Public Relations

Corporate Communications – The Whale Penis Story

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, External Communications, Public Relations and tagged , , , , , .

Here’s something you simply couldn’t make up if you tried. Some Russian automotive manufacturer decides to upholster the seats of their latest blingmobile in – yes, obviously – whale penis leather. For the hard of thinking, that’s the tanned skin of a whale’s penis. For the puerile, yes, it came in four skin colours.

 Pamela Anderson gets involved, because, obviously (again) she can’t bear to think of the plight of the whales’ penises. Sends email to Russians. Russians decide not to use whale penis leather any more. Issue a retraction. Everyone happy.

 Now, listen up. The serious message in this is…………………..no, you’re right. Who cares. Enjoy it for what it is.

Social Media – A Presence On Youmytwidioboobespace

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, Evaluation, External Communications, Public Relations, Social Media and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

Some time ago, I suggested the imminent coalescing of one or more social media – as the only real way that they can survive individually is by broadening their offer and thus encroaching on each other’s space. (It’s my space! No, it’s not, it’s TwinkedIn.) Just in case you’re not an avid follower of my random – but increasingly accurate – musings, you can catch up here.

Hurry up, the rest of us aren’t going to wait all day.

Right. Anyway, the point is that I’ve just received my first request though LinkedIn to be someone’s bitch follower (or was it that she wanted to be my follower?) on Twitter. Oh, but yes. The gradual merging of media has started and who knows where it will end. As an aside, I cannot see how the Twitter/LinkedIn deal is going to work – LinkedIn has already taken on some of the aspects of Facebook, as people forget that it’s a business tool and post quick updates on their musical tastes – and the culture of Twitter (the Twattish behaviour, if you like) will not mix well with the orignal culture of LinkedIn.

Be that as it may. This is the beginning – as I’ve said several times before – of the end, specifically the end of the social media free-for-all that exists now. So – if you’re a corporate, and you’re thinking of dipping your toe – perhaps even investing something in it – is now the time?

Remember Betamax. You don’t want to be Twitter-savvy, if it turns out that Wave is the future – and yes, OK, I know that’s a bit faux-naif. (Qui? Moi?)

But social media, as a business tool – marketing, comms and to a certain extent, sales – does not deliver tangible benefit. And while it’s still sorting itself out, it’s unlikely to. So curb your enthusiasm – because I know you’re just busting to get involved – and let’s see how it shakes down.

It won’t take long, mark my words……..

Crisis Management – Yes, Stupid, You Need A Plan

Posted on by in Crisis Management, Crisis Management Guides, External Communications, Public Relations and tagged , , , , , , .

Following on from news of Burson Marsteller’s research in to European companies’  level of crisis-preparedness – I wrote about it recently – which revealed (in addition to such gems as ‘crises may affect share price’) that while 60% of companies polled had encountered some sort of crisis, 53% didn’t have a plan – PRWeek sees fit to inform its readership that “Crisis Comms Is (a) Hot Topic”. (What is this? Some sort of uncontrolled outbreak of the Galloping Bleedin’ Obviousnesses?)

Now, in fairness (because, when all’s said and done, I’m a reasonably fair bloke) PRWeek is reporting that ‘more than 60 communicators from large international corporations across the EMEA region were set to meet in London to discuss the findings” (of the Burson-Marsteller report).  Which I find both terrifying and very difficult to believe in equal measure – what are 60 communicators going to do with the loosely-structured, scaremongering collection of motherhood statements that is the B-M report? Will they agree with the statistics – ie 36 of their number have experienced a crisis, while 32 of them don’t have a plan in place? And will the 28 who do then jeer and point at the others?

I suspect, given that the keynote speaker at this – judging by the breathless PRWeek copy (“Senior comms executives were set to convene this week to thrash out crisis comms strategies in the wake of new research” – oh, please) – hastily-arranged gathering, is the owner of a security and risk management advisory firm, that this is more of a paid-for training session cum conference. But, hey, call me an old cynic.

