The damage that incurred is simply scary. Many of the company’s most sensitive business strategy/finance/competitive approaches documents were stolen and the popular tech blog/quasi media outlet TechCrunch decided to actually focus on two of them in this article.

Reading through this article is a bone chilling experience. Twitter’s business strategy and some of its deepest secretive deliberations and possible next moves are simply laid out for anyone to see. These include: How it plans to compete and/or partner with Google moving forward, real details on its goals and strategies (i.e. should it get into the licensing content game,) how it plans to deal with any possible identity crisis (not sure I get that one, but planning for this is certainly smart,) it’s acquisition strategy (according to rough notes, it has no intention of being acquired,) what it’s financial goals are (reaching $4 million by end of year,) how RSS is the enemy and what it intends to do about it, etc., etc. etc. I think you get the point.

There are many different story angles that I could pursue through this post. For starters, how ethical was it for TechCrunch to exploit Twitter’s misery by publishing all of these very confidential approaches to attack the market? Some would say that this is fair game. Even though Twitter was victimized by a theft, once the media/bloggers obtain something, it’s in their purview to report on it. Others would question the tactic since this had nothing to do with documents being leaked by an employee or someone just being careless at the company. No, they were stolen. My feeling is that (because of the special circumstances surrounding the release of this information) TechCrunch should have backed off. Of course, some other ambitious Woodward/Bernstein wannabe media outlet or blogger would have just picked up on what TechCrunch passed on. So, this issue really doesn’t matter.

We could discuss the technology ramifications behind what happened. I certainly am not knowledgeable enough to offer any views on what security platforms should have been used by these executives to ensure greater safety within their accounts. But, it does seem like the company didn’t take a whole lot of much needed precautions by allowing a hacker to break in so easily by just obtaining new passwords.

Then there’s the topic that I’d like to focus on… which I find most interesting. As I read through the excruciating details of Twitter’s thinking on so many key business and reputational issues, I cringed thinking about how the company will clearly lose a step in its competitive race to maintain dominance on the Internet because so much of what it plans to do next will be reacted to and mitigated. But, I also got to see how this global tech phenomenon thinks. And, it’s pretty damn impressive.

Many companies in Twitter’s enviable position would be more than happy to simply focus on how to maintain their current status. (I would refer to that as being complacent.) Not Twitter. Its executives are clearly thinking about hundreds of ways to move this organization (and what it offers) into the next stratosphere. From finding ways to capture even more market share, to fending off enemies, to developing various types of strategies to deal with the other Web giants (i.e. Google and Facebook,) Twitter has clearly created a fast moving, incredibly strategic, ‘what’s next’ culture that is made to compete and won’t accept anything less than success. (Just review the notes from so many of the strategy meetings laid out in TechCrunch and you can see that.)

So, while the company might feel like it is standing in front of the world, naked right now, there are also thousands of followers who are that much more impressed with its business savoir faire and who now recognize what a special organization it is.

And then, there’s one last (but important) positive here. Not all bad publicity is actually bad publicity. Yes, Twitter feels foolish. But, through this major incident it also continues to remain top of mind for millions because of the all publicity and viral chatter that surrounds it. Everyone was talking about Twitter before. And, the masses certainly won’t stop now.

One that I wrote about a few weeks back is how inexpensive commercial office leases have become. Actually, if you’re looking to buy any real estate now (that is if you have any available cash and a strong stomach,) most would agree that today’s market is tremendously appealing.

Another positive occurrence is that most days traffic driving in and out of New York City is about 50 percent less congested. This makes me happy (as I drive 2-3 times a week). And I do feel bad (occasionally) that I’m only experiencing this reality because well over half a million City jobs have been terminated. While those might be viewed as more ‘run of the mill’ advantages, here’s one that I’ve been thinking about for a while that isn’t so obvious.

I believe that this current climate will create important beneficial advantages for those college students who have just graduated. What did you just say? You think I’m crazy? Ok, that’s a valid initial response. But, hear me out on this one a little before you completely disagree.

