The Flack

Healthcare Histrionics

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Sat, 07 Nov 2009 11:34:51 PST

Dumb Michelle Bachmann had all her PR theatrics on display this week in DC. Her goal: to rally the right wing lunatic fringe to propagate anti-healthcare reform headlines, and in so doing, keep the cash flowing so she can hold on to her job. Ms. Bachmann is now ranked 8th among insurance industry beneficiaries.

She certainly pulled out all the props, including a copy of the healthcare bill wrapped in some kind of twine, a group Pledge of Allegiance (to which the Congressman who led it forgot the words), and a healthy heaping of political wack-a-dos who today pass for Republican leadership. This included crass conservative shock jock Mark Levin and House Minority Leader John Boehner who mistook the U.S. Constitution for the Declaration of Independence.

And let's not forget the TV-ready nasty visuals Ms. Bachmann's teabagger followers brought to her party (which didn't seem to bother the Minnesota or Ohio Reps.). These included posters with images of bodies at a Nazi death camp, our President painted in white face a la The Joker, and an assault rifle with the caption "Come and Take it."

Shocking, but sadly effective. One cable outlet called it "a major rally," in spite of the fact that it only drew a couple of thousand people, while The Times paid attention in its paper edition, and on its The Caucus and Prescriptions blogs. Ms. Bachmann's press aide, who quit this week, must be kicking herself.

In a battle of the Republican beauty queen bimbos, we couldn't help but notice the PR tactics of Ms. Bachmann's primary rival for the hearts and minds of America's uninformed. Sarah Palin has a date to speak tonight at a pro-life event in Wisconsin. Instead of embracing the standard GOP theatrical tactics to garner media interest, Ms. Palin has banned all media from the event.

What's more, she also intends to muzzle the audience. CNN's Political Ticker reports:

"But Palin appears to be doing her best to keep a low profile on this trip: no press will be allowed into the Milwaukee auditorium where she will speak and those who have paid the $30 admittance fee are unable to carry in cell phones, cameras, laptops, or recording devices of any kind."

The Bachmann-Palin Overdrive contrasts with two more subdued, but nonetheless effective pro-healthcare reform public appearances this week. The first featured the brilliant Bronx HS of Science grad and first-term Congressman from Florida Alan Grayson. Rep. Grayson did the math and then took to the House floor to read the expected number of people who will die in every Republican Congressional district as a result of no healthcare insurance.

The second had our President make an unannounced stop to the White House briefing room to inform the press that both the AMA and AARP have endorsed the Democrats' healthcare proposal. Some say this upstaged the Bachmann event.

Personally and professionally, I prefer my healthcare histrionics to be fact-based and more reflective of the crisis at hand. On these measures, Mr. Obama and Mr. Grayson clearly prevailed. If only the rest of cable-crazy America felt the same way, not to mention the media that caters to them.

The Reading Room

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 05 Nov 2009 13:47:26 PST

We were gathered at our bi-monthly Boys' Lunch at Michael's last month when one of "the boys," a very senior media-minded communications executive, looked at me incredulously when I said I actually read Bernoff's Groundswell, Jarvis's What Would Google Do, and Godin's Tribes, among others.

He definitely thought I was either drunk on the Kool-Aid or in need of a new life.

Just as the number of new media confabs have proliferated in recent years so have the number of published works heralding in the new world order. Many pros have forsaken these longer form media, replacing it with the Twitter cooler for keeping abreast of the changing times. Even the RSS-reader crowd has opted for the even more real-time Twitter stream for their news and info.

What you read and whom you follow speak volumes about who you are and what you know. In a New York Times media panel I recently moderated, pre-Twitter Lists, I asked NY-based tech reporter Saul Hansell what he regularly read. His answer -- paidContent, Silicon Alley Insider (now The Business Insider), TechMeme, and a few others -- provided a window into his editorial mindset, but for PR types, some insight into how his story ideas germinate.

Twitter, RSS and random web surfing aside, PR peeps should pay heed when those enmeshed in the new media/marketing space take the time to provide context to today's changed landscape. So I thought I'd compile a smattering of recent book titles worth exploring:

Josh Bernoff and Charlene Li's Groundswell
Jeff Jarvis's What Would Google Do
Ken Auletta's Googled: The End of the World as We Know It
Shel Israel's Twitterville
Chris Brogan and Julian Smith's Trust Agents
The Huffington Post Complete Guide to Blogging
David Meerman Scott's New Rules of Marketing & PR
Paul Gillin's The New Influencers
Brian Solis and Deirdre Breakenridge's Putting the Public Back in Public Relations
David Kirkpatrick The Facebook Effect: The Inside Story of the Company that's Connecting the World (Jan 2010)
Tim O'Reilly and Sara Milstein's The Twitter Book

Jeff Rutherford sent in a handful more including:

Bob Garfield's Chaos Scenario
David Meerman Scott" World Wide Rave
Adam Penenberg's Viral Loop

Enjoy and prosper. (If there are others that merit inclusion, please send along.)

Photo: Bryan Derballa/Wired.com

Follow the Leaders

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 02 Nov 2009 18:45:38 PST

What a weekend! No, I'm not referring to the Yankees two-out 9th inning rally that suddenly subdued those Hoagie-eating Philly fans. I'm talking about @ev, @biz and @jack's decision to open up Twitter Lists to more than the chosen few. It literally unleashed the curatorial curiosity in all of us.

I can't recall another more buzzed-about (and time-consuming) software application release, but then again I happen to follow Tweeps who get all a-twitter over such things. Isn't the quick uptake of Twitter Lists driven by the same sensation one feels by sharing his or her music playlists, i.e., Check out these artists I follow. Don't I have good taste?

Still, I wonder, will Twitter Lists go mainstream or stay relegated to the domain of the digital cognoscenti? I mentioned their debut at a small dinner party over the weekend, and eyes glazed over. My wife poked me to change the subject. ("You dweeb!") Oh well. Wrong crowd.

So what do Twitter Lists mean for you, PR peeps? Everything and nothing. If you want to keep abreast of real-time trends (eventually impacting all industries), then it's a God-send to be able to more easily create and follow lists of individuals driving or reporting on these trends. Conversely, if you want to accelerate the PR industry's march into oblivion through the taint of blind or uninformed story-pitching, then ignore Twitter Lists (and Twitter for that matter).

Here are links to a smattering of notable observations and resources regarding Twitter Lists since their universal debut several days ago:

Listorious (@listorious) - How prescient that the company that started Muckrack (journalists on Twitter) and the Shorty Awards would also launch a site that would capture and organize the exploding multitude of lists on Twitter.

Robert Scoble (@scobleizer) is no stranger to the tech and social media trends enveloping our world. He immediately embraced the democratization of Twitter Lists and set about the time-consuming task of curating his own followees. Hey Robert, thanks for doing this. Ever think about taking a break from the social media swirl? There's a world-class golf course right near your home. (Now that would make news: "Scoble Takes a Day Off to Play a Round of Golf")

Chris Brogan (@chrisbrogan) "I just took a look into creating my first ever Twitter list. I’m listed on over 1500 at this writing, so I figured I’d give it a go. Immediately, I realized what I’m not going to like about them: they will exclude people..."

Jeff Jarvis (@jeffjarvis) "Amazing how many Twitter lists have 0 followers. How will they be spread?"

Jeremy Porter (@journalistics) "Twitter Lists for Journalism and PR"

Wall Street Journal Digits Blog - "The Twittering Masses Get Lists"

The New York Times social media editor Jen Preston (@NYT_jenpreston) "We'll soon be launching a landing page w/directory to NYT Twitter lists. Suggestion for a list? Send to twitterlists@nytimes.com

digital media|minute "How Twitter Lists Can Kill Google"

Mashable "Twitter Lists: Only You Can Help Mashable Beat Barack Obama :)"

Mark Drapeau (@cheeky_geeky) on Mediaite "The Emerging Twitter List Arms Race"

PR Newser (@prnewser) "What Twitter Lists Mean for PR"

TheNextWeb.com - "The Brilliance of Twitter Lists and Suggestions for Improvements"

"Twitter Lists In Detail or, 'Yo Dawg, I Heard U Like Lists!'"

