Random observations

Tongue-in-cheek marketing from the neighborhood realtors

Blogs are a delightful creation, but so many bloggers are a tad big prickly ... evidently looking for ways to skewer someone just a little more effectively than the blogger they just read. We all know this. Maybe it's the next Olympic sport--lobbing insults via blogs. Feel the burn.

It makes me look for multiple meanings in otherwise mundane stuff that I read. Do I "get" what the writer's trying to say? Do I want to?

Into this larger context drops a postcard from our local Coldwell Banker realtor, sent to "postal patrons." There's a nice photo of a meadow on the front. [My town has an abundance of trees. Deer like the woods and ticks like the deer. It's a problem because much of the town seems to get Lyme disease each year.]

The realtors write, "Through the years, we have become aware of the tick population which has led to the discovery of a tool which removes them. This handy gizmo is called 'Ticked-off.' If you would like one, call either of us. The supply is limited, so call soon for your free tick remover. Happy Summer!"

First I rolled my eyes (bad habit), and then I thought ... well, we do have a tick problem. Then I thought a second longer and figured that this is actually a brilliant attempt to turn people off to the town and list their houses with this realtor. Now I don't really care what motivated this post card campaign, but am mystified by my own inability to take at face value what I read and to stop questioning the agenda of the writers.

For this, I don't thank graduate education, living in a "liberal" state or any of the traditional guilty parties. For this, I thank too much time spent with blogs.

Posted by Laura Kempke on August 13, 2008 at 9:20 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Does "Face Time" Still Matter?

I was reading the latest from BusinessWeek Online and didn't have to get past the headline "Are There Too Many Women Doctors?" to get a bit irritated. 

It turns out that women work slightly fewer hours than men because they spend more time taking care of their kids. This disparity puts pressure on other doctors--generally male, oftentimes older--who are left to pick up the slack. The study also points out that women often go into underserved areas like primary care or pediatrics, which pay less than other medical specialties, in order to gain scheduling flexibility. Anyone who succeeds in scheduling an appointment with a primary care physician or pediatrician likely benefits from the decisions many women doctors make.

When you need to be seen by a doctor, you need to be seen by a doctor, but the article got me thinking afresh about the value of working in an office building surrounded by coworkers vs. the obvious trend toward electronic communications and remote work. Indeed, I've always wondered what it says about me that my best client relationships are often with the people who I rarely see.

At the same time, I benefit enormously from being able to walk down the hallway and ask 15 other VPs what they think about my PR conundrum of the day. It's hard to say no to collaboration when someone plops themself down in your office, but certainly my colleagues could make their excuses about being busy and I'd clear out.

This is nice, but what I always find interesting is that colleagues working in other cities, whom I've never met in person, are just as willing to help. A little stroll down the digital hallway is just as effective as seeing people face to face.

Of course there's business you can conduct only in person. But when you've got a group of people with common interests, do you have better relationships with those you can see? Is there clear value to being in the office simply to be in the office--to putting in that face time?

My hope, and I'm pretty optimistic that this is really happening, is that social media allows groups of people with similar interests not just to compare pet peeves on Facebook or to post photos of their vacations, but to remove most of the need for face time. It'll probably be of minimal use to the 50 percent of medical students today who are women, but for the rest of us who are looking to "be there" for both our families and our employers, the ability to interact in a way that's increasingly targeted and personal--yet is entirely electronic--sure holds a lot of promise.

Posted by Laura Kempke on June 25, 2008 at 12:54 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

What wine tasting teaches us about PR

Last week I had the pleasure of attending an event featuring Gary Vaynerchuck -- a smart businessman who is changing the wine industry and leveraging social media to do so. He has daily videos where he tastes and evaluates wine, and regularly interacts with fans through every social medium available ... check out his daily videos here.

He has built a strong following -- with people coming to see him from around New England. He managed to pack a room with 200 people and keep us entertained for 90 minutes (and it could have gone longer).

Out of the entire discussion last week, there are three thoughts that I wanted to share with everyone. Specifically, a few of his comments can be applied to social media and public relations in general. I do not think Gary will mind too much, since I am taking the seeds he planted in my mind and growing them into full blown, PR-specific thoughts for you all to taste and evaluate ....

1) The only way to improve your wine palate is to taste wine -- You can read the magazines, watch the movies, read books and visit vineyards; but in the end, what gives you a true appreciation for wine is actually tasting it. The same applies to PR and social media. Theory is essential. You need to have a grounding in the fundamentals ... but in the end you need to execute. You need to practice what you preach. If you aren't engaged -- why not? This leads me to my next point ....

2) The only way to appreciate wine is to stay out of a rut -- try new things. Most people find a few wines and stick to them. They have wine racks full of Yellowtail, Conundrum,  Cakebread Chardonnay and Parallel 44. (This gives you an inkling of my tastes). That's great, but it is limiting. Try a new wine frequently. The same applies to PR. It's why a good PR pros are constantly looking for the next new channel, a new approach to doing things. It's a mantra we preach here at Schwartz. 