My theory is that these kids will need to work that much harder, think so much smarter and do whatever it takes to nail down their first jobs now. And, those who can’t… well many of them will need to eat a slice of humble pie. That is, those without incredibly affluent parents supporting them will need to find any job now to pay their bills. That could mean using a four year degree from a top-20 university to flip burgers at McDonalds, wait tables at Fridays, or be a clerk at the Gap.

The old cliché “what doesn’t kill you makes you stronger” is one of the best I’ve ever heard.  Most college grads have never faced today’s challenges before. Finding ways to live and deal with this economy will create a new resolve that they never knew even existed. Those who are actually strong/fortunate/savvy enough to land the job they want, will build real character that would never have come about when times were good (as they will be again in the future.)

I graduated 20 years ago in a time when the economy had also hit a brick wall. (Remember junk bonds?) No one ever wants to hear the annoying line from older generations that goes something like this: “Back in my day, we had to walk 11 miles in the snow just to get to school every winter.” That’s because those generations often use it to demonstrate just how bad things were and just how much it took to overcome the odds. I promise not to do that here. But, I will state that learning to find one’s way, under the most uncertain and often anxious conditions, can truly be a blessing in disguise.

Back then, we didn’t have the Internet to help us network and find people who knew people who could help. Instead, it was all focused on first understanding and then packaging any thread-like, tiny point of difference that could separate your resume and then (if lucky enough) interview from the pack. In my case, I hand delivered resumes to all the NYC agencies. I was told that deliveries were put in a separate pile than regular mail. I really had no clue if it would work… but figured it was worth a try. So, after delivering about 100 resumes across the city in about a day and a half, I waited. Thirty six hours later that one call came in which provided me with the competitive interview I longed for. To be honest, I’m not really sure what set me apart (from the four other candidates) in the interview to win me my first job (it certainly wasn’t the $199 JC Penny suit that hung off my body). But, as they say…”the rest is history.” And, I was on my way.

Life isn’t easy. And, it certainly isn’t fair. I think that 20 years from now, a host of today’s college graduates will look back at this point in time as being a defining moment for them, when they learned to fight through tough odds and persevere. I know that most will learn to appreciate the good, “easy” times that much more as well.

Why is this something that the Foreign Affairs Committee should possibly care about? Perhaps it’s because the resolution calls Jackson a "global" humanitarian. The resolution was introduced by Republican Lee of Texas. It praises the entertainer's many charitable activities that took place throughout his life. It states: Resolution Number 600-- honoring an American legend and musical icon.

Clearly, people tend to get carried away when someone famous dies. And, this resolution seems a tad over the top. But, this seems to be par for the course for Michael. I just heard this morning that a grassroots effort in Jacksonville, Florida is now underway to rename the city after the fallen pop star.

The media have also covered Michael's sad story (in both positive and negative ways) nonstop on a 24/7 basis for two solid weeks.

All of this has led to countless blogs, emails and just plain conversations from many that they are sick and tired of being forced to watch this story everywhere. I've heard some rant a few days back that after a week of coverage, no one cares any more. And, others grumble they are simply annoyed that this entertainer's death should receive the same CNN-like headlines as "more important" real stories like the Iran election battles, American journalist abductions in North Korean and our President's diplomatic discussions in Russia.

I don't disagree with any of this. But, on the other hand, I'm kind of surprised that so many people can't understand why news about the Prince of Pop has reached epic proportions.

Our culture has always been obsessed with celebrities and especially entertainers. And, that will never change. Some might claim that this is a chicken and egg question. (Which came first?) They believe the Jackson feeding frenzy is happening simply because the media won't stop reporting on it. Thus, the public are forced to consume it. On this topic, I tend to disagree. According to Nielson Media Research, over 31 million viewers watched Jackson's funeral on TV (and the Staples Center was completely sold out as well) and CNN.com served out 4.4 million video streams to a ravenous public who simply could not get enough of this story’s details.

Michael's ratings drew more views than two Presidents' memorial services (Reagan and Ford) and came in a close second to another beloved celebrity like figure years back (Princess Diana) who had 33 million people watching.

The bottom line is that after Elvis and The Beatles, Michael Jackson might be the next most influential rock/pop icon ever. The deaths of both Elvis and John Lennon incurred tremendous public interest also. And, I'm sure if either had passed away in today's age, we'd be experiencing similar 24/7 obsessions across the globe as well.