Read Write Web - "Ten Twitter Lists You can Grab and Embed Right Now"

The advent of Twitter Lists has its ups and downs for PR pros - mostly ups. I've long advocated for PR peeps to be judicious about whom they choose to follow on Twitter -- to add value and avoid the superfluous. Twitter Lists offers a useful shortcut for finding those worth following, assuming you have faith in others' curatorial capabilities.

This PR pro currently has nine lists he follows, a number that is sure to grow. Still, I tweeted the following over the weekend:

So where's the app that will let me merge (and de-dupe) Twitter lists into one Twitter-Cooler uber-stream?

I suspect that Listorius, however fab it is today, will quickly atomize diminishing its utility

Don't get me wrong. I love Listorious, and frankly, it's the only game in town right now. My advice: take a visit and drill down to find those lists, and the curators thereof, worth a follow. Not unlike Guy Kawasaki's AllTop, it lets you easily keep abreast of what impacts you (and your clients), but in real time.

Restoring Trust

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 30 Oct 2009 09:07:48 PDT

The Council of PR Firms executive director Kathy Cripps had a twinkle in her eye as she looked out across the expanse of The Yale Club’s Grand Ballroom in New York City yesterday morning. In spite of these recessionary times, the Council’s annual Critical Issues Forum drew a full house and a fair share of industry luminaries, many of whom are featured in this video.

All the big and mid-sized agencies were there, except perhaps for one, to hear the all-star panel featuring General Electric CMO Beth Comstock, PBS “Nightly Business Report co-anchor Susie Gharib, Morgan Stanley’s Jim Wiggins, retired GM corp comms chief Steve Harris and APCO CEO and Council president-elect Margery Kraus.

The always provocative and engaging Len Schlesinger, now president of Babson College, and formerly a top business executive and Harvard B School professor, handled moderating duties with his usual aplomb.

In the crowd, I was able to spot Harold Burson, MS&L’s Jim Tsokanos, Lou Capozzi, outgoing Council president and Ketchum CEO Ray Kotcher and his colleague Rob Flaherty, president of Ketchum who doubled as the event’s host, Ralph Katz, Andy Cooper and Anne Green of Cooper Katz, Maureen Lippe of Lippe Taylor, Abby Gouverneur Carr of Bliss PR, Lynn Casey of Padilla Speer Beardsley, F-H’s Nancy Seliger, and too many others to recall.

Of course, my trusty digital audio recorder was battery-challenged so I was only able to get a few choice audio bites from the panel discussion (that I thankfully tweeted). The conversation focused on how to re-build public trust in corporate America and the sorry state of the news media. Here’s a random smattering of paraphrased sentiments:

Jim Wiggins (joking): Perhaps GE should manufacture those mind-erasing devices used in “Men in Black”

Susie Gharib recommended that the audience go see Michael Moore’s latest film if only for the simplistic way in which it shows how we got into this mess in the first place.

Jim Wiggins: We ‘get it’ on the issue of executive compensation. Though it will probably not be enough to satisfy Michael Moore.

Susie Gharib suggested Goldman Sachs take its $20 billion in bonuses and "give it to people who don't have jobs or homes." (which prompted this PR person to interject from the audience "It would be seen as a PR ploy.")

Steve Harris: At GM, we've trained 10,000 people to use social media, and keep another 15,000 in the loop.

Susie Gharib: I agree with public perception of media as being biased. Old style objective journalism is dead...except at PBS

Beth Comstock: At GE, it's a fundamental re-set. We don't see things going back to where they were. One statistic says that jobs won't return until 2017 in this new re-set world.

Following the panel, we broke for lunch during which David Gergen and Len Schlesinger took the stage. I don’t know if it’s his southern and mellifluous cadence, but one could easily understand why Mr. Gergen has served as an advisor to a handful of U.S. Presidents across both sides of the political aisle.

He compared President Obama to newbie President John F. Kennedy, but acknowledged Kennedy’s command presence during the 13-day Cuban Missile Crisis as perhaps the single biggest display of executive leadership in this nation’s history. Here are a few (paraphrased) notable quotables from Mr. Gergen:

Were entering a new normal. The old normal is not returning.

Wall Street and the media are two institutions that have the least public confidence (from the JFK School of Government’s annual study)

Business is not off the hook. It's on probation.

…not sub-prime mortgages, but sub-prime leadership (citing Bill George’s explanation of why the bubble burst)

This year at Harvard Biz School. students self-organized to take an oath to serve the public good (70% took it)

Was death of Walter Cronkite the passing of an individual or the passing of an age?

We've taken another notch downward in last 2-3 years with the growing viciousness of what's on the blogosphere

The viciousness of blogosphere has migrated to cable, (eg, Olbermann, O’reilly)

If the pendulum doesn't swing back, we're going to entertain ourselves to death (on the type of news programming we’re seeing)

All in all, the Council should be proud of the timeliness and overall substance of yesterday’s discourse at the Critical Issues Forum. More tweets can be found by Twitter-searching this hashtag: #CIF09.

The Media Bypass

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 26 Oct 2009 14:28:28 PDT

Ad Age's Mike Bush today visits with a number of PR pros who wax poetic on how their clients bypass the media filter to reach customers directly.

We've covered this for a few years now, but it hasn't gone so far as to dismiss the value of media relations for advancing a client's communications objective.

Bush writes:

"...as the body count of magazines and daily newspapers continues to rise and the once-robust news and feature holes of surviving publications shrink along with reporting staffs, some marketers have given up on the traditional path to media coverage: pitching journalists.some marketers have given up on the traditional path to media coverage: pitching journalists."

Theoretically, perhaps, but in reality the number of pitchable (or should I say "engageable") "media" outlets is actually greater than at any other time in history. It's just that we, as PR pros, need to look beyond the imprimatur of a Newsweek or Fortune to those virtual voices that may exert even greater influence over the specific audience with which we wish to connect.

And it's not an either-or scenario. The creation and dissemination of original (and reporter unfettered) content will continue to grow in importance. PR exec Mark Hass shares his rationale for using YouTube for one of his automotive clients:

"They [the client] still have the usual car-and-driver folks drive and write about their cars, but that's becoming much less important than [it] used to be...You build a channel on YouTube and you get millions of views...And these people are coming from all over, and it's more about their interest in your product, as opposed to the readership and viewership of a particular medium. It's horizontal. If you wanted to reach that many people using traditional media, you would have to pitch and place in dozens of outlets."

Who among us can disagree? Plenty. There remains a vast swath of corporate communicators and their bosses in the C-suite for which a Twitterfeed, company blog, YouTube or Facebook page takes a distant backseat to a prominent piece in Business Week or The Journal or an appearance on "Today" or "Squawk Box."

Believe it or not, even a client's by-line in the world's most popular (and conversation catalyzing) blog Huffington Post isn't viewed by many as having the same value as a piece in The New York Times or the New Yorker. (Though the latter often end up being linked to by the former.) There exist countless (a majority of?) PR firms and pros who remain mired in the notion that the press clip is the end result -- as opposed to the customer, investor, legislative or regulatory action a piece of content or conversation may produce.

Unfortunately (or fortunately for many), this dynamic will persist as long as clients measure and pay their firms for ink and airtime impressions. If you happen to be in San Diego for the PRSA International Conference Nov 7-9, stop by our session late Sunday to hear more about the nexus of PR and social media from some of the best practitioners in the field.

Jackson Intervention

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 23 Oct 2009 04:33:48 PDT

With Michael Jackson mania poised to start all anew, it's curious to watch how Mr. Jackson, once k.a. "Wacko Jacko," may emerge as a whole new fellow.

Here's a tweet from the west coast editor for The Daily Beast:

KateAurthur Kudos to the Michael Jackson fans mad about the movie whitewashing the "grim truth" for the name of their website: this-is-not-it.com

Apparently, there's so much "the crowd" will take when it comes to spinning the truth. But who's to blame: Ken Sunshine, the Jackson family's hired-hand whose firm orchestrated the fawning media events in the aftermath of Mr. Jackson's demise, or SONY Pictures whose Jackson territory-HQ'd parent company spent $60 million for the rights to the new Jackson docu-pic?