Two things then. All you 60 communicators set to gather in London – what are you doing? If you haven’t got a crisis plan – and you don’t know where to start –  don’t spend your money on coming to London to listen to a lecture. Get in touch with the CIPR or the PRCA and ask for their recommendations on a crisis management consultant, and then go and have a conversation. Quick-smart, choppy-chop.

Thing two. PRWeek. Instead of reporting this horseshit in a breathless fashion, could we please, please have a three page feature on creating a robust crisis management plan – some case histories maybe? You could even shadow one of the 32 of the 60 who don’t have a plan as he or she goes through the process of getting one together. Just a thought.

Corporate Communications – Doing God’s Work?

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, External Communications, Public Relations.

Goldman Sachs is an organisation that has always fascinated me – partly because a friend worked there for a while – but mostly because no-one really knew anything about it. It was mostly rumour and speculation, about the codes of silence, the 24-hours days, the cult(-ish) behaviours and, obviously, the massive hessian bags of money that lined every corridor in their office buildings. (OK, I made the last bit up.) And there was the mythical partner status, conferred upon only the most deserving and diligent of employees in a special ceremony that culminated in the bestowing of a personal licence to print money.

Be that as it may. What piqued my interest further was its communications operation. I met one of the team not so long ago and she was everything I would have expected, in that she would tell me that she’d done some ridiculous number of interviews (18 I think) to get the job and she most definitely wouldn’t tell me anything else about it.

The Goldman Sachs comms team works at not getting coverage – and does it very well indeed. It is, of course, run by the highest paid man in corporate communications – one Lucas van Praag (my apologies to him if I’ve spelt it wrong) ex-Brunswick and a partner at the firm. Now, I know nothing about this, but I feel fairly confident in saying that his yearly package runs into millions. Possibly, in a good year, tens of millions.

So imagine my delight when there, in the Sunday Times, but yesterday, was an interview with Lloyd Blankfein, chairman and CEO of Goldman Sachs and the head of the London concern (5,500 employees and counting), one Michael Sherwood. Have a read here.

It throws up loads of questions – not about the business of GS – but more about their comms strategy and whether, for an institution that (according to itself) never fails, it hasn’t, in some manner, dropped a bollock with this one. I’m presuming that this is a one-off – we’re not going to see a new, friendly Goldman Sachs popping up everywhere – and I guess you have to admire Mr Van Praag for getting the people to do it – accustomed, as they must be, to keeping their heads down and avoiding ostentation and example.

But I cannot help but thinking they’d have been better off drawing the blinds and turning down the music, and waiting until the mob goes away. Yes, I’ll buy what the article proposes – GS is being tarred with the same brush as the banks that really f***ed up over the credit crunch, and that’s damaging to it and, potentially, to the way it operates. One potential solution? Make it less mystical – open the doors, show people there’s nothing to be afraid of, explain that the money is reward for doing the job – the job that keeps the rest of the world turning.

Only the article didn’t. Unfortunately, Mr Blankfein didn’t come across as a very nice man – or one that in any way understands the feelings of the general population (irrespective of whether or not GS is responsible for what’s happened and those feelings). His explanation was not very convincing. Mr Sherwood talked too much about multi-million pound yachts which, apparently, he likes. Too many staffers were quoted, and in their quotations, there were the echoes of the slightly weird, slightly freakish, slightly ghoulish nature of the business. It scared me, let me tell you.

No, on balance, I think this was a piece of coverage too far. I think it would have been a piece of coverage too far even if the good times were rolling. But they’re not, and as news of a cold winter and an austere New Year gather momentum, this just seems a little undiplomatic and slightly unnecessary. Of course, it might be that GS is sticking a big middle finger up at the world and is saying, through the media, we’re bright, we work hard, we get paid a sh*tload and – oh yes – f*ck you. I hope not, but………….

(Incidentally – a small non-sequitur. Mr Sherwood of Goldman Sachs talks about buying multi-million pound yachts. Which he likes, apparently. On the other hand, his remuneration is placed at the 6 million unit-of-some-currency-or-other mark. Dollars or pounds. Not lire, obviously. Anyway – is it just me, but if you only earned 6m a year, you wouldn’t be able to afford £32m yachts, would you? No. Suffice it say, he earns a sh*tload more than the paper went away believing.)