Entertainers create controversy. The media love to cover all of it. And, we consumers eat it up. Call it crazy. But, all this craziness surrounding Michael Jackson's posthumous interest seems very normal to me.

It will start to slowly fade away. My suggestion to all those people who are pulling their hair out-- turn it off whenever you can and just tune out all the time. But, stop fighting it. This is a continuing big global news story because our international society wants it. Whether you like it or not, that simply won't change.

I agree with a few of his points (which I’ll discuss here). But, mostly, I think his belief in the fact that most anybody should and can “follow his/her dreams” to become a successful entrepreneur is a bit naïve and not always realistic.

Let’s talk about why some of Mr. Hoffman’s points make sense first. Yes, the cost of doing business (often referred to as overhead) is as cheap as ever right now. Whether it be office rent, supplies, travel or even paying other employee/freelancer salaries, a newly minted business can be assured of demanding very low costs, if strategically handled. This can play a large factor in being able to go months without needing to churn in serious sales or revenues at the onset of the venture. That creates real time and opportunity for an entrepreneur to create the right product/service or business and sales strategy to address the marketplace.

Looking at this from the lens of the marketing services industry, the other clear positive that I see is that corporations (or, in this case, marketers) are trying to keep all their costs down. Why is that good? Well, it isn’t necessarily positive for established agencies that also have firmly established rates and fees. But, for a one-, two- or three-person consultancy willing to do a lot of work for a greatly reduced rate in an incredibly flexible way, there are lots of opportunities.

As a matter of fact, I’ve probably met with 10 different former corporate communications/marketing executives over the last few months. Each is seriously looking for his/her next corporate gig. My advice to most was that they should think of temporarily hanging their own shingle out for a while until the market comes back. The most talented ones will certainly find a variety of short-term strategic and/or tactical projects from the very type of large and small corporations they used to work for. These companies need smart consultants who can do highly skilled work at cut-rate prices. And, that’s just what they can get now.

The last point that I agree with Mr. Hoffman on is that each entrepreneur needs to seriously think long and hard about what prospect/client problem is being solved with this new business. That’s where I believe we might start to disagree as well because figuring out what the marketplace pain is the first time isn’t typically too hard (as a matter of fact, it often smacks young entrepreneurs right in the face, as they experienced the pain firsthand in their corporate jobs). What is exceptionally arduous, though, is understanding how to package one’s offering around that problem or pain point, as well as figuring out how a no-name entity with zero credibility will market itself, build a brand and convince potential employees and prospects to come aboard, all while learning how to operate and handle cash flow/financial issues that need a high degree of attention.

Let’s say these entrepreneurs create a good recipe for success over the first year or two. A sincere congratulations is in order. Except, very quickly, that market they are so comfortable with will shift, with current trends quickly becoming old and an entirely new set of problems now emerging for those same prospects and clients. These market shifts can create real opportunities or serious brick walls for many entrepreneurs/new small businesses. My feeling is that it’s during these shifts that the men are separated from the boys (with the boys often running hard into those nasty walls).

The winners (or those with long-term profitable and sustainable businesses) are quick to catch on to marketplace changes and find ways to create their own offerings that not only can help clients with new pain points but are likewise positioned in a way that the industry clearly finds their service or product compelling. The leaders actually spot those trends as they are first occurring and are typically first movers in soothing the pain as it is initially emerges into the marketplace. These organizations typically experience tremendous growth. And the losers play catch up, which means that they are still trying to find ways to make their old model work. You guessed it: many of these companies end up calling it quits and, instead, go to work for the competition.

Starting a business might be the only option right now, and that could be a really fulfilling dynamic for many. Others always wanted to be their own boss, and, from a timing standpoint, taking the entrepreneurial plunge could make a lot of sense. It’s important, though, to understand that the numbers don’t lie. Something like 80 percent of small businesses fail within the first three years. There really is no “perfect time” to start a small business. Instead, the focus should be more about building a compelling, long-term model that is flexible and an infrastructure that is rock steady.

