and strategies to tough-out these tough times.

See a snippet here:

Developing and Implementing a Campaign

Much as it saddens me to admit it, some clients do not understand the nature of the PR process. As a result, PR firms must start by explaining how our process works and how we can help clients maintain as much control over their communications as possible. While PR can try to shape the message, ultimately, it is up to the news outlet to present the story. PR firms must explain to their clients that everyone gets misquoted. Stories get cut. Companies get ignored. Mistakes happen. But communications is not something you can turn off and on like a faucet. It’s a constant in business. As a general rule, the more you communicate the better off you will be. Sitting on the sidelines isn’t an option.

As indicated earlier, it is difficult if not impossible to measure the impact of a PR campaign on a company’s sales. I’m not a fan of “pay for performance” PR because I don’t think it reflects an understanding of either the editorial process or the role of public relations in an organization. Most clients know that they cannot buy editorial—they need to earn it. They know that PR leads to subtle changes, such as their visibility in the industry, the reaction from their peers, the sense that the company and its products and services are gaining recognition and acceptance among target audiences. All of these aspects have an impact on business, though it is hard to draw a direct line from PR to these outcomes. And good PR doesn’t always translate to good business; for instance, a company of ours was profiled in Forbes Magazine but went out of business nine months later for reasons that had nothing to do with public relations; there is no way to predict the future.

One challenge in PR is the small, no-name company that has no advertising or marketing. They frequently turn to PR as their primary (perhaps only) marketing tactic, because it’s both powerful and cost effective. That places a heavy strain on the PR function, since it’s difficult to create an image and a footprint around an unknown, low-budget company, particularly if it is competing with large companies with mega-million dollar budgets. Ideally, PR should be part of a marketing mix.

Interestingly, before the dot-com bubble burst, many client companies had no marketing budget and no advertising budget; they focused exclusively on PR. Case in point: one client, which was publicly traded, had us issue news releases daily, and sometimes more often than that. Day traders were tracking the stock; in that era, there was a relationship there between PR— any PR—and stock performance. Thankfully, that era passed. Most client companies do realize that PR cannot do it alone. Ideally, PR, marketing communications, and advertising work together to enhance the company’s image and sales. Good PR alone cannot save a business; it can, however, build and nurture a company’s reputation. And, when given a seat at the table by the CEO, PR can actually help companies do the right thing.

 

Changes

The Internet has changed the way PR operates, but it has not eliminated the importance of traditional media: the broadcast networks and print publications that continue to trumpet the nation’s business and public policy agenda. While e-mail may now be the first line of contact between journalists and PR pros, the real work (as noted above) happens on the phone.  

The new curve ball in this game is the blogosphere­the informal but vast community of online commentators and opinion makers­that is increasingly influencing what the mainstream media considers news. These quasi-journalists are playing more of a role, even if they lack proper credentials, because traditional media is now reading them. As the lines separating mainstream and Internet media continue to blur, it becomes more complicated to determine how to reach people who matter to clients. 

For instance, we still follow the tradition that it is best to put news out at the beginning of the week, but that is really more habit than necessity. The tradition stems from when weeklies went to press, but that is less critical now to disseminating a message. As if to underscore this flux, we are watching rates for TV and radio advertising go down and rates for online advertising go up.   

One problem with the Internet is that it publishes corporate news verbatim. That may seem like a strange complaint coming from a PR person. We certainly appreciate the direct channel to various audiences, and we relish the ability to provide content to various sites on a regular basis­a practice that was less common when a printing press or broadcast outlet figured into the equation. But unfiltered corporate news can diminish the importance of the editorial function. If stories lose the credibility/reliability that independent journalism provides, who is to say what’s newsworthy? Editors play an important role in creating an informed society, and it’s vital that journalism retain its place in this culture. That said, journalism as we have known it is changing. Not to sound anachronistic, but I believe PR as a discipline is very much invested in a system that has worked well for years. 

Elements of the Campaign

From a strategic point of view, the most important element of any PR campaign is having a story. That is why the front-end work is so critical. Many companies believe strongly in what they do, but are unable to view their messaging with the right degree of detachment. Part of what PR firms offer client companies is a reality check to point out the holes and the inconsistencies within a client's story. The best PR people help client companies enhance their reputation and make their message resonate with the media through this kind of constructive critique.