My guess is both. Wasn't it SONY that gave the LA Times an exclusive look at select portions of the new film in exchange for a glowing Jackson tribute this past Sunday? And didn't Mr. Sunshine and company gloss over the singer's death by conjuring every known media asset of the singer's former triumphs, in effect drowning out anything that could be construed as deleterious to his legacy?

Can you blame either? Isn't this how they earn their keep? SONY revives Jackson's moonwalking days to draw boffo box office, while Sunshine earns re-invents Mr. Jackson so he's worth more dead than alive.

It's just that these revisionist tactics, while once sufficient to prevail with mainstream entertainment media scribes and programs, have less of an effect in today's RSS-fueled media democracy. Here's an excerpt from the release posted on the This-Is-Not-It website:

Who We Are : friends and fans of Michael, including some who were with him the last weeks of his life and who have witnessed to many of the events that led to his death. The latter group got so concerned about Michael Jackson’s state that on June 21^st, they decided to stage the first step on an intervention. They wrote him letters asking him to stop the tour if he was not up to it. Michael Jackson received these letters on June 24^th. The second step of the intervention was never to take place.

The New York Times today also weighed in with film director Ken Ortega's glowing words about Mr. Jackson, but also acknowledged the big spin now underway with its headline:

"Revising the Image of Jackson’s Final Days"

Again, I'll be curious to see whether the film's choreographed adulation will yield a citizen backlash, especially now that the statute of limitations has passed for the real truthsayers to emerge without being accused of having poor taste.

Apple's Vaunted PR?

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 20 Oct 2009 08:13:18 PDT

Boy oh boy. Apple (AAPL) is on a real tear. Boffo earnings and equally boffo rumors including one alleging that Verizon is testing a 4G iPhone (take that AT&T!), keeps that brand in a state of PR nirvana.

As a result, the company's legendary PR department continues to grow in stature. Deservedly? I wonder.

It seems like eons ago when Apple couldn't get any mainstream respect. Does the name Gil Amelio ring a bell? After my former Intel client jumped ship to join Apple's PR team, she invited me to submit a proposal to help extend the company's rabid following beyond those die-hard attendees at the annual Macworld Expos.

Separately, for our Ziff-Davis Publishing client, we invited local TV reporters to accompany one of our Mac enthusiast magazine editors to a computer superstore to conduct a Pepsi-like challenge. The Mac prevailed on a number of levels. Hence, the PR idea was born: we would propose to Apple that they challenge the Wintel PC juggernaut in cities everywhere. As a veteran of the cola, burger, sneaker and toothpaste wars, I was up for a fight. Bring 'em on!

The proposal went nowhere, though today I smile when I see Apple's "I'm a PC and I'm a Mac" advertising creatives. Maybe it was time to give the Cupertino company another try? I noticed that Apple was about to open a shiny new store (see pic above) in my hometown. I tweeted on it a few times, but thought I could do more.

I dropped a note to the Apple PR person listed on previous store opening releases offering Flatiron's services to help engage local media influentials. No reply. (Not even a thanks, but no thanks.) No biggie. After the store finally opened on Saturday, I checked back to see whether Apple's vaunted PR machine succeeded in gaining any local (eg,. traffic-building) media traction.

I then learned the secret of how Apple PR rolls. The company issued, via PR Newswire, a media advisory inviting "accredited" journalists to call a number in northern CA to gain access to the store one hour before the doors open to the public. PR Newswire?! Could this be the store-opening PR team's main modus operandi? The media coverage spoke for itself:

Nothing from Newsday, The New York Times, News12 L.I., Anton Publications, FioS Channel 1, L.I. bureaus of local broadcast, News 55 L.I.... Not even the local weekly. But then again, this is Apple. One-to-one media engagement? Not necessary. The store will be packed regardless.

Ironically, it is Microsoft that seems to be deploying the Pepsi Challenge: the day before the new Apple store opened, Reuters moved a piece touting Microsoft's first retail store.

Photo: Peter Himler with a Canon PowerShot SX20 IS

Bribing Bloggers

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Mon, 19 Oct 2009 11:44:54 PDT

PR Newser's Joe Ciarallo and AllThingsD's Peter Kafka's eyebrows were respectively raised when a PR (?) rep for the upcoming ad:tech conference attempted to barter for their editorial coverage.

Here's a piece of the proposed offer as outlined in an email:

"ad:tech will provide:

* Twitter announcement of your involvement with ad:tech New York to our 6,800+ followers.
* Your choice of: a free pass to the exhibit hall (valued at $35) or 35% off a full conference pass."

"We ask you provide:

* No less than 3 posts about ad:tech New York on Twitter, Facebook or your blog. Suggested postings: a session you're interested in, why you like ad:tech, the exhibitors that you want to see or technologies that you are interested in learning about. What you share is up to you-it just needs to be posted by November 1."

Yikes! What is the world coming to? Have the lines blurred so much that outright bribery for news coverage is accepted in some circles? I recognize that the IAB has come out forcefully against the new FTC rules for bloggers, but I imagine that many bloggers will find the ad: tech enticement, well, sufficiently enticing to take the bait.

Separately, I noticed a tweet today from a mommy-blogging friend in which she waxes pr-poetic
about Vail Resorts.

"Although my family often braves the perennially icy slopes here in the Northeast, nothing compares to the awesome ski terrain in the Rocky Mountains. Vail Resorts run 5 of the top ski resorts- Vail, Beaver Creek, Keystone, Breckinridge, and Heavenly – each of which has come up with winter plans of exciting innovations and celebrations., tantalized at the massive plans for each mountain it appears Colorado will be the place to be this winter."

The post was so PR-positive I had to wonder whether this was a pay-for-play gig or perhaps a ticket to an all-expense paid family ski trip. I then noticed the disclosure at the bottom: I attended a press luncheon at Gramercy Tavern in New York City with the folks from Vail Resorts to learn about all their plans at each resort for the upcoming winter season.
My my, all that adulation in exchange for a free lunch? Well, it was at Gramercy Tavern, Danny Meyer's tony eatery that earned three New York Times stars when last I checked. Still, she could have asked about the (sobering) prices of this season's lift tickets to create some balance. Do the FTC's new blogger rules apply to free lunches?

Update (10/17) - ad:tech's Mike Flynn offers an apology. (Truth is Mike, ad:tech is a fab event whose speakers/topics alone merit blogger/reporter interest/attendance.

Peter, and all,

Please accept our apologies. We recognize we made a foolish error. You can see our full apology at http://www.adtechblog.com/blog/d...tail/apologies/ .

Sincerely,

Mike Flynn,
Event Director, ad:tech North America
mike flynn | Homepage | 10.17.09 - 1:44 pm | #

Sidewiki's PR-ospects

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 14 Oct 2009 07:33:04 PDT

The digital marketing cognoscenti are nearly unanimous in their advice to newbie clients seeking to manage/advance their brands' online reputations. Listen first! After all, how could a company know where to apply its marketing/PR muscle (and tools of engagement) without knowing what is being said about it?

Listening to (or monitoring) the online conversation is so essential that it has spawned a cottage industry of specialist providers. Among them: Radian6, Converseon, Visible Technologies, Crimson Hexagon, DNA13, Trackur, Scout Labs, and too many others to remember. The price of admission: the ability to capture and organize voluminous amounts of brand or product-specific consumer and news-generated content derived from Twitter, the blogosphere, websites, group discussions, web comments, and even offline news sites, etc.

Many "conversation mining" companies also claim to automate the process of "sentiment analysis," but be wary of this. To date, this holy grail capability remains somewhat rudimentary, i.e., "positive, negative or neutral," given the myriad nuances that define the nature of a conversation. This will change over the next year or two as AI algorithms grow in sophistication.