The gist of it is that there is far too much time, emphasis and marketing spent on trying to win new customers/clients and not enough caring about those that are already retained. The user manual is a really poignant example of this. Prospects receive the most beautiful, well crafted brochure or slick ads on why they should buy a specific product. Yet, once they purchase (and the credit card transaction is done), the next document they receive is typically the most boring, hard to read, visually upsetting user manual on how this product actually works or should be put together.

Now, if only the marketing people took over the responsibility of creating this manual, it (like the brochure) could look like a work of art. And, customers would continue to have that same feel good emotional attachment about the product, after they purchased it.

The 50,000 foot concept of this post is also insightful. Why don’t more companies provide the same love and attention to people after they become customers as they do before hand?

I’m not going to answer that. Because, I think it is just too damn obvious. But, what I’d like to do instead is roll of a number of companies/industries that do this real well, to separate themselves from the pack. Here are five:

1.) Williams Sonoma – We had a high end coffee maker that was jammed after owning it for one year. We had no receipt, or even box for it. My wife took it back and they volunteered to replace it with the same one, brand spanking new.  I’ve heard about three other stories like this. That company cares about its customers.

2.) Mandarin Oriental Hotels – Have you ever stayed at one? Guarantee that any request you have will be followed up with at least two calls to make sure what you received is to your liking.

3.) Empire Car Service – I’ve written about Empire in a past blog nine months ago. Nothing’s changed. Always on time. Always impeccably clean cars and always the best service in the industry.

4.) Singapore Airlines – Unlike any other airline I’ve ever flown, they make you question whether you’d really like to ever get off the flight.

5.) Eos Wireless – Very good wireless iPod speakers system. They got my order wrong. Yet, were so attentive and focused on solving the problem that I’m now writing about how this negative issue turned into a completely positive situation.

I’d love to hear about any other companies you’ve experienced who fit into this minority category. Let’s keep this list growing…

ATM fees are nothing new. And, these annoying fees that banks charge to consumers have risen steadily over the last 20 years. But, this issue has been a contentious one forever, as well. I remember when we represented the PLUS banking network in the early 90s (back in my J. Walter Thompson days). The number one issue keeping those banking executives up at night was how to show consumer rights groups, legislators and the constituents they represent that ATMs provide real value. And thus, those nasty fees are entirely fair.

The main problem is that none of the arguments they put forward then worked. Just like the messages that are being emitted now, they continue to fall on deaf ears. And, this creates real legislative and reputational problems every few years when the issue becomes hot again. If you read some of the comments/positions that a few banks take, one can understand why.

I read an article in which a Chase spokesperson (my bank is Chase) said (I’m paraphrasing) that the ATM surcharge fee supports real value that the bank provides through its 11,000 U.S. ATMs to non banking customers. (Chase, like many banks doesn’t charge its own customers these fees.) So, if I read this correctly, would Chase close down these ATMs, or continue not charging its customers for ATM usage if non customers decided to forgo using these services from Chase forever? I highly doubt it. Chase needs to have ATMs available to me and the millions of other customers for convenience. It just knows that everyone else represents a huge money making audience, especially in this tough economy.

Another bank issued a statement early this year that it only charges ATM fees to those who aren’t checking customers. And, this is a real reason why those who aren’t customers should really think about becoming ones. Are you kidding me? Talk about a bizarre, strong armed sales tactic that will not resonate with the average consumer.

My point in all of this is that ATM fees are bad news from a reputational/image standpoint. Most banks have realized this and at least stopped charging their customers for the pleasure of using their machines. I’d like to acknowledge the few (though) who learned that they can’t win this PR war and have stopped charging fees all together, or in only very specific instances. These banks understand that there are millions of people who everyday have the same experience I had yesterday. And, they clearly value their images a great deal.

I realize that ATM surcharges represent a very healthy revenue stream for the banking industry. This is not a simple issue. But, as we’ve seen over the last nine months, the difference between a financial services company having a positive versus negative reputation, now takes on an entirely new reality as to whether that organization can survive (or at least thrive) or become part of a growing banking graveyard.  

I wasn't at this conference (thankfully). But, these informal survey findings are appalling. When the question is raised to 150 public relations executives: Do you still measure the value of your media relations programs by comparing results to that of advertising value equivalencies? Amazingly, 150 people raised their hand to say yes. Ugh.