3) Wine is a living thing -- unlike my beloved single malt Scotch, wine can change dramatically from year to year. A wine that was great one year may be horrible (or as Gary says "utter crap") the next year. This holds true for even the best, most proven and time tested wines. Ask any wine connoisseur about 2007 Bordeaux. Too often companies and PR people fall into that trap. It worked last time, we should do it again. As we all know from the financial services commercials -- past performance is not an indicator of future results. Always re-evaluate ... is this likely to work this time? Is there something better I should try? I know my teams ask me that constantly, and as PR pros, we need to be aware of this at all times.

Sláinte Mhath!

Posted by Mark McClennan on June 23, 2008 at 9:28 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Love in the Time of Credit Control

It’s the age old conundrum – should the man pay for dinner, or are you prepared to go Dutch? That was the dilema recently posed by a questionnaire to a female friend who is seeking romance on one of the world’s most successful matchmaking websites. The etiquette of who picks up the tab has long been discussed between the sexes, with the traditional role of the man as bill-payer challenged by the feminist movement of the 1970s and onwards. But in these uncertain times, with the Credit Crunch starting to bite, fuel costs astronomical and growth slowing to a trickle – are you more likely to date somebody who’s good with money, asks the aforementioned survey?

Yet it is not only the perpetual motion of young lovers’ courtship that may be hit by an economic downturn; the impact will surely be felt in the media and communications worlds too. On the face of it the media industry faces a period of sustained hardship. Take, for example, the recent round of layoffs at some of the leading newspapers in the United States, including the 1400 fired in a 10% staff reduction across the McClatchy newspaper group, or the much-discussed elimination of 100 newsroom positions at the New York Times. Couple that  with undisclosed lays offs at B2B publishers such as Ziff Davis Enterprises and, in total, some estimates put US media job losses at more than 4,000 in 2008 alone.

There are some more subtle market changes at play of course, other than the global economic downturn. In the McClatchy case, while print advertising revenue had fallen by 15% over the past year, online sales – a smaller segment of group revenue – had grown by just 13%. Indeed, this is a trend that has been prevalent across a number of international publishing groups with journalists increasingly producing copy for online titles, while print magazines become thinner by the month as content continues to chase the advertising dollar.

Changes too have been taking place in major UK media outlets, with journalists at The Independent fighting cost-cutting moves to introduce seven-day working across their daily and Sunday titles. Meanwhile, News International’s subsidiary BSkyB is contemplating job-cuts at its loss-making magazine department. It is telling that most UK print trade titles are now staffed by a vastly reduced editorial team, while national newspapers have increased flexibility by turning to freelance writers.

With consumer spending unlikely to remain as robust in the coming year – and advertising dollars inevitably falling as a result – the question remains, which media titles will best survive? If job cuts are unavoidable in the print world, could streamlined, fast moving online titles benefit from a lower cost base? Moreover, there is an argument to say the seemingly inextricable rise of the blogger – with zero cost self-publishing now an established norm – could become even more prevalent in the recession. There is, after all, no suggestion that the downturn has hit consumers’ insatiable appetite for content.

Perhaps even more important to the emerging tech PR community are the movements in the Venture Capitalist community, with some analyst firms suggesting that US VC spending is slowing. There has even been speculation in some quarters that the world’s local bank is denying social media and mobile tech start-ups a bank account as they are seen as high risk in the present climate. And while fewer companies may find backing in the coming year, there is little evidence – yet – that the mass 2001 dotcom cull is to be repeated.

Venture Capitalism is, of course, not unlike that dating game. Financiers and entrepreneurs circle each other with increasingly amorous glances until one makes a move. The question is, in troubled times, who’ll really be footing the bill?

Posted by Ed Barker on June 20, 2008 at 11:55 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

A Different Dialect

The view from the Motherland across the clear blue water of the Atlantic Ocean is so often a contrast of differing approaches; two countries divided by a common language, to paraphrase an eminent Irish playwright. So it plays out in both politics and communications. In the past few days Barack Obama has declared himself the winner in the race for the Democratic Presidential nomination, with his rival Hillary Clinton formally endorsing him over the past weekend. The Illinois Senator’s slick yet professorial – and at times fervently hyperbolic – style has wooed large swathes of an American electorate seemingly hungry for change. Such has been Obama’s impact that if polls are to be trusted, then the sanguine politico could well become the first black President of the United States.

Home, and just a stones throw from Schwartz’ London offices, the tormented leader of the Labour party, Gordon Brown, seems to stumble from one self-made communications crisis to another.

Immigration, unpopular tax changes, crime, economic slowdown – pick any one of a dozen issues and Brown has seemingly struggled to control media criticism. The Fife MP may only have been Prime Minister for a little under a year but his demeanour couldn’t be of greater contrast to Obama’s. In a time of financial and political turbulence, the American people – at least those of Democratic persuasion - have turned to a man who voices the promise of hope. Britain, so much of the media would have us believe, is to be led into the same mêlée by a beleaguered and increasingly idea -shorn general.

American elections have always differed in style and tone to those in Britain. The seemingly constant public campaigning and media saturation in the US, contrasts so markedly with the ‘in the shadows’ briefings of the Westminster Village. Indeed, Obama’s campaign team has made judicious use of the internet – turning to social networking sites to raise campaign funds, increase voter registration and project not only a consistent message but an image of an engaged and youthful leader. By contrast, Brown’s recent foray into self-broadcast on the Downing Street YouTube channel was as uncomfortable to watch as it undoubtedly was for the man to film. The media’s rather predictable reaction was to mock Brown as the fish out of water he was.