Corporate Communications – The Boxing Metaphor (2)

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, External Communications, Public Relations and tagged , , , , .

Story of my life really – I back an almost unassailable certainty and, with my support, it rapidly turns itself into an outside chance at best, a practical impossibility at worst. So it was with the Haye/Valuev boxing extravaganza on Saturday night last – I used the fight as a metaphor for companies/organisations who are caught out in a lie. They lose respect, consumer confidence, loyalty – in effect, they get caned. So it was – obviously – to be with Haye – mouthy git, giving it all this about knocking Valuev out, comes the time to prove it, he’d get in the ring with the behemoth and – smack – good night, Vienna.

Only. Only…..he didn’t. When push came to shove, he danced round the foothills of man-mountain, nipping at Valuev’s heels, worrying his hamstrings and cutting a long one short – as you will all know, my boxing blog snorkellers – he won on points. So – firstly congratulations to Mr Haye and secondly – OK, OK, I was wrong.

But it still niggles, The metaphor was quite a good one and I think there’s something to be salvaged here. Like the company that’s called to put its money where its mouth is and prove some of its claims, Mr Haye did enough to save himself from exposure. But it wasn’t terribly convincing. It was an explanation with holes in it, that everyone knows probably isn’t the real deal.

So my metaphor still stands – David Haye is the company that’s done some burbling, bumbling and obfuscating and has wriggled off the hook. But make no mistake – no-one’s going to forget this and they’ll be waiting should this company/organisation try something similar again.  

And in my metaphor’s case, he has no choice other than to try something similar again.

Crisis Management – Who’d Have Thought It?

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, Crisis Management, External Communications, Public Relations and tagged , , , , , .

Today I is mostly loving Burson-Marsteller and their ability to keep a straight face. That most marvellous of publications, Communicate Magazine, has a story about some research that B-M has conducted into the crisis-preparedness of European companies.

I am extremely lazy, and therefore, you – dear blog snorkeller – can read it for yourself. Click the light fantastic here.

What prompts me to share it are B-M’s findings as regards the consequences of a crisis (crisis (n.) an unstable period, esp one of extreme trouble or danger in politics, economics, etc), which, apparently, can include “falling share prices, loss of corporate reputation, loss of media and/or public trust and law suits by individuals or groups”.

In other news, scientists at the Institute for Studies have discovered that water is wet, the sky is blue and petrol is frighteningly flammable.

Corporate Communications – The Boxing Metaphor

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, Crisis Management, External Communications, Public Relations and tagged , , , , , , , .

Following on from an earlier post about publicity and the rules of engagement. Taking it as read that publicity – in some form or other (publicity (n) – information that concerns a person, group, event, or product and that is disseminated through various media to attract public notice) – is the end goal of everything that we do as communicators, then – ergo – there must be rules that the professional communicator has at least an eye to when going about the task.

For my part, these include (but are not limited to) telling the truth (or at least a part of it), not misrepresenting, not insulting, not belittling and not demeaning – and, here’s a biggie, not saying anything that you cannot, if called upon to do so, back up.

Obviously, there’s a fine line here. Many moons ago, Tesco announced a new home delivery service – for those of its customers who lived in some splendour and didn’t wish to see a Tesco-branded van up their cul-de-sac (to coin a phrase). The new service involved delivery by dark green Range Rover, and the pictures of said Range Rover (along with the story) got square hectares of coverage.

I myself announced that a particular pub restaurant chain was to launch ‘Pincher’s Portions’ of chips – to solve the age old issue of wives, girlfriends and partners refusing to order their own chips and then pinching yours. (Ooooooh – it still irritates me.) Again, the story tapped into the zeitgeist and generated a decent footie pitch of coverage.

Of course, neither story was strictly based in complete fact. Tesco had one, perhaps two, Range Rovers, and the posh delivery service vanished as fast as the story did. My lovely pub restaurant chain put the Pincher’s Portion on the menu in a couple of its outlets, for a brief while. It didn’t matter at all, though – the ideas behind the stories were great and, if absolutely pushed (by some humourless killjoy) to prove they were true – well, we could.