For those reading this post who aren't in the industry, it means that these executives still use an ancient, worthless means to gauge the return on this part of their public relations programs. An example would be comparing a full page positive feature article that a company obtained in Business Week, to the cost of a full page ad in that same publication. If the ad costs $75,000. Then, the article ROI is deemed to be worth that as well.

Unfortunately, I liken this to comparing apples to broccoli. Yes, they both are in the greater fruit and vegetable category. But, take that away, and there is nothing else relevant between the two. An advertisement tells the world "we are great," and is also viewed through that same commercial lens by anyone who reads it. A full page article supporting that same company, infers that a third party, high end national media publication (such as Business Week) believes the organization is doing something very right. I'm not biased against advertising. But, it's just a simple fact that the article is more credible, believable and typically provides immensely more value in building a reputation, enhancing investor opportunities or generating leads than the ad.

My real question here is: Why is this still happening?

Over the last 10 years, I've heard from no fewer than 100 clients that they hate this antiquated measurement approach. And, they want something that is more verifiable to support important programs. Yet, according to the responses at this summit, many of these same folks say that their clients continue to push them or mandate this atrocious means of measurement.

So, one of two causes is having this effect (in my mind). Either the corporate world still doesn't understand just how wrong this is (possibly because we haven't educated them enough,) or they simply don't care. It's hard to create general stereotypes for an entire segment of the industry (and I'm glad to say that most of our clients actually want real metrics), but I'll offer up my two cents.

In this bad economy, I think many just don't care about measuring accurately to understand real ROI. They might claim the opposite, but the reality is they just need some end numbers or stats that can be pushed up to the senior powers at large which show major benefits for the costs of the program. And, one thing is almost always true. When comparing PR apples to advertising broccoli, the apples almost always win. That's because all an agency has to do is churn out a large quantity of media hits to typically drive the supposed $$$ value well above what the actual cost of the program is to the company.

With jobs on the line and so much fear out there, it's hard to blame some for doing this. That said, our industry is always fighting for greater respect among the C-suite. It's hard to argue for that, when a large chunk of the industry is still stuck in the 20th Century measurement world.

That's a real problem.

Ok. I know what you could be thinking. Maybe they were just a little intimidated because of my position. That's duly noted. But, the main issue has little to do with jitters and entirely about what the focus of any interview really needs to be.

You see, my belief is that any interview with me needs to revolve mostly around, well.... me. That is, it should focus on the interviewee asking questions about Peppercom, Ed Moed, the world of PR and communications and anything else relevant to my professional life or what his/her job might be. Contrary to what most might think, I don't want to have to ask 25 questions about the candidate. No, instead I want the candidate to show me how smart he/she is by asking 25 intelligent questions about my business and firm so that I can see how savvy he/she is. This will truly create a natural dialogue with the candidate. When this happens (and it is rare), it demonstrates that this person really took the time to research what is important to me and to make sure that he/she really wants to stand out among competitors.

I'll never forget the best interview I ever participated in a few years back. It wasn't an easy interview because both Steve and I conducted it together (and we like to have fun at the expense of each candidate) with this woman who was interviewing for a management supervisor role here. She really surprised us by opening up the conversation with just how much she knew about Peppercom, our offerings, our philosophy and even the two of our blogs. It became a real ego trip for Steve when she asked very pointed questions about specific posts he wrote and created a very intelligent conversation about our beliefs in measurement, connecting PR to sales and a variety of other really topical subjects. After about 25 minutes, we were smitten and sold on her. We told our management team to offer her a job. I'm happy to say that she continues to be a real star at our company today.

I'd argue that in some ways the process for conducting a good interview is very similar to having a solid new business pitch. It should be about the prospect/interviewee in both cases. In new business, that means even if the prospect says he wants to hear all about your firm, the real truth is that he's got problems and wants to see if they can be solved by you. So, you better dig deep to uncover or understand those problems (versus just talking about yourself).

Having gone through this experience three times, made me think that our colleges and universities are not doing enough to train these graduates now. I know every school has career centers that offer tips, prepping and probably training. But, I wonder (especially in this day and age), if that's enough?