The contrasting styles between these two much talked about politicians are potentially as much about cultural differences as generational and personality traits. The US culture of immediacy has, after all, given birth to Facebook, YouTube and the rest of the web 2.0 media revolutionaries. Even media friendly Tony Blair was a novice when it came to use of the internet. And just as communication style impacts media and public perception of our politicians, then cultural factors influence the style of communication between the PR community and the press too. This has been the subject of much debate between Schwartz’ US and European offices in recent weeks.

In many ways globalisation has brought our two countries closer together: American TV, music, commerce, brands – and particularly politics – have impacted greatly on the British way of life. The primaries, for example, were covered daily by the nation’s leading newspapers and rolling news stations. Even so, the three thousand miles of water that separate our offices sometimes makes it easy to forget that the US is a young country, with an aggressive, entrepreneurial economy, where short term goals come to the fore.

The pace of life here in London is fast, but the ethic of business – and therefore the media agenda – often differs from our friends across the pond. The UK media, for example, is focused on issues and trends, personalities and opinion, rather than products and services. It’s a fact that calls for international campaign management, for international PR campaigns - proving the old adage that one should always think local, even when acting global. It’s a path that many a President has trodden before.

Posted by Ed Barker on June 11, 2008 at 2:34 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

A Great Night at the Bell Ringer Awards

Last night at the 2008 Bell Ringer Awards, Schwartz Communications was recognized with 27 awards, including 12 Bell Ringer Awards and 15 Awards of Merit. (For those curious, you can find the full list here).

The work spanned numerous categories, including consumer, healthcare and technology. One key standout was that we received both Bell Ringer Awards presented for the Best New Media category.

The award total is impressive (close to our highest ever), but in all honesty it is what is behind the awards that is even more impressive. In speaking with a number of other vice presidents at the ceremony last night - these awards would not have been possible without the extraordinary efforts our team members seem to always give and the great clients with whom we have the pleasure of working every day.

Steve and Paula Mae Schwartz, our co-founders, tell us regularly to take the big swing. Our clients expect it of us. My clients set the bar high, and when we reach it, they move it higher. Only by doing this can we truly realize dramatic business results through public relations.

The Bell Ringer judges obviously agree with Steve and Paula Mae, for they also awarded them the Crystal Bell lifetime achievement award last night for their work in bringing a new approach to high-tech and medical public relations.

So thank you to our teams, our clients and our co-founders for making last night possible.

Posted by Mark McClennan on June 3, 2008 at 9:21 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Honoring Excellence

Last week at a gala event, Schwartz's own Kristina Ebenius was honored by Resume as one "Sweden's 499 best & most powerful" within media and communications. 

 The publication created the list to honor those executives "who do the unexpected and most creative, those who manage to get new clients without severing ties with old ones and those whose opinion we just must read about and hear. The souls who turn media and communication into Sweden's most fun and vital industry."

Now, I am frankly not sure why they didn't go with 500, but we are proud they put her on the list for "leading a global secret in Sweden."

At Schwartz we all know Kristina is a tireless dynamo who has helped grow our office more rapidly than our most optimistic projections. She has been instrumental in bringing Schwartz's results-oriented, media relations-focused brand of PR to Europe and are glad to see others recognizing her for her efforts.

Stort Grattis Kristina! Det var väl förtjänat! 

Posted by Mark McClennan on at 6:07 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Teeing Off -- PR and Golf

The Masters just ended and my passion for golf is reignited. Unfortunately, like most people, my ability to write about and talk about golf far exceeds my skill at the game.

Therefore, I decided to share words of PR wisdom as golf analogies. But I need your help. Golf may be one of the two most overused analogies in business, only after military themes and slightly beating out baseball and The Godfather .… So share your own PR/golf lessons in the comments section and I will add the best here.

Following are five to get you started:

Don’t be seduced by the driver—The driver is a great club. When you hit it well, there is nothing like watching the ball fly and hearing the “oohs” and “aahs” from appreciative fans (or members of your foursome). But for most people muscling the driver rarely results in a 300+ yard straight drive off the tee. Sure you will hit that perfect drive once in 20 rounds, but you are much more likely to whiff, hit it in the woods or end up in the sand--raising your score and leading to frustration.

The same goes for media relations. Being on the Today Show, the Wall Street Journal or in Parade is outstanding and usually a reason to celebrate. But too often your outreach there won’t connect, or you will neglect other important elements, and put yourself at a handicap. You should go after these outlets, but if all you do is swing the driver … you will be in trouble. This leads to the next point.

Drive for show, putt for dough—All the creative ideas, the flashy presentations and the red Nike shirts don’t amount to anything if you haven’t mastered the short game. Execute flawlessly. Pay attention to detail.
 
Why does Tiger Woods hit 1,000 practice balls?—Focus on fundamentals brings success. A PR campaign needs to be built on solid fundamentals--the trades to bring the key messages to prospects and customers is the solid drive off the tee; lay it up onto the green with user testimonials and analysts, and *then* you are in position to go for the deceptively simple putt with the business media (which is never as easy as it looks), to get the birdie. It’s the little things that add up to success.