Now the boxing metaphor. As you may know, dear blog snorkeller, on Saturday, one David Hayes is to step into the ring of pugilism and face Nikolai Valuev of Russia. Clearly, Mr Hayes’ fortune rests on the publicity he can generate around the fight, encouraging people to pay their subscriptions to watch it, and making himself more marketable. He has been most vociferous around how well he is going to do, and how is is going to knock his opponent out. There has been reams of coverage – the story has been wholly unavoidable, unless you’ve been living in an hermetically-sealed bunker somewhere for the past couple of weeks.

Unfortunately for Mr Hayes, he is going to be called upon to prove all the claims he has made. Also unfortunately, his opponent is seven foot two inches tall, and weighs 23 stone. He is – looking at it in a logical and balanced fashion – going to get spanked.

A company caught generating publicity on the back of a lie will lose the trust of its stakeholders and the impact on its corporate reputation may be mortal. If you squint a bit and look at Mr Hayes as a company, what’s going to happen to him on Saturday is exactly the same.

Public Relations – Don’t Sweat the Small Stuff

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, External Communications, Public Relations.

Another hapless ‘PR person’ achieves the dubious distinction of a mocking mention in the Evening Standard’s City Diary section. (Sadly, I can’t link to it, so you’ll simply have to accept my word on this one.)

The gist of the article was that said hapless ‘PR person’ put a call into the City desk, requesting that, when writing about Boots (the company, not the footwear), journalists should refer to the company as Alliance Boots – not just in the first para, but throughout the story. Suffice it to say – as I presume the request was couched in less-than-requestful terms – the story’s pay-off was simply “no – get a job”.

Now. We’ve all been there. Client fiercely protective of company, its reputation and its brand equity, and also – in cases where two entities have come together and combined their names – very mindful of the politics that go with it. Unfortunately, many clients also believe (and it’s not necessarily a bad thing – how else could they deal with the long hours and the sheer tedium of much of what they do?) that the company they steer, and they themselves (by default) are the most important things in the entire universe.

This, inevitably, leads them to believe that the outside world will dance to their tune and that they simply have to snap their fingers and their bidding will be done. In this case, the fingers they’re snapping take the form of a pin-stripe-suited associate at Finglebum Snide Travesti Partners, financial PR advisors of this parish. Who, mindful of their obscene retainer, pick up the ‘phone and make arses of themselves and the profession as a whole.

Journalists often have a good whinge around how the PR profession doesn’t understand their needs and their constraints. In fairness, PR people often have a whinge around how they’re treated by the media – and both parties have a point.

In this case, however, Finglebum Snide Travesti Partners let the side down. They are financial PR advisors. So advise. Tell the client that their company is getting decent coverage, and that the coverage is having the desired effect – communicating corporate messages to the required audience. Remind the client that their company is a strong one, and that the shareholders are unlikely to even notice that a journalist has not used the company’s full (proper) name. Advise the client that making an issue out of this may, actually, have an adverse effect.

Like clearly demonstrating to stakeholders that the company is run by anal-retentives, who quite clearly have too much time on their hands and therefore are not involved anywhere near enough in the frying-of-bigger-fish department.

(NB For the purpose of this post, I have made all sorts of assumptions. In the interests of providing balance, I accept that the fingers that were snapped may equally have taken the form of an in-house communications advisor. I am prepared to concede that Finglebum Snide Travesti Partners does not exist, although it probably should. I will go as far as to propose that no fingers may have been snapped at all and the ‘phone call made to the Standard’s City desk may have been an off-the-cuff, spur-of-the-moment decision by an inexperienced junior. All this being said, my point still stands.)

Corporate Communications – The Role of Publicity

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, External Communications, Public Relations and tagged , , , , , , .

Without beating about the bush – “according to public relations scholarly conventions, publicity is a small part of public relations”.

Read the full thing here.

Further, as someone else put it “publicity is not considered among the higher forms of practice.”

