Articles by admin

After finishing a very frustrating conversation with a vendor last week,  and discussions with some of my colleagues, I  became more and more irritated with the service provided to us by many of our vendors.  I then took a step back and tried to reflect on what the issues were and came to the realization that it probably wasn’t all one-sided, there are things I could improve as well. So, here are my five insights to making vendor relationships work.  I’ve already had the opportunity to try it with one vendor and achieved success—hopefully I can make it SOP.   

1.    Treat it as a partnership – yes, you’re hiring the vendor, but that doesn’t make them your slave.  The old adage, treat those as you’d like to be treated definitely holds true here.  You’re in this together and in order to ensure success, you’ve got to act as a team.

2.    Set and manage expectations – I prefer to have everything in writing and I’m often on conference calls all day, so I prefer to try and conduct as many transactions as possible via e-mail.  I had one vendor who seemed to only want to use the phone, so I finally said, I’m available at this time, or we can just handle this via e-mail.  If you prefer to discuss via phone, let them know in advance.  And, be clear on when things are needed.

3.    Invest in making it work – take the time to make the partnership – 30 seconds doesn’t cut it.

4.    Share information – this should go without saying, but it’s important to give the vendor the big picture and all the information they need to get the job done. In the same way as you’d do for a colleague, explain the program, why you’re executing it and provide the details.

5.    Give feedback – throughout the process give regular feedback and discuss it when the program/assignment is wrapped. 

Now, I just need to take my own advice!  

 A study conducted by the good people at the Pew Internet & American Life Project has concluded that a whopping 93% of teens are now online.  Of those, about 64% are using the Internet to post content as widespread as pictures and videos to homework assignments.  Feel free to take a second to pop your eyeballs back into their sockets.

According to a USA Today article on the study “Teens don’t drop old technologies as they add new ones, ‘they just communicate more,’ says Pew’s Amanda Lenhart. ‘And more frequently.’” 

For too long PR practitioners have considered a successful hit to be the front page of the New York Times.  Naturally we want mass audiences, but that’s like wishing for a return to the days of three TV stations.  As media continues its perpetual splintering, the future of PR will be defined not by print but by processors. 

Look into the crystal ball with me. 

In 10 years when these teenagers are young adults, news will regularly be delivered to their mobile phones or directly to their inboxes, not to their doorstep by a paper boy.  These adults will get personalized updates and news that is strictly relevant to them. 

Will a typical press release or pitch get picked up by media the way it might today?  Probably not.  I envision a day when press releases are regularly sent directly to consumers’ mobile phones and PDAs.  Forget pitching media when we can send highly relevant, highly targeted and most importantly, USEFUL information to the people we’re ultimately trying to reach.  What if PR practitioners could send press releases or company updates directly to consumers?  It could very well happen with the way traditional media continues to disintegrate.  And what if those consumers could send PR practitioners direct feedback about the products/brands that we’re marketing?  Certainly this group of consumers will be far more tech savvy than previous generations and the crumbling walls of media will only continue to put marketers and their audience on a much more intimate plane.  If the media, marketers and consumers represent three distinct groups today, in 10-20 years these groups will probably be indistinguishable - instead, we’ll simply be trading information with one another.  And the success of PR will not be about the number of eyeballs but about the quality of information shared and its meaningfulness to those who receive our messages. 

So let’s move beyond those New York Times hits, and let’s try to think about ways to actively reach and engage consumers instead of simply talking at them.  Sounds quite refreshing to me. 

A recent CNN story about political attack ads explored negative ads in American politics. These are definitely not a new phenomenon. The fear-inducing “Daisy” ad for Lyndon B. Johnson was devastating for Goldwater in the 1964 presidential campaign. The Willie Horton ad was a huge factor in the 1988 presidential campaign.

Social media has changed a lot of the rules for politics and business in general. We’re just starting to see how much of an impact this will have as the first presidential campaign since the explosion of social media heats up.
Now anyone with a laptop and a cursory understanding of video editing can reach a huge audience without the traditional barriers to entry. A negative campaign ad mashup of the famous 1984 Apple Super Bowl ad resonated with Obama supporters earlier this year when it replaced the image of “Big Brother” with Hillary Clinton. It will be interesting to see how these types of videos influence the presidential election as we get closer to the final vote in November.

The discussion about negative political ads got us thinking. How do these tactics apply to the business world?

The exciting thing about social media is that anyone now can make a video that could reach a huge audience. A huge community can also easily come together to share ideas about a specific topic. Unfortunately, however, anonymity often doesn’t help dialogue as some people leave comments they wouldn’t make if their real names and faces were somehow required. This is one of the biggest problems with political attack ads. It is often not clear who creates them, and they never contribute to meaningful dialogue.

The best way for companies to engage their customers using social media is to use be open and honest with them. Blogs, forums and other social media can be useful platforms for encouraging legitimate discussion of issues and can provide a mechanism for customers to give feedback.

We’re CarryOn Communication and we support this message!