Pay attention to the course and your environment—In golf, it's good to have a general plan of how you will play the course. But conditions change, your competitors change, even your swing can change in mid-round. You may have planned to hit a hard driver on the 15th hole, but by the time you get there it's raining and windy ... change of club and plan.
 
Successful golfers plan, but they also adjust and trust their instincts to adapt to the changing circumstances. Successful PR people need to do the same thing to achieve success in the face of changing conditions.

You WILL hit the bunkers—Every golfer hits the sand traps. Hitting them is not the end of the world. The same goes for a PR program. You will hit the rough, the bunkers and even the water. Think about what you will do in those situations and you can recover from it. Have disaster plans in place.

Posted by Mark McClennan on April 14, 2008 at 5:50 PM
Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

CNN.com Gross Out

We're all well aware that traditional media have been under strain for years, first due to the web and now as a result of competition from "new media."

Some are handling the challenge as gracefully as they probably can, given the situation, and some are not. CNN.com (U.S. Alexa ranking: 19) splashes down into the latter category.

CNN has always, in my mind, been a mix of fluff and serious reporting. You might disagree, but I think that what CNN does well (e.g., some international reporting), it does better than just about anyone.

So that makes all the more stark the contrast with CNN.com. Mixed in with "American cancels 900 flights" and "China says 35 arrested in Olympics bomb plot," we have "Wedding bed found in polygamist temple" (voyeuristic--is this the most important element of the story out of west Texas?), "I'm a sociopath, hiker's killer tells police," "Witness: beheading victim asked for help," "Woman makes gruesome find after mom dies" and "Principal nabbed with teens, porn, pot."

Seriously?

It's depressing to see CNN.com take events that deserve careful treatment and clearly pander to site visitors' desire to read about and view the sordid, the morbid and the just plain gross.

NYTimes.com (U.S. Alexa ranking: 33) manages to pull in huge traffic without upping its eeew factor, but they're the only general news site giving CNN.com a run for their money.

Perhaps when CNN.com readers have their fill of sludge, they're heading to NYTimes.com for a more serious take on events. One can only hope!

Posted by Laura Kempke on at 9:15 AM
Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Target to Your Market

Fun piece on page one of today's Boston Globe on creative ways VCs look to source early deals. Couple thoughts:

1) The story's prominent placement was likely the work of Managing Editor/News and Page One Editor Caleb Solomon. Solomon visited Schwartz a few months ago and talked elequently about the role of new media in today's newsroom and how he looked to get more business stories on page one.

2) Innovative VCs like Borealis Ventures tap into underserved entrepreneurial communities. Borealis, based in New Hampshire, looks for ideas and talent in northern New England. The Peak Pitch contest is a perfect way to reach their desired audience. All types of companies can learn something about target marketing from events like this one.

Posted by Mike Farber on March 26, 2008 at 2:21 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

PRSA Boston Takeaways

Attending any conference or meeting with other PR people is always entertaining, regardless of the advertised topic. At the very least, you know everyone there is addicted to the news and wants to talk about it.

I wasn't sure what to expect from last night's Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) Boston session on the military's program for embedding reporters with troops in Iraq, but was optimistic that it would be interesting. It's far afield from what we do here, of course, but from what I can tell from the people I've had the opportunity to meet with or hear speak, the military has more than a few public affairs/PR people who are on top of their game.

The panel included:

• Vic Beck, a Navy captain who's serving as chief of media operations in Iraq. Before he was called up, he was a VP with Peter Arnold Associates. Captain Beck dialed in during the middle of his night.
• Guy Shields, senior manager of public relations for Raytheon Integrated Defense Systems. Mr. Shields helped design the embedded program in 2003 when he was an Army colonel.
• Steven Komarow, senior deputy international editor of the Associated Press. He worked for USA Today when he was embedded with the Army during the invasion of Iraq.

The three covered a range of topics and took many questions. I have to say that it was the most worthwhile PR industry program I've attended in some time.

One of the things I noted was the total focus of the embedded program on the traditional media. Not that it's surprising--it's that this was a great reminder for me (if one was really needed) of the power of the mainstream media.

Schwartzers delight in finding new blogs that drive website traffic and are as happy as anyone to do the Twitter play-by-play. But what we find more often than not when we're able to do a head-to-head comparison of, for example, how many people were reached by similar stories on a website covering tech industry news and a popular blog devoted to the same is that coverage in the traditional media has bigger impact.

(My colleague Jason Morris is our resident expert in these analyses. Maybe he'll give us some of his data at some point.)

Captain Beck explained that last month there were 68 embedded reporters. His team could track to those journalists, in that month alone, 4,924 stories in western media.

What I took out of this was a reinforced belief that as enamored as we get with social media, it's important not to pursue it at the expense of the traditional. I think about the "either/or" topic because sometimes companies are so smitten that they go off the deep end and tell us they don't want to work with reporters--they just want to pursue blogs, online forums, etc.

I'm sure it's human nature to be entertained by the new, especially when the old can be tough to work with some days. Blogs and YouTube videos produced by tech companies--these types of things are integral to more and more PR programs. But you can't argue with 4,924 stories in what appeared to be every major and mid-sized U.S. market.