Today, MediaPost's Laurie Sullivan draws our attention to a new, but potentially significant development for those of us charged with online reputation management. It's Google's Sidewiki toolbar about which Ms. Sullivan writes:

The toolbar, called Sidewiki, which launched in September, provides a venue for venting and posting derogatory comments on virtually any Web site that only those who install the toolbar can read. And although many realize that Google never intended that the toolbar be used for evil, some believe the Mountain View, Calif. company's innovation could create a nightmare for marketers and Web site owners if they choose not to download and install the tool.

Google claims that its own algorithm has a built-in capacity to ferret out non-useful (or destructive?) comments on Sidewiki. A Google spokesperson:

"Rather than ordering entries chronologically, we use a unique algorithm that incorporates various signals about the entries to rank them in terms of usefulness. The signals include language modeling for the text, and information we know about the author, such as the quality of past Sidewiki entries he or she has written.
The community using the tool monitors Sidewiki entries by voting up content that is useful and informative, and voting down irrelevant or unhelpful posts. Similarly, the community can flag any illegal, pornographic or copyrighted content by using the 'Report Abuse' button."

"What Would Google Do" author Jeff Jarvis even took issue with Sidewiki, less for the challenges its secret society of brand detractors might potentially pose to PR pros, and more for putting the conversation his site generates behind a "hedge." On September 23, he posted on BuzzMachine:

"Google is trying to take interactivity away from the source and centralize it...It takes comments away from my blog and puts them on Google. That sets up Google in channel conflict vs me...It robs my site of much of its value... On a practical level, only people who use the Google Toolbar will see the comments left using it and so it bifurcates the conversation and puts some of it behind a hedge."

Stephen Foley, iCyte CEO (and an Aussie in New York) has taken up the charge to prove that Google may be compromising its "Don't Be Evil" mantra. In a post titled "Sidewiki Gone Mad," he writes:

"I have a nice house. I have spent many years building it. I have a large fence out the front. Up until yesterday no-one could write on my fence, but that has all changed. Now anyone can write anything they like on my front fence...."

Others see the tool as a "next generation TripAdvisor." While it's too soon to predict Sidewiki's uptake, reputation managers (and the mining companies they employ) should pay heed to the perilous potential this tool holds. In other words, sign up and listen.

World Series PR Pitch

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 13 Oct 2009 08:02:48 PDT

It made perfect sense. Why not glom onto the current national obsession for the national pastime to spark media interest in your company's predictive technologies?

I'm speaking of course about the baseball playoffs, and more specifically about the two teams that will end up in the season-ending best-of-seven.

One enterprising company claims to have analyzed some 40 years of baseball stats to conclude that this year's World Series will be an all-southern California affair. In fact, the quants at Information Builders went so far as to predict the winner. Here's a take from the pitch letter:

"To come up with their prediction, the company analyzed 40 years of baseball statistics from all of the teams that made the playoffs such as winning percentage, runs scored, batting average, total extra base hits, earned run average and fielding percentage. As a result, Information Builders was able to predict The Los Angeles Dodgers will defeat the Los Angeles Angels of Anaheim in the 2009 Fall Classic."

As we all know, the quality of the pitch matters little if the batter is inherently predisposed. I mean if I were to receive this, I would probably give it short shrift given my predilection for the prospects of the New York Yankees. In this case, the pitch recipient was Larry Dignan, editor of ZDNet and an avid Philly fan. His take :

"But before pitching someone the PR teams should at least check a locale or two. I’m a tweener between New York and Philly. Do you honestly think I’m going to be hip to a Dodgers World Series win? And can I really take a predictive modeling exercise seriously that left out my Phillies?"

I suppose the LA Times sports or technology desks might have been a better place to start, but then again Dignan did finagle a hit out of the pitch.

The FTC Tête-à-Tête on Twitter

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 09 Oct 2009 09:43:36 PDT

If you've been following the digital discourse set off by the alleged $11,000 fine levied this week by the FTC against some bloggers, then you might enjoy Thursday evening's Twitter exchange between BuzzMachine's Jeff Jarvis and Mediashift's Mark Glazer (@mediatwit).

In case you've been out of the country, the FTC finally instituted its guidelines designed to ferret out commercial deception in the social spheres. Mathew Ingram managed to tease out the tête-à-tête by twipping off Jeff to Mark's POV on the new rules.

Here's the exchange as it unfolded in 140-character twincrements:

mathewi: @jeffjarvis? RT @mediatwit: I think the FTC rules are good. I doubt they will enforce every tiny thing and any push for transparency is good

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Good, God, Mark, you endorse the FTC rules in a tweet? Shall we discuss govt interference in public speech? The 1st Amendment?

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit And I don't buy the FTC's pr on this: 'Oh, don't worry about us.' What matters is the rules. Successors will enforce.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit But do the FTC rules extend to journalists on papers, magazines? No. So bloggers become 2nd class citizens w/fewer rights.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Of course, transparency is good. But you think govt should define & enforce it just for a) bloggers and b) celebs but not hacks?

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis And what shouldn't be enforced? Are you defending blogger's rights to deceive people with reviews?

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Then use existing fraud laws against anyone who defrauds (including the press). Don't single out bloggers.

mathewi: @jeffjarvis: hey, maybe @mediatwit was compensated by the FTC for that positive tweet -- that would be so meta :-)

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Let's push for transparency in govt first. And business. And journalism. Bloggers are citizens talking.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Government regulation of speech chills speech. It is a 1st Amendment matter. We should be defending speech.

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis Defending the 1st Amendment is one thing. Defending deceptive business practices, false advertisements on blogs is different.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit If I say something nice about BestBuy after speaking there I'm now liable. What's deceptive there? If Pogue does, he's not. Huh?

jeffjarvis: RT @mathewi: @jeffjarvis: hey, maybe @mediatwit was compensated by the FTC for that positive tweet -- that would be so meta :-)

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis What kind of speech will be chilled? Reviews of products on blogs? You really think bloggers will stop reviewing things?

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit See my Post, Mark. It's much more complex than 140 characters.

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis @mathewi The FTC is totally right! [This tweet paid for by the FTC] #joking

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Yes, Mark, they will. They are now in jeopardy. Pogue isn't. Papers should be defending bloggers right. As I'd think you would

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit I was about to say something nice about BestBuy but I am indeed liable. I'm chilled. No deception. Life under govt regulation.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Now say something nice about the LAT, CNET, Conde, NYT, EW, Merc, Nieman and then you must disclose or risk fine.

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis I will concede that disclosure is good, but if the FTC is really going to enforce in every tiny case, there would be a problem.

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis Why can't you say something nice about Best Buy after speaking there? Just disclose. I would want that as your reader.

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis If I write in-depth about PBS, LAT, USC, I do disclose that I work or worked for them. It makes sense to me.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit I do disclose. http://bit.ly/ZuP0x (expand) That is my choice. I don't want it by govt. fiat and under risk of prosecution. Do you? Truly?

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Only in-depth? What about a tweet? You're a media critic and you've been paid by media you write about. I trust you. Govt? No.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit Murdoch wasn't right about Delph, MySpace, LondonPaper.....

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis No, you are right. I like the idea of disclosure, but after

jeffjarvis: RT @mediatwit No, you're right. I like the idea of disclosure, but after looking at the rules, they don't make sense. Doubt they'd be legal

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit bravo, mark. i salute you.

mediatwit: @jeffjarvis I agree that these rules have nothing to do with people who are NOT being paid by companies currently.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit We agree abt PayPerPost et al. I hate them. But the FTC sullies and puts at risk all bloggers - citizens talking - as a result.

jeffjarvis: @mediatwit They should enforce fraud laws. But leave speech unregulated.

mathewi: In case you weren't following the Twitfight between @jeffjarvis and @mediatwit over the new FTC rules, @jeffjarvis won :-)

Growing PR Spheres

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 08 Oct 2009 07:50:55 PDT

Silicon Valley Watcher's Tom Foremski has made a sport out of scrutinizing the PR profession these last few years (often with good reason).

Yesterday, he raised a provocative question from which one might infer more disrespect for our perennially beleaguered profession:

What are the implications when PR pros, who've built large online followings, use their new digital spheres of influence to advocate for clients?