A recent guest post on TechCrunch by Dan Ackerman-Greenberg, co-founder of a viral video marketing company, touched a nerve with readers. He shared “secret strategies” behind many of the viral videos that appear on YouTube and elsewhere on the Internet. What is striking about the post is that he was willing to share so unapologetically some controversial tactics used to promote viral videos.

Among the shady YouTube tactics Ackerman-Greenberg outlined are the use of misleading titles, creating fake user accounts, creating false controversy by posting phony comments back and forth, deleting comments they don’t like, paying bloggers to post videos and more. The post generated about 500 comments, mostly decrying these tactics.

First, people shouldn’t be surprised that these tactics are being used by some to push viral videos. The ultimate search for marketers is to reach the elusive youth demographic. The potential to reach such a huge audience makes us all consider how to get our message to them.

So, back to the angry response of many TechCrunch readers …

What are they expecting? Don’t most videos that appear on the most viewed page have some agenda? Of course they do. One comment by “rico” says it well: “i know a lot of people would like to keep their youtube experience pure - heaven forbid their viewing of cat videos and snl skits be tainted by marketing, but don’t get angry just because someone figured out how to make money in a creative way.”

YouTube and other social media resources are a great way to reach a lot of people. We think that it is just not worth it to use unethical tactics. It’s a good rule of thumb in PR that if something could embarrass your client if found out, then don’t do it.

Ultimately, good content is key to any viral video’s success. If done correctly, hundreds of thousands of potential customers may view your message. But that is not really the end goal, is it? While stupid videos like this one mentioned by Ackerman-Greenberg may generate a lot of views, we doubt that it is really going to influence the company’s bottom line. It is hard to correlate a large number of views with actual actions taken by consumers, voters, etc. But that doesn’t mean that it’s not worth creating good viral videos. If the video encapsulates your brand well and inspires people to act, it can have a huge impact.

Greenberg states, “You simply can’t expect to post great videos on YouTube and have them go viral on their own, even if you think you have the best videos ever. These days, achieving true virality takes serious creativity, some luck, and a lot of hard work.” Yeah, that is probably true, but we believe that there are more ethical ways of “greasing the wheel.” Doing it the wrong way just gives our profession a bad name and ultimately hurts our clients.

Let us know what you think. Post a comment or two.

Dear PR Student –

I recently read an article by Paul Holmes titled A Manifesto for the 21st Century Public Relations Firm where he very succinctly recapped the Internet revolution and the role of PR, advertising, etc.

His basic premise was that one discipline can never claim ownership of the online medium, but that public relations has failed so far to even make a case for its rightful leadership in developing strategies to help clients make the most of the medium.

The reason he called it “rightful leadership” was because the Internet is really and truly a public relations medium – all about information and education and it gave everyone the opportunity to earn attention. And if something smelled funny, you can call B.S and share your POV on the subject. And now, with the second generation of the Web (buzz word: Web 2.0) being all about community and sharing, I think we all in the industry are fiddling and tweaking and brainstorming and recommending and uncovering (little by little) authentic communication strategies.

With that said, Mr. Holmes’ theory that PR needs to take its rightful throne is truly inspiring, and should be for all of us in the industry, and to those PR students sitting in their PR classes.

How are we going do it? And how will the next generation help us?

I leave you with this thought.

I can’t wait for the day a 21-year old intern comes in for an interview without a single iota of “PR experience” on their resume. Instead, their sales pitch is, “Well, I do have 10 + years of firsthand experience developing UGC content and sharing it with friends, plus bookmarking stuff I like on my del.ic.ious page. I also like to share video and photos with all my friends from my mobile phone. Did I mention I have a personal blog where I review gadgets just for fun? I think it gets about one million views a week.”

You see, PR is not like sports, where a rookie stud can come in and hit 50 homeruns and become a leader right away. In PR, unfortunately maybe, there is a “climb the ranks” approach. But with social media becoming so important, I can almost see the day where the hotshot graduate shoots right up to the clean-up spot in the lineup because they can flat out rake (that’s baseball lingo for hit the ball well).

In fact, I think we are there now…

Navigating the uneven ground of social networking continues to uncover ethical dilemmas traditional media is unconcerned with.  While marketing to children has long been considered a touchy subject, there exists a fine line between capitalizing on one of the largest influencers and convincing children they are inferior unless they purchase the endless stream of gadgets and gizmos.  Social networking sites aimed at youngsters bring these issues to the forefront.

Traditional media and advertising have the distinct advantage to claim persuasive commercial messaging is geared toward adults and therefore, ethical.  Social networking sites specifically for children are another story.  As seen in this CNET article, virtual worlds are inherently commercial.  Kids are encouraged to buy virtual goods to make their avatars “happy.”  This early form of consumerism paired with the traditional Web based advertising targeting children could spell long term consequences.

As new opportunities present themselves, marketers and consultants must carry a sense of accountability to ensure an ethical use of messaging.  Explosively popular mediums like virtual worlds give marketers the opportunity to be judicious in how they leverage them.  Just as the Joe Camel debate brought advertising to children to the public’s eye, will virtual worlds spark similar interest?