Clearly we're not the Army, but to me, last night's program was an outstanding reminder to keep it balanced.

Posted by Laura Kempke on at 10:53 AM
Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

Polaroid's Demise: Why Old Doesn't Mean Trash

I pass a sad sight each time I get on 128 South from our Waltham offices: the all-but empty headquarters of the once-proud Massachusetts institution, Polaroid. The sign covering the windows of the large, empty cafeteria proclaim "Polaroid Now," but Polaroid is mostly in the past. When the company announced recently that it would soon stop making its eponymous film, many cried while many others said "they still make that stuff? Why?"

This past Sunday's Boston Globe had two articles in the demise of the technologically innovative company, one that focuses on the artistic side while the other looks at the business and technological legacy Polaroid left behind.

While my title here at Schwartz includes the line "New Media Strategist," I'm a big fan of older technologies. My camera collection includes a number of film cameras including a 1950s era Kodak Retina IIIc and a medium format twin lens reflex with technology dating back to the 1960s.

Each has its own personality and quirks that makes it worth keeping and using. I pulled out my Colorpack II and loaded it with Fuji instant film to take the shot in this post. Yes, Fuji makes instant film and frankly, it's a lot better than the stuff Polaroid was putting out. In fact, the guys at my favorite camera store believe Fuji will probably pick up the rights to the rest of the Polaroid line. 

People peg Polaroid's demise to the digital revolution, but it really began with one-hour photo machines. While Polaroid offered a single instant picture, you could take your standard roll of 12, 24 or 36 picture 35mm film into the local Walgreens, get prints back in an hour and still be able to make copies later. A Polaroid offers only one image.

That said, my kids usually want to see their pictures on the back of my digital camera, but they are amazed by the tactile aspect of the Polaroid. The idea of holding a picture in their hands 2 minutes after taking it blows them away. Also, the uniqueness of that image contrasts with the quick-copy culture that digital provides.

Everyone looks to new technology to supercede the old, but that doesn't mean the old is worthless. One morning while drivng to work I heard a WBUR-FM story about a local shop that repairs and sells manual typewriters (I have a few of these around my house as well). The owner was saying how he gets a lot of teens coming in to buy machines that were once on the cutting edge but are now considered stodgy. As a person whose first professional writing job involved pounding on a manual typewriters, there is something nice about hitting keys that make a *WHAP* sound and have a bit of a reaction. Just as with film, when you type on paper you take more care in your work, since you can't erase by just hitting the "backspace" button.

On twitter Businessweek Reporter Stephen Baker recently commented that his book editing process is amazingly archaic. Maybe that's not such a bad thing.

Posted by Chuck Tanowitz on March 19, 2008 at 1:10 PM
Comments (1) | TrackBack (0)

The Waltham Globe

My office looks out on Route 128 and since last fall, I've been watching the demolition of a building, clearing of the site and now the digging for the foundation of a new office building. They've been blasting and when this is about to happen, state police stop traffic in front of the building across all eight lanes of the highway.

I'm sure that blocking traffic is necessary to keep Massachusetts drivers, rubberneckers all of us, from driving off the road. But it also creates nasty traffic jams during times when travelers would typically expect to get from point A to point B in a reasonable amount of time.

Route 128 carries something like 200,000 cars a day and continued development of big office buildings and shopping areas along it affects people who live and work along 128.

Where should those people turn for information about the development? Big regional newspapers?  Well, no. The last time the Boston Globe, for example, covered this sort of development was four months ago.

Obviously they can't cover everything repeatedly. But where are 200,000 who wonder what blew up next to Uno's to go?

I keep heading for Wicked Local. I'm so happy that a news outlet recognizes that there's much more to the Boston area than Boston itself. And for those who love the city, a coworker recently pointed me to Universal Hub, a wonderful aggregate of all things local.

Financial constraints and, certainly, assumptions about what the masses want to read have for years impacted regional dailies' coverage of companies that haven't yet reached the size of a Fidelity or EMC. As someone who believes the action is with the smaller companies, I've long been irked by this.

This opening has cleared the decks for the success of an Xconomy, which is more than happy to dive into the growing tech companies (disclosure: this one's a client) that drive much of our local economy.

Without a doubt, major media have done much to successfully rework themselves, but I have to believe that readership of newer sources will keep growing as people like me look to the news outlets in their backyard.

Posted by Laura Kempke on at 11:26 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

NCAA Social Media Tip Off! Who Would Win?

The Big Dance is about to begin and corporate networks are about to slow to a crawl as employees feverishly work to finish their tournament brackets and then stream the games on Thursday and Friday.

I love the Tourney, but since my beloved Orangemen aren't in this year, I decided to take a slightly different approach - what if The Big Dance was a social media tournament? What if the schools had to compete based on their social media prowess, not their hoop skills?

At 3:00 a.m. last night, I decided to make that thought a reality. I evaluated the field of 64 and had the teams face off solely on social media skills and came up with a power ranking for each school. I kept the NCAA seeds and let them face off.