He cites Todd Defren, Steve Rubel and Brian Solis, with their five figures of followers apiece, as prime examples of practitioners whose authority may exceed that of the very journalists they seek to sway. To his credit, Foremski also takes his reporter colleagues to task for their slow digital uptake (Brian Stelter and David Pogue notwithstanding). He concludes:

"The PR people could post the stories themselves and pitch them to their already large communities and get a far higher readership! But, the problem they face is that this would be a "pay per post" type scenario and they would lose credibility very quickly. Also, having someone else write a story about your client, on a third-party site, where there has been no exchange of money, conveys far higher value to the story. That's the paradox of PR peoples' large, personal media footprint -- they can't use their own access to large numbers of people to promote their clients."

From my perspective, this is exactly what these forward-thinking PR pros and others like Ford's Scott Monty and Comcast's Frank Eliason should be doing: building their digital footprints.

Don't misunderstand me. Pitching story ideas to influential journalists remains a core PR competency, but the atomized media landscape demands other, more scalable (and some believe controllable) means for influencing the conversation. It's what recently prompted 35 prestigious universities to recently band together to create their own digital wire service for science news.

As for whether blogging and tweeting PR pro should be trusted, I raised that question years ago when I asked burgeoning blogger Steve Rubel whether he considered himself a "...PR guy or journalist?

I mean if 35,000 people follow Michelle Malkin, what's so bad about a PR pro taking the reigns over his client or employer's message? And even if PR pros gain meaningful followings, won't the digital court of public opinion ultimately determine his or her credibility (and virality)? If not, then maybe, just maybe, the FTC will intercede.

PR Newser also picked up on Foremski's post.

Image via Fast Company

The Art of the PR Job Hunt

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 06 Oct 2009 17:12:10 PDT

Last week I was invited to City College of New York to talk about "career paths in social media." I ended up dwelling on career paths in public relations, under which social media most often resides. My co-presenter was the very capable Nadina Guglielmetti (say that three times fast!), who leads Wag-Ed's digital consulting practice in New York.

Given the softness in the PR job market, and the equally incongrous eagerness of the 40 or so students gathered that day, I tried to manage expectations by keeping it real and actionable. Here were several of the pointers:

Listen to the conversation. Seek out those authoritative voices in the PR/media/marketing space and follow their blog posts (and blogrolls), Twitter tweets, and RSS feeds. Who knows. It may just lead to @heatherhuhman with her entry-level PR job and internship postings.

Get physical. Go out and mingle with those in the field at the countless free meet-ups and tweet-ups that occur nightly in New York City. Meet-up.com is a good place to start.

Tool with the tools. If there is a silver lining on the PR job front, it's for those with a modicum of digital and social media know-how. Start a blog; set up Twitter, Facebook and LinkedIn accounts; learn how to shoot, edit and upload a video on YouTube; check out Posterous, FourSquare and FriendFeed. Then add this new-found acumen to your resume.

Find your passion. No, PR is not a passion. Music, theatre, sports, business, the environment...these are passions. But know that PR is applicable to all of these areas (and so many more). Build your resume based on your interests/credentials, i.e., that which you're passionate about, then apply for those jobs...via the PR department.

Talking about passions. Did you see the story in today's New York Times about former PR agency chief David Kratz? After departing EuroRSCG, he took to painting. This week he was named president of the New York Academy of Art. Good for you, David. I bet the Academy is pleased with the editorial bi-product of your ascendancy there.

Thanks to David Thompson, Associate Director of Career Counseling and Professional Development, CCNY, for having me to campus. Also, great to see my old H&K colleague Lynne Scott Jackson, or Professor Jackson as she's known on 138th Street.

Press Cred

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Sat, 03 Oct 2009 07:03:49 PDT

I was checking out the speaker line-up for BlogWorld and New Media Expo after hearing all the Twitter chatter for the Oct. 16-17 confab in Las Vegas. It looks like a great event, and I'd certainly love to attend. After all, this blogger's been at it a while, bowing in the spring of '05 "in a Gawker moment."

Still, it's a bit surprising that a show called BlogWorld retains its vitality in an age where Twitter, Facebook and the ascendant Friendfeed, Posterous and FourSquare increasingly dominate the digital discourse. In fact, some prognosticators have thrown cold water on blogging as a viable or minimally, monetizable medium.

The most popular blogs -- from HuffPost to TechCrunch to Glam -- have already morphed into the mainstream (albeit with their own journalistic sensibility) -- while the solo blogging acts may one day evolve into personal "lifestreams."

But, back to BlogWorld. My buddies over at Shift Communications are handling press inquiries and credentials for the show. For them, I have one question: why would one need to credential any journalists when there are hundreds if not thousands already registered? Here are the posted requirements to grab a cred:

Complimentary Editorial Media badges will only be issued to reporters who are directly covering the show in an editorial capacity for a recognized business or technology news source. Topics must directly relate to coverage of the show, Internet trends, blogging, podcasting, new media, social media networking or online marketing and communications trends. Editorial topics in other industries (politics, sports, leisure, social, etc.) qualify the individual as a traditional show attendee, not as press.

I'm wondering what constitutes "a recognized business or technology source." As a blogger who follows the media and communications industries with a reasonable dose of technology, would I even qualify? Or does the phraseology imply that "complimentary editorial media" badges are for the mainstream only?

The question of whom to credential and who not has always been a murky decision even in an era when we didn't have a myriad media with which to contend. For example, we used to limit event photo credentials to only those on assignment from a "recognized" media organization. No photo agencies or shooters-on-spec need apply. Today that policy is untenable considering the reach of Getty and Corbis. Shift further qualifies the qualifications:

Note that editorial credentials will be issued to individuals who are covering industries of blogging, podcasting or new media. Indirect relationships will be reviewed on a case-by-case basis for coverage and credential availability.

So, with all the equivocation, the credentialing policy still provides some wiggle room, and rightly so. I'd just hate to learn that the blogger sitting next to me grabbed a press cred, while I was rejected.

Update (10/3) Rick Calvert, founder and head of Blogworld and New Media Expo, weighs in:

"At those events and at BlogWorld & New Media Expo we have to be especially thorough in determining who gets a press pass. No matter where we draw the line it will always be a subjective one. One mans press is another mans blogger looking for a freebie.... So we ask lots of questions. We are looking for media outlets that cover the business of media both old and new. We have turned down traditional media applicants because we have determined they want to come to the show to learn about new media. Not cover the event."

More of his remarks in comments below.

Friedman vs. Frydman

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 30 Sep 2009 15:58:52 PDT

I'm torn. Two of my close friends, both in the PR biz, are currently embroiled in an epic PR battle on the streets of Jane in New York City.

Nancy Friedman runs one of the top travel and upscale destination PR shops in the biz. While Ken Frydman and his business partner Richard Schwartz have built a great local PR and PA practice after cutting their teeth in the halls of power in city government and elsewhere.

The two adversaries also happen to be close personal friends themselves.

Mr. Frydman is using the MSM and a blog or two to accentuate a community's displeasure with the nightly crowds drawn to a trendy hotel in the mostly residential West Village neighborhood. The proprietors of The Jane Hotel are said to prefer a negotiated truce with their local, vocal antagonists, while the latter group simply wishes to shutter the hot spot altogether.

I have personal memories of this neighborhood when it first started morphing away from the rough and tumble trade. My old buddy Jeff Ross, Conan O'Brien's long-time producer, shared an apartment at 24 Jane Street back in the day. I digress.

The local vocals in this fight had pinned their fate on a rather substantial New York Times Sunday real estate story, until it was learned that the author of the piece appeared to have a pony in the race. The story was killed.

My favorite line: when asked whether it made sense to hire a P.R. company, the head of the Greenwich Village Block Association, who's sitting on the sidelines for this one, responded:

“Why do you ask that question? Is there a down side to hiring P.R.?”