Some PR people do not take on clients whose organization or products give them ethical qualms; others hold to the view that, as with attorneys, every company is entitled to its day in court-in this case, in the court of public opinion. My firm is small enough to have the luxury of selectivity in the companies we represent. For me, not having ethical qualms simply means we can do a better job; we aren't ambivalent about our advocacy.

Client companies can make difficult demands. One client gave us the mandate to get on the front page of The Wall Street Journal within six weeks of being hired. If we didn't, the company was going to buy the back page of The Journal. The going rate for a full-page ad at the time was $80,000. Of course, they'd pay us a small fraction of that figure for editorial mention on page one, so it was clearly a terrific deal for them, but it was also a terrific challenge for us. When we picked ourselves up off the floor from laughing, we decided to go for it. The key was putting together a team. We had to create everything about the company from scratch, since nothing existed- it hadn't launched yet. We had to simultaneously define the company, create materials, determine the proper person at the target publication we had been handed, and solicit other parties beyond the client (because no Wall Street Journal reporter would put a story on the front page based on one start-up company). The CEO and I wrote the launch news release in the wee hours, the very morning we had to ship that release off to the Journal reporter. It worked. The Wall Street Journal reporter herself did a TV interview about the company's story, almost becoming a spokesperson for our client in the process. It was the launch the company was looking for. At the time, there were about twenty people working at the company; a year later, there were 400. The key is having a story-and finding the right person in the right place to give it the right type of attention.

Tactically, the most important part of a PR campaign is direct high-level media relations. PR firms look for as large a media target as our news hook can sustain. Sometimes, to buttress that news hook, PR firms conduct consumer research, often working with an outside research firm that can create and disseminate attitudinal surveys. Having information about how consumers feel on a given topic at a particular point in time invariably has news value. PR firms package that information accordingly, to broaden the story beyond the client. To round out most campaigns, PR firms also do media training for their clients, making sure the client CEO is ready to talk to a journalist or go in front of the camera.

PR firms use a variety of communications tools, including e-mail pitch letters, news releases delivered via commercial wire services that focus on search engine optimization, and Internet blog (and even YouTube) posting, among other tactics. While journalists are busy beyond belief, there is no substitute for simple (and persuasive) conversation. New technology is wonderful, but the telephone remains the most powerful tool in the PR professional's arsenal. And, precisely because reporters and analysts have so many demands on their time, the wise use (but not overuse) of multiple approaches is the best means of cutting through the noise.     

The PR Team

Typically, PR planning uses two teams—a team of PR professionals and a team from within the client company. We work both separately and together and develop a strategic plan and tactics (aimed at business to-business and/or business-to-consumer audiences, as the client’s business dictates) and the appropriate tools to use. Talented writers are essential— defining messages and materials in clear and compelling fashion. PR firms write to communicate with clients, with the client’s customers, partners and investors—and as the client’s surrogate for publication (via news releases, bylined articles, speeches, etc.). Within my firm, media relations specialists—professionals who are on the front lines with journalists and other opinion leaders—complement the writing teams. Together, we all plan out the ongoing relationship between the company and our firm. 

Each agency-client relationship is different because each client is different. That said, there are certain approaches that guide everything that PR consultants do. Number one: How will the story—the company’s message, as expressed in journalistic language—play out in the media and in the public at large? Ultimately, most PR firms are hired for their news judgment and their ability to anticipate how powerful the story will be; who it should be aimed at; what the potential pitfalls are; and can the company actually deliver on what it is saying. When there is a crisis, message development is critical, so PR firms devote a tremendous amount of time to hone that message, often creating multiple messages for different audiences. If they define the story and messages correctly, other tactics fall into place. 

But PR must never forget to focus on how the message will help the business—how it will meet client needs and affect the marketplace. Just as in advertising, brilliant creative can win awards while ad execs neglect the client (and consumers can’t place the brand for all that creativity), so PR must be focused on the client’s needs to make it in the market. Press coverage is vital, but rarely an end in itself.  