How was the ranking determined? It was determined by (# of facebook users in the School network/number of students at school according to Wikipedia). Note: Yes that includes alumni, but they count as fans in the stands cheering on the team. And if the students didn't join their schools network..they didn't show up for the game. I recorded it all in a handly notebook and used the Microsoft calculator app to do the math.  

The Final Four:   Stanford vs. Duke and Notre Dame v. Davidson  

The Final:   Davidson v. Stanford  

The results? No surprise to loyal Valleywag readers - Stanford takes it all with a 2.5 ranking, beating Davidson with a 2.05

Other interesting observations:

• UCLA (1.39) was the only #1 seed to make it to the Elite Eight
• Two 5 seeds made the Elite 8 - Michigan State (1.41) and Notre Dame (2.01)
• Once again a 15-seed was dangerous (I still remember the Richmond Spiders) - American University (1.51) beat Butler (1.37) and University of Oklahoma (1.18)  to go to the Elite Eight
• Toughest Draw: Cornell. They had a 2.17 ranking, but they were up against Stanford in the first round. If Cornell was in the East or the Midwest, they would have made it to the finals. Next year, they deserve more respect.
• Closest game: Kansas State v. Wisconsin in the 2nd round (1.328 v 1.320)
• The schools with the lest social media power?  Indiana (0.61), Boise State (0.463), Portland State (0.432) Cal State Fullerton (0.414), and Mississippi Valley State (0.14)

Finally, for my beloved Syracuse fans, if they had made it into the tourney, they would have done what they usually did, make it to the Sweet 16 with a Power Ranking of 1.47 and then bowed out...

Posted by Mark McClennan on March 18, 2008 at 12:10 PM
Comments (2) | TrackBack (0)

Social Media Lessons from Horton

For the past month, my three year old son has been having me read him the Dr. Seuss classic Horton Hears A Who in preparation for the movie that was released this weekend.

Despite reading the story more than 30 times in 30 days, I still really like it, and that made me wonder whether there are there any lessons from the book that can be applied to social media and PR practitioners. Similar to my “All you needed to know about PR you can learn from Dora the Explorer” essay, Yes, there are. Horton and Dr. Seuss provide companies and professionals engaging social media with some great guidelines.

A person's a person, no matter how small—This is the overarching theme of the book, and is also a central tenet of social media. Companies can no longer afford to ignore the “little guy.” Or as I tell my teams – everyone matters.

Listen—Horton teaches all the other animals in the jungle of Nool something that many companies are still learning. At a minimum they need to listen. If you are not listening, you are missing a world of possibilities. If your ears aren’t open to RSS, Twitter, Facebook and the dozen of other ways in which people are communicating, what are you missing?

Engage others—It was only by working together that all the Whos in Whoville were able to be heard. Don’t go it alone. Find people of similar (and even dissimilar) interests and engage them in conversation and build a relationship. You never know when you might need your friends.

Beware the Wickersham Brothers (and cousins)—A mob can appear out of nowhere and attack you. The important thing to plan is how will you respond? Plan out and ask the tough questions and scenarios. If you don’t take the initiative, do you think anyone else will? Be ready to fight back against the brothers.

The beezlenut oil is simmering—Ignore competitors, dissatisfied customers and bloggers at your peril. There is always a vat of beezlenut oil simmering in cyberspace in which your company, product, reputation, posts and videos can be dunked. Just because you don’t see the pot, doesn’t mean it isn’t there. Try to avoid it, but if it spills – work to get out fast. Don’t ignore the oil and get boiled alive.

Ignore tags and technology at your peril—If Horton had tagged his clover with “Who” or “Whoville,” he would have been able to find it, instead of searching three million clovers before finally finding the right clover. Use technology to your advantage. Tag everything you can and search tools are wonderful.

Finally—The power of Yopp—Speak out. Your voice matters. It doesn’t matter if you are not an A-lister blogger, a megacorp or social media guru. If you don’t participate you lose, and even the smallest Yopp, the smallest contribution, can make a significant difference.

Posted by Mark McClennan on March 17, 2008 at 11:43 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Beats Facebook Wall Any Day

A former colleague sent me a postcard from her recent trip to India. I was ridiculously happy to receive it. 

Yes, I keep up with her on Facebook and email and all, but a postcard was so much more fun to receive.

I'm sure this is just yet more proof that I need to get out more, but there's something to be said for going old school when it can make a friend stand in the middle of the hallway smiling in a way that Facebook never has.

Posted by Laura Kempke on March 13, 2008 at 1:19 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Click to Confirm Your Google Alert

When Google introduced the Google Alerts service, my first thought was "Great! Now my clients don't need to pay for expensive news searches." Many of them had already pared back their use of such services because they were looking to save every dollar coming out of the tech recession, so they were just happy to find a cheap alternative.

My opinion changed when some clients became obsessed with tracking not only their own coverage, but that of their competitors. I had a number of conversations with people who had a tough time accepting that it's not realistic to expect the agency to stop--literally to prevent--other companies from getting noticed in the media. (Intruding on those companies' coverage--there's the goal.)

I still think it was mostly an emotional reaction to being able to really understand, probably for the first time, where their competitors were appearing in the media.

But now, most clients are way past the emotion. They're deep into their site analytics and are tracking visitors who come from news articles, product reviews and blogs. I love to hear that an article the PR team helped out on brought in a bunch of well-qualified visitors, some of whom went on to download the client's software.