I also liked PR Newser's take in which Jason asked Ms. Friedman for a clarification on her assertion that positive comments in support of the hot spot are being removed from some community blogs:

"Positive blog posts about the Jane are getting taken down on some of the sites and blogs who are supported by the neighbors. I thought blogs were about dialogue and not just one-sided."

We'll see who prevails in this one. Again, I can't take sides, but it's certainly interesting to watch these PR pros, with distinctly different styles, do battle.

Small and Big Screens...

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Sun, 27 Sep 2009 18:03:45 PDT

I had the good fortune to attend the thought-provoking "Future of Media" panel, hosted by MediaPost and sponsored by AOL and others, in New York City last week as part of Advertising Week.

Featured (from left to right) were: Mark Cuban (HD Net, Dallas Mavs), Vivien Schiller (NPR), Bob Garfield (Ad Age, NPR), Martha Stewart, Reid Hoffman (LinkedIn), Susan Whiting (Nielsen), Rob Norman (WPP's Group M), Judy McGrath (MTV Networks), publishing legend Milton Glaser, and moderator Chris Anderson of Wired.

The conversation, held at The Times Center, touched upon many of the issues with which nearly everyone in the content production and distribution space are grappling today: the monetization of online content, the role of social networks in the media mix, analytics, the blurred lines (for some) between church and state (advertising and editorial), and what's next.

Here are some of the notable quotables that caught my attention:

Chris Anderson: "I also have to confess that I have a problem with the title of this panel....Using words like media are probably limiting us in our search for business models, and the path forward."

Vivien Schiller "What the [NPR] stations need to do...is to become increasingly relevant to their local market. They need to increasingly provide information in the public interest to their communities, particularly as local newspapers, many of them are suffering or folding, and in doing so they become so relevant that they cannot be disrupted."

Judy McGrath "If you have some creative excellence and a brand, it's a great fertile time to try to figure out how to connect with consumers...and hopefully how to monetize your content. It's exciting."

Martha Stewart "It [merchandising] is important to our customers. They want to satisfy their dreams. They want to become become doers once they learn how to be dreamers. By reading the content, they then become the doers."

Reid Hoffman "A business model is not just something you slap on top of content production -- the whole thing from how it's discovered, distributed and produced. Those ecosystems are changing. So it's a question of how do you re-architect the ecosystem. And that's the thing I think would be most interesting, but also the most perilous."

Chris Anderson "In the media industry, I'm stunned by how controversial Free [my book] is because it is, of course, the foundation of traditional media. Radio is free to air. Television is free to air. Our publications are subsidized 90 or more percent by the advertisers that are virtual free. And yet free is considered heretical by many, including by Mark Cuban."

Mark Cuban "Certainly free as a form of sampling is very valid. Giving someone a taste of it then upgrade it, has been used by drug dealers for years and years. The internet is becoming stale. Fifteen years in, it's old news...some of the conversations we're having here, I close my eyes, it's 1998. Streaming media...Wow! Who thought of that idea?"

What's next? Did anybody watch the Cowboys-Giants game where the Giants won in the last second? What was the #1 thing that was talked about the entire game? The screen! You can't take your eyes off of it. It's digital. It's seven stories high, 70 yards long, and it weighs more than a 747. And it cost $40 million dollars. I look at it and I said, it cost $40 million dollars today. What's it gonna cost in five years? What's it gonna cost in ten years? If it's a medium that you just can't take you eyes off of. And it's what everybody wants to talk about...what kind of opportunities does that create? And is that medium gonna be free? Everybody since 1976 have said 'smaller, cheaper, faster.' Now we're transitioning to a world where it's 'bigger, better, and, cheaper." And now, it's going in the opposite direction. Can't see U2?

Would you pay 20 bucks to go watch it on a seven-story high screen with the most amazing sound system with all your friends? The rules are changing. Everybody 's so focused on the Internet as a solution for everything, they're missing all the good stuff....I'm talking about a platform. I think they're going to be new platforms, that are real time, event-driven that could be connected to much bigger platforms that will ingrain a more social experience...digitally-enabled platforms that can be anywhere that will enable a better social experience. But we're not looking for them. We're still looking to say how can I get a better search to my iphone or my laptop or my PC to watch TV on my PC. That's so last century.

Susan Whiting "That idea of 'best screen possible' enabled by content...it still matters. The entertainment and information content still matters. No matter how fragmented we get, we see that every day."

Bob Garfield "The fundamental problem is fragmentation and ad avoidance and the glut of supply is going to...is already churning out to destroy the critical mass...produced by quality content. Craig's List has eviscerated the newspaper industry. The DVR and the Internet are destroying broadcast. Broadcast is in huge, huge trouble...Two of the top four broadcast networks are talking about becoming cable outlets -- CBS and NBC -- which is swell, because cable has much better prospects than broadcast in exactly the way that it is way better to have multiple sclerosis than Lou Gehrig's disease."

Milton Glaser "The combination of words that most terrifies me is 'targeted consumers.' Poor darlings. In the old days when we started New York magazine, we would not permit a salesperson to enter the editorial part of the building...I suspect that that is no longer the case...What strikes me as being most significant is not so much the emergence of new platforms, new media, new technology as much as how does it affect the nature of the message itself that people are receiving and what are the consequences. Are these targeted consumers really benefiting in the deepest way from the content?"

Martha Stewart "We've been watching very carefully the destruction of church and state that exists between advertisers and edit. Increasingly we find that there' a major breakdown... There is definitely a change going on. Is that because the consumer wants to see a product next to a page talking about that product. The Internet certainly does that constantly. We are dealing with it. We are taking very close notice of it and we want to not only serve our readers and our viewers and our Internet users in the best way possible, but we also want to make money and get advertisers to welcome our good content."

Bob Garfield "There's a big difference between relevance and corruption...you describe the magazine world as a kind of cathedral and I think historically it's been more like a brothel...and now it's becoming like Plato's Retreat."

Vivien Schiller "I think in this conversation that we are substantially underestimating the intelligence both of the audience to smell a rat, and the intelligence of the people who run [legitimate] news organizations...Integrity is the fundamental of the business model."

Rob Norman "One of the marvelous things that has happened...with the rise of social media in particular is the ability for the bad and the rotten and the underperforming to be teased out and actually raise the standards of corporate behavior and raise the standard of product development and relevance. ...the checks and balances of the democracy of the dissemination of information. is one of the things that my clients have discovered...is that social media helps their good news travel fast and helps their bad news travel much faster than that."

Click here to listen to the whole conversation (TRT: 85 minutes), and please excuse the audio quality.

Photos: Peter Himler (Canon PowerShot SX20 IS)

Monday, Monday

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 23 Sep 2009 17:18:13 PDT

Maybe it was a Monday. Who can remember? But here I was sitting quietly in my cubicle some two-and-a-half years into my first job in PR. I worked for a small, but highly influential entertainment boutique in midtown Manhattan.

That morning, I answered the office door and in walked a lanky guy with a mustache who asked to see my boss. I escorted him back to Bobby's office, and returned to my cube.

About 15 minutes later, Bobby called me in and introduced me to John Phillips...yes, that John Phillips. Apparently, Mr. Phillips was in desperate straits. A jail cell seemed a lot closer than California Dreamin' at this stage of his life. He was busted for cocaine possession and on the verge of going before a judge who would decide his fate.

He explained that he and his daughter Mackenzie have been active in a rather progressive drug treatment program out of Fair Oaks Hospital in New Jersey. If my memory serves me well, it was Dr. Mark Gold and his novel use of the drug Clonidine to ween addicts off of cocaine on whose wagon the Phillips hitched.

Apparently, John was a model patient who took a leadership role in the program. He hoped this positive "positioning" would weigh heavily on the judge's fateful decision.

My boss asked if I could help garner some media attention for John's "work" with Dr. Gold...on a pro bono basis. I accepted the assignment (as if I had a choice). Still, it was a pretty good story, as I soon learned. People magazine quickly committed to a cover, followed by appearances on "The Today Show" and elsewhere. Dr. Gold was an integral part of the interviews, and thus benefited professionally as well.