Role of the CEO

The most important role of the PR firm CEO is choosing the right people to be on a given client team. I’m looking for a match in terms of team member experience, expertise, and­always­chemistry. In my firm, I write plans as a means of securing new business, with the help of strategic staff members and support staff. What’s interesting is that even though we do a good deal of homework, we still feel like we’re in a vacuum when we craft these plans; at best, we’ve had a briefing or two before developing a detailed plan of action. It’s a snapshot of our thinking, and that’s often enough to give clients a sense of comfort. Prospective team members contribute to this process.

Our client base tends to consist of young companies just starting to develop a brand identity. Typically, they call us in to launch a company or move a product. Some have worked with agencies before­at least in previous positions­and some are on the rebound from an unsuccessful experience. 

PR firms generally work with a liaison in the client’s marketing department, although they also sometimes work with the client company’s CEO. PR is much more effective when the CEO is highly engaged in the communications process. I think about two recent clients. One company was just starting out online. The CEO was a brilliant idea guy with no real concept of the online world. He essentially threw out his ideas and let the marketing people clean up the mess. The lack of direction -­ which started at the top and flowed throughout his organization and into ours -­ severely hampered our collective efforts. This back-and-forth, start-and-stop style of management simply isn’t conducive to formulating and conveying a clear, powerful company message.

At the same time, we began working with another company whose CEO had extensive, high-level experience with online companies. He came up with a vision and is working with us and his own internal PR team to refine and implement that vision. We obtain real-time feedback and work in an atmosphere of collaboration. That is the right way to lay the groundwork for a successful PR campaign.

Measuring Success

It’s traditional in the PR business for relationships to endure -- ideally, for years at a stretch. While many agencies do some project work, typically they hope to keep their clients indefinitely. Most focus on their clients and the goals articulated throughout the PR planning process. Companies realize that PR firms are performing a function that is necessary in the business world -- they absolutely must communicate with their various external constituencies (and a host of internal audiences as well). How they communicate -- via the news media, via analysts and pundits, via the emerging community of bloggers, via customers and partners --- varies widely, but communication itself is not an option.

Public relations isn’t advertising. It cannot be evaluated using the metrics that advertisers require to support their expenditures, whether promoting a brand or a product. There are “ad equivalency” measures in PR, but they don’t reflect the inherent power of editorial -­ which, after all, isn’t for sale at any price. Most CEOs would agree that nothing matters more than corporate reputation. It is that power and credibility that make public relations so challenging for PR professionals and clients alike. Clients need to have a somewhat longer time horizon and appreciate that it’s precisely the lack of control we all have over the editorial product that makes it so valuable.

All of this isn’t to say that success can’t be measured -- only that PR metrics tend to be qualitative and strategic rather than quantitative and tactical.

Obsessing About Service…

PR firms should be obsessive about service. Savvy clients understand that gaining media coverage is not the only (or even primary) goal of public relations; the real goal is helping the client organization achieve “success,” however that client defines it.

To deliver service that moves the client toward those goals, the PR firm’s own structure matters. Our firm is organized differently than most PR firms; we use senior-level independent consultants, supported by a small administrative team. We keep our overhead limited and work to ensure that our professionals spend virtually all of their time on client service. Because our clients are also entrepreneurs, most recognize and appreciate our orientation. Some PR firms, particularly but not exclusively the larger ones, seem to create a sense of divided loyalties among employees; it is often unclear whether staff members are beholden to the PR firm or to the client. Because we’ve eliminated that divided loyalty, clients find it easy to work with us. And, because the professionals on our team have been at this business for, on average, fifteen to twenty years, we deliver premium service. In other words, clients don’t pay for on-the-job training. Having a company of seasoned professionals on hand (most left brand-name agencies so they could do client work rather than manage others) is a big reason why we’ve been able to foster a superior work ethic; our consultants are just happier than they were in their previous lives. Clients tend to pick up on that.

While our team isn’t housed in one place, the Internet has eliminated many of the traditional barriers to communication. One of the ways PR firms provide quality service is by communicating daily with their clients by telephone, e-mail, and face-to-face meetings. Most also use some feedback mechanism to collect input and use it to fuel changes in PR strategy and tactics. Most clients are open in terms of their goals and whether the PR firm is meeting those expectations.

 

Excerpted from, “Developing Public Relations Campaigns: Top PR Experts on Implementing a PR Plan, Benchmarking Success, and Achieving Client Goals (Inside the Minds),” by Aspatore Books Staff Copyright 2007. All rights reserved.