Tech (and increasingly healthcare) companies and PR people talk about what this means for the practice of PR. Certainly, no one wants to feel like they're spending money on faith alone, so they're holding PR up against things like SEO and other marketing tools.

To be sure, measurement can be a wonderful thing. But I wonder if the techniques most in vogue today really capture the cumulative effect of steady-state volume--that stream of Google Alerts that companies love and that helps stack them up nicely to their competition--plus positive (not just okay) reviews, plus getting the Fortune 50 customer (not the no-name) to talk on behalf of the start-up, plus the CEO Q&A that gave him space to talk in depth about his or her corner of the industry ... and so on.

Some of these things have no immediate tangible effect, but does this mean they won't matter in sum six months or a year out for companies trying to establish a new category or go up against a much bigger player?

I'm thinking that PR's real value these days lies in the ability to bring all of these things--some easily measurable, others not so much--together. It's not social media to the exclusion of "traditional," or product PR in lieu of thought leadership campaigns. If I were running a tech company, I'd ask myself how I could have all of these things AND still have money left over for my Google AdWords campaign.

Posted by Laura Kempke on March 12, 2008 at 11:44 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

No Down Time, Even in the Air

When I was in college, one of my professors had been a field reporter for Voice of America. He told us the story of an influential CEO he interviewed who appeared to be the busiest man in America. He asked the CEO (unfortunately I can't remember his name) when, if ever, time was afforded to simply think. The CEO responded (and I am paraphrasing) that "he used to be able to think on long flights, but now they put those phones on the back of the seats. I never get a break."

It's been a while since I have been on a plane that has phones, but given a New York Times story I read this morning, it looks like very soon we all will have no peace in the skies. A few different Internet start-ups are developing services that allow air passengers to check email and even surf the Web in flight.

I am not surprised that the response from the blog community has been positive. Without a doubt I would pay for this service. Initial reports say JetBlue will be offering it for free for email use. I would pay for that, too. As it is, I spend money each time I get to Logan Airport to sign up for its Wi-Fi service, even though I log on for only thirty minutes or so before boarding a plane.

Another interesting aspect of the in-flight Internet news--JetBlue is one of the early adopters. JetBlue often promotes its technology and its relationships to popular technology companies.  That's smart. People want to fly airlines that are technologically advanced, for obvious reasons. Being early to market with Internet access enhances the company's hip aura, in contrast to the dingy relic image I associate with many other airlines. No question Virgin Atlantic is also in the hip Airlines category. As noted in The Times piece, they are also one of the first to offer Internet access, except for them it's through the inflight entertainment systems.

Going back to my college professor's story for a minute, if I'm trying to work or think through some deeper topics, I'd much rather have the person sitting next to me in flight surfing the 'Net than chatting (probably loudly to be heard over the engines) on one of those seat-back phones.

Posted by Ross Levanto on December 7, 2007 at 7:50 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Don't Just Choose an Analyst Firm, Choose an Analyst

Many clients turn to us when they are about to engage with their first analyst firm and ask for recommendations. The questions we in turn ask: "What are you looking for from your firm? Market sizing data for the next round of funding? Lead generation? Feedback on messaging and market strategy?"

Most of the discussion heads down that path about which firm is the perfect fit based on focus, cost, support and what the competition is doing. Is it Gartner? IDC? Burton?

Unfortunately, this where the client vetting process often stops. Companies often assume that all analysts at a firm are the same and that they, the client, will get the same level of service, expertise and support from every analyst at that firm. This is a bad, bad assumption.

Most of the time when we meet with a prospective client, they request a follow-up meeting with the entire proposed team. Why? Because most savvy marketing people realize that a firm's reputation is important, but that in a services business it is all of the people doing work on the team that matter. That is why repeatability is the single most important element in a successful services business. The comfort of knowing that whenever you go to that restaurant or hotel, fly that airline or work with that law firm, that you can expect a close facsimile of good service that you have experienced in the past.

This extends to analyst firms. The best analyst firms have a repeatable service model and have built a solid reputation by servicing a large percentage of their clients well. That said, I am sure that every company has worked with an analyst in the past who didn't meet the standard of the firm's reputation. This is not an indictment of big firms or brand-name firms, but of poor analysts at any size firm. So what do you do?

Every company should ask their PR firm to arrange a briefing request with the analyst that covers their space. During that initial conversation, the company should actually interview the analyst about their professional experience, past coverage areas, planned research for the coming year, how they support their clients and what they consider to be a successful analyst firm/client relationship. During the conversation or (preferably) in-person meeting, they should also get a feel for the personality and work style of the analyst. Is this someone who will be open to our view of the market? That's important. Are they willing to challenge our views at the risk of offending a prospective client? Even more important. "Yes man" analysts lose their credibility quick and with it, any return you may have gotten from that relationship. 

At the end of the day, you have to be confident that you will get a return on investment from that relationship because you work hard to get that budget. The firm name and reputation are important, but a dead weight analyst is dead weight no matter which firm they work for and it can seriously impact ROI.

Bottom line? Find what you want in an analyst and then focus on the firm. Weigh firm name and influence as one of many factors in the decision.