Bollocks. 

What is meant by ‘publicity’? In what sense is it not considered among the higher forms of practice? What practice? By whom?

If we are talking about the PR or corporate communications industries, then I would humbly point out that publicity (of some sort, on some level) is the aim of everything that we do – from writing a news release, through the creation of the annual report, via investor relations, to lobbying of public figures.

‘Stunt’ PR is one way of generating publicity (and by ‘stunt’ PR, I include use of celebrity and also the publicising of celebrities themselves through use of their own celebrity)and I firmly believe that it needs to be subject to the ethics of our trade (amongst which are don’t lie, don’t misrepresent, don’t insult, belittle or demean).

But publicity is not ‘among the forms of practice’. Publicity IS the practice. A lot of the high falutin’, self-important practitioners would do very well to remember that.

You know who you are.

Social Media – The Other End of the World

Posted on by in Communications Strategy, Evaluation, External Communications, Public Relations, Social Media and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , , , , .

As my regular blog snorkellers will know, I’ve not been backward in coming forward with my theory that social media is on its way out. This is for reasons too innumerable to mention here, including the fact that no-one’s making any money out of it, it’s being swamped by spam, the user growth figures are slowing, the user growth figures have never reflected the reality of the amount of people who sign up then never use the service again and – my favourite – because I say so.

There is another theory, however and in the spirit of fairness and balance, I give an iteration of it a hearing here. Clickety-clink – here’s the link!

(Can’t believe I just wrote that.)

The theory says that the traditional digital comms tools – email, websites – are themselves on the way out, to be subsumed into social media. The reasoning goes that social media provides opportunities to communicate and to provide content that email cannot – to summarise and paraphrase – email is one-dimensional and the social media are not. Same goes for the traditional, reasonably static website – why would you, really, when user-generated, arguably richer content pertaining to a brand or organisation is out there in the blogosphere, or posted on Facebook?

But then the theory trips up. I think it trips up because of the widespread inability to separate social media into its two component parts.

  • Something that people do in their spare time (and when they’re notworking, obviously) to keep up with friends and family, ask for advice on things that trouble/interest them and view/download jokes, clips, tracks, patches etc etc.
  • Something that simply is not working as a marketing, communications or reputation-building tool.

Just because individuals, in their day-to-day lives, may decide to run those lives via Facebook or Twitter or some combination of the two, does not make them valid, or valuable, business tools. Business requires communication without distractions, without logins, without a ‘spirit of community’ and – most importantly – without commentary from everyone who reads it. This is why email, as it is currently, works – for business purposes – so well. You can choose who receives it, you can monitor it and you can cane people who misuse it or try to hide their use of it. The thing that will change about email is how we send and receive it and what it looks like when we do send and receive it.

I also draw attention to the school of thought that says ‘ask a 20-year-old whether they’re using email’ as if this has any bearing on the matter. No, they’re not – they’re texting and using social media (well, some are, anyway) – but, quite frankly, who cares? Email is a business tool (and I include marketing and corporate comms within ‘business’) and 20-year-olds are a notoriously difficult-to-reach audience with limited appeal. You might as well ask an 80-year-old whether they’re using email for all the relevance it has.

And traditional, static websites – well, here’s a sensible post. Actually, there’s more of a place for traditional corporate websites that ever before – and why? Because, thanks to social media (and the way the bigger internet players are forcing us to behave – yes, forcing – Google SideWiki, anyone?) there’s such a slew of information that, ironically enough, the only place you’ll be able to go for reasonably accurate and (dare I say) impartial information will be the corporate website.

Now, I’d just like to make it clear – again, and mainly for my wife, who thinks I’m a cave-dwelling technophobe – that I am not either denying the existence of social media or telling anyone to stick their heads in the sand. Social media is here. Loads of people are using it. It is right and fitting that if we work in communications then we should have a knowledge of it. That being said – I repeat – do not confuse the social media that people use to run/ruin their personal lives and the social media that has all the potential to ruin your business (uncontrolled rumour and bad-mouthing) and none of the potential to materially enhance your revenues.