When Phillips finally went to court, the judge cited his good work at Fair Oaks and gave him a suspended sentence. Phillips called me to say he owes it all to me. Had I known what a twisted soul he really was, I would have thought twice about helping him. In fact, based on his daughter's revelations to Oprah today, both of them were apparently in on the ruse.

Future of Media

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 22 Sep 2009 04:34:00 PDT

On Wednesday, I expect to learn the future of media. The day begins with Media Magazine's Future of Media Forum or "It's Not What it Used to Be."

At The Times Center in NYC, Wired's Chris Anderson will take these and other media movers and shakers through their paces: Mark Cuban, Martha Stewart, NPR's Vivien Schiller, Ad Age, NPR's and Chaos Scenario's (see above video) Bob Garfield, LinkedIn's Reid Hoffman, and MTV's Judy McGrath.

Later that day, yours truly will take another group of equally astute, yet non-executive media mavens through their paces. They include HuffPost's media editor Danny Shea, Mediaite's (and Shea's predecessor) Rachel Sklar, The New York Times's prolific TV/media reporter Brian Stelter, PaidContent's man in New York David Kaplan, and Henry Blodget's #2 who edits the increasingly influential The Business Insider (fka Silicon Alley Insider) Nich Carlson.

So if you had your druthers and could extract anything there is to know about the future of media, and maybe by extension the future of the PR biz, where would you start? I've begun to formulate my questions. Please chime in with others.

Is charging for content the right remedy for decimated bottom lines at MSM companies?
Will the blogosphere eventually usurp the established news organizations in authority?
In the age of Twitter, will the PR professional decline in value as a trusted news source?
Can the long-standing PR model of "earned" media through pitching (I mean "engaging") journalists survive in an age when consumers increasingly derive their news and info from the friends?
Won't there always be a segment of the population that takes its news from TV and newspapers?
Was President Obama's five-show interview-fest effective in advancing his healthcare agenda?
Will online ad revenue ever be able to fully cover the expense of producing a quality news product? Or does something else have to give?

Watch this space for coverage and hopefully, some audio takes, from Wednesday's media confabs.

Higher Ed Muscles In

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Thu, 17 Sep 2009 06:58:44 PDT

Start with Yahoo and Google, and go from there. This seems to be the recipe cooked up by 35 of the nation's most prestigious universities in an effort to re-exert their influence over the science news that percolates in the public domain.

Specifically, the MercNews reports, these universities have banded together to form and sustain a web site and "wire service" called Futurity.org.

The plan was mostly necessitated by the drastically reduced news hole and number of mainstream beat reporters covering science news.

"Whereas 20 years ago nearly 150 U.S. newspapers had a science section, today fewer than 20 do, and those are often dominated by health and lifestyle coverage. Reporters covering medicine, space and environmental issues have taken buyouts or been laid off across the nation. In December, for example, CNN eliminated its entire science and technology team. In February The Boston Globe closed its science section, an action the Mercury News and San Francisco Chronicle had taken several years earlier."

In a recent post, this blogger noted that ProfNet, the original crowd-sourced service for journalists to quickly identify experts, started with a closed universe from academia. The thinking then, and thinking now, presupposes that universities provide journalists with a greater degree of editorial "reliability," versus, I suppose, those charlatans from private industry. Still, skepticism abounds:

"Any information is better than no information," said Charlie Petit, a former science reporter at U.S. News & World Report and the San Francisco Chronicle. "The quality of research university news releases is quite high. They are rather reliable," he added. "But they are completely absent any skepticism or investigative side."

Cristine Russell, a former Washington Post science reporter who is president of the Council for the Advancement of Science Writing, weighs in:

"This can be a really good source of information for students and others who are looking for information. But it does not replace the independent news media."

Personally, I think Futurity is a very smart and timely move that may not win a ringing endorsement from a Darwinian depleted species of traditional science reporters, but has the ability to bring credible science news and research directly to the public. And what's wrong with that?

Prez Presses the Press

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 16 Sep 2009 11:50:10 PDT

If you're an A-list newsmaker, you can pretty much call the shots over where, when, and how you take your media interviews.

And today, there are few bigger newsmakers than the leader of the free world (unless you count celebrity-du-jour Lady Gaga (or that "skank with a brain.") But I won't go there.

The Wall Street Journal (and others) today report on President Obama's media blitz slated for this coming weekend in which he has no fewer than five network appearances on the docket, including Letterman on Monday.

In her piece, "TV Blitz Will Test Obama's Star Power," WSJ reporter Elizabeth Williamson writes:

"The president's heavy media schedule raises questions about whether his ubiquitous presence will dilute his effectiveness as a pitchman."

To which former former Clinton Press Secretary Joe Lockhart paints a do-or-die dilemma:

"I don't dismiss this idea that if at some point you fire your best weapon and it doesn't work, what do you do next? But you come to the point in a debate where you're not worried about the next battle."

The President intends to four-wall the Sunday talk shows, something few mortal newsmakers can do. I'll never forget the angst involved in organizing the first U.S. TV interviews for HSH Prince Albert and Princess Stephanie on both GMA and Today, arch rivals. We finally negotiated to have GMA go live and Today pre-tape, or was it vice-versa? No matter.

As for the Journal's POV, my feeling is that if you have a powerful communicator with a compelling message, there is little reason not to deploy him far and wide. In fact President Obama's relative absence from the media sphere this summer, likely fueled the need to play catch-up today. Also, this weekend's not the first time our President pressed the press with his presence.

Still, White House Deputy Press Secretary Joshua Earnest is not worried about the prospect of a diluted message:

"The president accepted invitations to appear on these programs to talk about his health plan. These programs reach a variety of audiences because we're confident that the more the American people understand about the president's plans for health-insurance reforms, the more likely they are to support it."

And, of course, we all know about the importance of being earnest, especially for a PR pro.

Courtyard Copley's Content

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 15 Sep 2009 11:41:44 PDT

My wife and I have to be in Cambridge, MA for a dinner in late October. Kayak is my first resort when it comes to online research of domestic or even international travel. (C-G site Trip Advisor is my second.)

While I'm no Peter Greenberg, I happen to find online aggregator Kayak to have the most functional and easy-to-use interface. Searches are easily modified to allow me to pinpoint travel parameters, e.g., ratings, cost, hotel or airline brands, dates...

Anyway, my pre-purchase research on Kayak took me to the Courtyard by Marriott in Back Bay Boston. I then visited the chain's own site and noticed the ability to "follow" the property on Flickr, Facebook, Twitter and YouTube. How clever. Strangely, a visit to the same property off the main Marriott domain doesn't permit such socialization.

So who exactly would want to follow a local hotel, and what kind of content does the hotel post to make it worth following or friending? A visit to the hotel's Facebook page reveals 346 fans, two hand-held video clips (RT's 1:16 and :21), three photo albums (two with one image apiece, and one with 11 images), a Wall with 14 posts all of which derived from the hotel's promotion department, or so it seems.

Heading over to the @BostonMarriott Twitter feed, I see that the site has 1127 followers and is following 1224 people. Lots of cross-over here. As for the nature of the tweets, they again seem to emanate from the promotions and come-ons department. No sign of human life anywhere.

On the hotel's Flickr photostream, we find seven images, all taken on April 24. A search on variations of the property's name did not produce any other images - consumer-generated or otherwise. And finally, on the Boston Courtyard's (very green) YouTube channel, we find four hotel-produced videos posted plus 10 favorites (with no apparent relation to the property). The last visit was notched some six months ago.

The purpose of this non-scientific analysis is not to denigrate the social media acumen or strategy of the Boston Courtyard. In fact, the property should be applauded for even endeavoring to establish beachheads in these popular social media channels. The property might also consider blogging. Here's a link to some reasons why.

I would say, however, that building a presence is merely a beginning, and usually insufficient to drive bookings. In order for social media to accrue to one's business, it requires care, feeding and, most of all, a human touch. Passion helps too.

To this end, the city of Boston offers an extraordinary palate of culture, sports, education, and gastronomy from which to create a rich and colorful canvas of content. If the hotel's social media strategist could personally draw from this cornucopia of content, and inspire his or her hotel guests (and others) to contribute, I bet my future Boston hotel searches would more readily lead me to the Boston Courtyard.