Just as students have to fulfill a certain requirement of math, English and/or science classes, schools should offer mandatory classes for seniors on the art of interviewing and how to create real dialogue with prospective employers. Learning how to network to find a job would also be a spot on course in this overly competitive environment.

Some colleges/universities might already be doing this. If so, congratulations. You are offering your real world bound students something that they absolutely need. Those that aren't should get with the times and change their ways.

Mr. Cassidy writes, "Utilizing a fixed monthly retainer model creates a natural emphasis on producing results regardless of the time needed to do so, and keeps the paperwork to a minimum." I concur 100 percent with that. And, it will also drive an agency to go bankrupt during serious growth periods. That’s because account staffers can only work on so many pieces of business. So, if there is no focus on how much time they should devote to each account (based on real annual fee budgets), then each will max out his/her productivity very quickly and that means only one thing. More people will need to be hired for each new piece of business, when that shouldn’t really be the case. The net result will ultimately be bad for the client because the agency will not fare well and when that happens, account people get nervous, become stressful and feel a lot of anxiety. This typically leads to dropping balls on accounts or at least losing real focus on the client’s business. So, the indirect effect of this cause is only bad for clients.

Clients might believe that fixed retainers are the way to go. But, that’s because (in most cases), we haven’t educated them as to what is best for both parties. We all should be focused on results. I know we are at Peppercom. But, we also make a point of showing them just how valuable our time is so that they can truly comprehend that successful public relations isn’t just about making a few calls, or having excellent media contacts, but real time spent at many levels to provide optimum value.

This type of exposure might happen once in a business’ lifetime (or never at all). And, that’s why companies like LoudMouthGolf.com need to make sure they “milk it” for every ounce of value. If done right, these 15 minutes of fame can substantially increase a company’s reputation from a non- existent brand to one with very high awareness. And, sales can skyrocket.

A similar (but much more impactful) opportunity arose for J. Crew months ago, when the First Lady decided that she would sport J. Crew casual outfits when appearing on stage and in many public forums. That instantly created a huge sales demand for the exact same outfits that Ms. Obama appeared in. And J. Crew jumped into high gear by making sure the world understood what the First Lady’s clothes preference is. I must have seen 25 national media stories about this somewhat superficial story. If I’m not mistaken, J. Crew also created an online/offline ad campaign to acknowledge and promote this honor as well. 

So, you’re now wondering how your company can be so fortunate to win the publicity lottery like this? Well, here’s my take on three key ingredients needed for this type of award winning recipe:

1.) How does my product connect to something extremely timely and trendy?
With LoudMouthGolf.com it’s clearly the U.S Open. With J. Crew, a pure blast of luck connected the company to the presidential election. There’s always some opportunity to connect your product to a timely holiday, seasonal milestone, political controversy or business event taking place. You need to think about what the hook might be for why your product would be deemed interesting or important around that tie-in and how it should be positioned.

2.) What famous/infamous or controversial figure would tie nicely into my product and this trend?
Now, what famous or controversial person would really create visibility or an emotional reaction or just laughter if he/she/they actually decided to use your product? That’s the question. With that, you need to make sure that this partnership would actually emit your brand in the right way to key audiences. You might want to actually brainstorm a laundry list of possible candidates and then write down the pros and cons of each representing your brand (officially or unofficially).

3.) What is the win/win for all parties involved?
Finally, you need to really think about why this person might endorse or care about your product. And, what’s the real story for media, or the blogosphere or even your end consumer? We refer to this as the “win/win.” What end benefit does each party involved receive? Is it pure publicity opportunities for the celebrity? Does the story make sense for media because it’s so beyond unusual? Once you understand that, then create a packaging for this offer or story that will be simple to understand and impactful to implement.

Here’s a closing point to think about. The phrase I used above, (15 minutes of fame,) is just that. So, when all is said and done, those 15 minutes come and go very quickly. The most savvy marketers/business people are always thinking ahead and have figured out a way to use that initial 15 minutes as merely a high octane introduction to their brand. They then use that new found notoriety (and credibility) to consistently develop a steady drumbeat of ongoing publicity and successful marketing endeavors to build the business further.