Then of course, it's up to the hotel to deliver on the promise.

Facebook Finds Its PR Mojo

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Fri, 11 Sep 2009 10:29:14 PDT

Tech Crunch's Michael Arrington has tweaked a few noses as proprietor of perhaps the most influential tech blog in a milieu overrun with tech influencers. We all remember the brouhaha he created by publishing the business-sensitive internal emails provided to him by some randoid who hacked into Twitter's email.

And then there was his spirited defense of the value of breaking news with or without the confidence that the news was fully baked. How many rumors about Steve Jobs, Google's acquisition strategy, Apple, Facebook and Twitter can one bare before Peter cries wolf?

Late yesterday, I noticed a seemingly innocuous TechCrunch tweet (and post) in which the author (Jason Kincaid) proclaimed Facebook's new feature that allows users to FAX any photos from the site. Rightly, TC derided the wisdom of such an application. Other picked up on it including B-to-B social marketing expert Paul Dunay who also wondered why anyone would have an interest in such a technological throwback.

@PaulDunay Facebook Now Lets You Fax Your Photos. I Have No Idea Why Anyone Would Want To Do This

Sure enough, it was a goof. The Facebook team, with its PR people in tow (or vice-versa?), arranged to have this "new feature" only be visible by TechCrunch, and TechCrunch took the bait hook, line and sinker. They were punk'd....big time!

"Jason then called Facebook PR. Jaime Schopflin took the call and, apparently, couldn’t stop laughing for five minutes. Between laughs while catching her breath she mentioned something about this being a joke, that nobody but us could see it, and that they were placing bets around the office on how long before we noticed it and posted. And something else about teaching us to contact them before posting."

Sometimes it takes a little irreverence to make media waves...and your point. Kudos to FB.

Good Wife, Bad Pitch

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 18:24:19 PDT

The following note was received (and reported on) by Nikki Finke's Deadline Hollywood blog:

Dear Deadline Hollywood Daily Editorial Team,

I know I just emailed you recently about CBS's Three Rivers - I don't mean to stalk your inbox - but I didn't want you to miss out on The Good Wife either! ... My goal in writing to you today is to see if you’d be interested in sharing this information with your readers. As a thank you for considering the story I would love to send you a $20 Amazon Gift Certificate...

I look forward to hearing from you!

Best,
Amy

Need we say more.

A hat tip to @ErikDeutsch via @Niche for the timely tweet.

NewsCore

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Wed, 09 Sep 2009 07:58:27 PDT

Did you ever have a client ask you to contact an AP reporter to learn which news outlets picked up a story in which the client company was featured? If you are asked, politely decline and offer instead to use some of the off-the shelf monitoring tools, starting with Google News, that scrape and index online content. (Refrain from calling your client an idiot.)

Of course, with bloggers freely borrowing and remixing original AP reporting in their editorial output, one may never attain a complete accounting. If the AP had its druthers, that free and unfettered use of its content (i.e., its "intellectual property") will soon follow the teletype machine into oblivion.

Richard Edelman writes on his blog that AP rival ThomsonReuters sees otherwise:

"ThomsonReuters has been public in its views on the evolving online news industry, often times in disagreement with other big name publishers on issues like aggregation. On Reuters.com, its primarily ad-supported consumer news site, it encourages bloggers and other news sites to link to our content. 'Simply put, we [ThonsonReuters] believe in the link economy.'"

New York Times's executive editor Bill Keller recently shared his perspective on web journalism in a response to a substantive piece that appeared in the New York Review of Books. From Keller:

"Thankfully my job does not require me to know the future, but I suspect the journalistic landscape five or ten years from now will be a mix of survivors and start-ups, and that the distinction between mainstream and new media will diminish from both directions. I think traditional news organizations—including the Times but also many others—will continue to evolve. We will survive in print as long as the revenues justify it (and, thanks in part to growing circulation revenues, they still do) but we will grow, adapt, and ultimately prosper on all manner of nonprint platforms."

Propelling a story to go viral remains a core deliverable for PR (and marketing) pros charged with building a positive branded presence for clients in the mediasphere. In the early days of satellite-delivered, privately-produced video news feeds, we would attempt to extend a local TV news story's reach by pitching the respective network affiliate news feed service (ABC News One, NBC NewsChannel, CBS NewsPath) on the story's national news value. It was these syndicators' jobs to determine whether a local news package would play outside of Peoria.

And then there were the ad hoc networks of local TV affiliates. Minneapolis-based Conus or Group W come to mind. At its height, Conus had some 80 local TV affiliates -- from all three networks -- sharing news content via twice-daily satellite feeds. Conus, coupled with CNN's own content-sharing feed to disparate network affiliates, increased the likelihood that two competing stations in the same market might air the same reporter's package.

Today, with a cacophonous mix of news mediums, loose affiliations, and linking, lifting and re-tweeting by bloggers and microbloggers, the path to broad, national exposure is circuitous indeed. Top-down, bottom-up and side-to-side story-seeding, in combination, may serve as the only recourse for those of us striving to build a redeeming branded presence for clients.

On the subject of cross-medium, content-sharing scenarios, today I learned of a significant initiative by News Corp to aggregate and share news content across all of its media properties. The Guardian reports:

"The service, called NewsCore, will operate like a global wire service for all the company's newspapers, TV networks and websites. News Corp is describing the venture as a "21st-century multi-media information service that will draw on the worldwide news and sports resources within News Corporation and make them available to other News properties everywhere."

The New York-based service will be headed by John Moody, the former executive vice president of news editorial for Fox News who will "help coordinate editorial assets." Joining Moody in the venture are Mike Gutch, a former vice president finance at News America; Adam Birnbaum, technology and data executive; and Scott Norvell, formerly the Europe bureau chief for the Fox News.

As far as I know, this is the most ambitious, if not the first intra-aggregator and syndicator of news content across a single, multi-channeled media enterprise.

Monopoly Mash-Up

noreply@blogger.com (Peter Himler) — Tue, 08 Sep 2009 14:16:53 PDT

Scrabulous. You remember that little tempest in a teapot? It seems like forever ago when a couple of young entrepreneurs from India created a Facebook version of the popular word game that ultimately grew into the most downloaded third-party app in Mr. Zuckerberg's burgeoning empire.

In December 2007, this blogger took note of the fabulous Scrabulous with a cautionary note: beware of Hasbro, which held the domestic rights to the game. Sure enough, eight months later, a suits was filed and the game went poof in spite of valiant efforts to save it (as well as Hasbro's reputation in defending its rightful ownership).

Geek.com and Mashable report that Hasbro's other iconic board game will enter the interactive virtual realm in what clearly is the quintessential Google Map mash-up. Monopoly has teamed with Google to create Monopoly City Streets, which "allows users to compete in a live, worldwide version of the popular game, creating the biggest Monopoly tournament ever played."

Hasbro naturally (or was it contractually?) took to Google's Blogger to tease the initiative:

Friday, September 4, 2009
Shhhh... Your chance to WIN MONOPOLY fame coming soon!
This global game will feature an incredible amount of amazing new buildings and building types from MONOPOLY. From humble houses to stupendous skyscrapers and everything in between, never before will you have had the freedom to tailor your property empire exactly the way YOU want it.

Blogger, btw, celebrated its 10th birthday last week with a bash attended by a veritable valleyful of movers and shakers including Blogger's founders, Ev and Biz. They shared their thoughts on the early days of their less geeky, but certainly more "democratic" blogging platform. Today's they're better know for an even more democratic platform for idea exchange. But I digress.

The Hasbro-Google effort likely won't produce any lawsuits or corporate PR angst. It seems Hasbro smartly courted Google. (Could anyone be considered not smart by courting Google?) But Google benefits too. Apparently, the company will get to draw (excuse the pun) some attention to its 3D modeling app SketchUp, which is no stranger to working with other big consumer brands.

Anyway, I wish my old friend Wayne Charness and the Pawtucket gang much luck with City Streets. Sounds very cool.