Posted by Jason Morris on November 26, 2007 at 10:30 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Common Sense: Keep Your Eye on the Goal

The evolution of social media and technology is constantly causing companies and people to try new approaches and tactics to take advantage of and react to technology advancements.

Sometimes this can cause people to head down some very strange and impractical paths. This isn't unusual. It has happened throughout human history.

For example, I am reading a great book on naval warfare in WWI (Castles of Steel by Robert K. Massie). To deal with the new submarine threat, the British Admiralty tried a number of initiatives.

One that has caused me great amusement was allegedly proposed by Admiral Sir Frederick Inglefield. He not only proposed the idea - he received authorization for it.

The idea was to train seagulls to block the lenses of German periscopes with seagull droppings. (Google it if you don't believe me). Eventually the program was dumped. The admiralty tried a number of ideas before they settled on something more practical...depth charges.

There are a number of lessons to be learned here. The most important one for us as PR and marketing practitioners is to keep our eye on the end goal and not get distracted and pursue something tangential.

We need to embrace and respond to changing technologies. Social media is changing the dynamic just as much as submarines did in World War I. But don't panic over new developments. That will only cause you to react in sub-optimal ways. You don't need to use and react to every social media tool that is created.

Clearly define your goals and then figure out the best way to achieve them. Ask yourself about the desired outcome. Determine the level of engagement and ask if it is sustainable in the long run. Otherwise, you may just end up training seagulls.

Posted by Mark McClennan on November 14, 2007 at 10:46 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Measuring PR: Clients like it, PR people ought to love it

I recently attended a conference on PR measurement put on by the Institute for Public Relations. Hearing what’s working for other PR people is always interesting, but this conference was particularly welcome because it brought together people who are doing the deep thinking on probably the hottest topic in PR: evaluating PR’s impact.

Measuring PR is rough for a number of reasons. Just a few include the difficulty of tracking changes in perception of a company or product to editorial coverage (as opposed to advertising, opinions articulated by colleagues, etc.), the sometimes prohibitively high cost associated with measurement itself and, not least, the desire PR people have to defend their budgets.

Conference presenters included a senior director at Microsoft who’s working to represent the effectiveness of PR for that company’s product lines and executives with a single number. There’s an appeal to the simplicity of a single-number score. But I didn’t understand why obliterating the nuance associated with, for example, media reports on Vista, was a good idea. Nevertheless, good to know that Microsoft is playing with the idea of measuring PR with one number.

At Schwartz, we work with entrepreneurial companies that are looking to grow very quickly. In the past, many of them “just knew” when PR was working. They’d report more in-bound calls, greater willingness of potential customers and partners to take meetings, and so on. We liked to hear anecdotal evidence that our programs were working, but it was only partially satisfying.

A few companies found it meaningful (some still do) to look at advertising equivalents. This is okay—if nothing else, it makes the case that PR is cheaper than advertising—but ultimately not that useful.

The new BusinessWeek

BusinessWeek has just done a big re-design. Here's the new logo:

It's still red. They kept the big "W" in the middle of the name. But is it any good?

Well, it's not bad. Certainly bold. Perhaps The New York Times should take a poll of designers like they did for the New York City taxi logo. 

Here's what I find interesting. Buried in Stephen Adler's Editor's Memo it says, "We'll be opening our doors to an Internet-type model of aggregation--that is, offering other smart perspectives from around the world alongside stories that we develop. In this way, we'll share ideas that we have found worthwhile, even if they weren't invented here."

Now that's quite a statement for arguably the world's top business publication to make. In essence, BusinessWeek is recognizing that a huge part of their value is to be one of the few "must read" resources for busy professionals. If that means cherry picking enough good tidbits from competing publications to assure their readers that they're not missing much, then so be it.

Fits my theory on how the big "traditional" media outlets that figure out how to best integrate "new" media techniques and tools will wind up even more influential than before.

Posted by Mike Farber on October 23, 2007 at 8:10 AM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Take a lesson from Al

OK, maybe Al Gore didn't actually invent the Internet, but he has certainly demonstrated the effectiveness of combining traditional media with new Internet media. Gore's crusade to combat global warming was recognized last week with the announcement that the former Vice President will share the 2007 Nobel Peace Prize with the International Panel on Climate Change. Author David Rothkopf told Thomas Friedman, "Gore, even without the presidency, used all the modern tools of communication, the Internet, video and globalization to reach out and galvanize a global movement."

The key phrase is "modern tools of communication." Gore wisely used all the tools at his disposal. Inexplicably, many organizations today are still sitting on the sidelines when it comes to utilizing new forms of digital communication. There are tremendous advantages to be gained by combining traditional and new Internet communication tools. You may not need to spark a global movement, but I'm sure a movement within your market space will do just fine.

Posted by John Moran on October 17, 2007 at 12:51 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Comparing East vs. West, Based on Interview Questions

Add this to your file on the long-discussed difference between the entrepreneurial climates on the two U.S. coasts. Recently, I traveled on a press tour with a client to meet with business press---reporters and bloggers---in Boston, New York and Washington. My client also went to San Francisco, and we compared notes on all the meetings.

The reporters in San Francisco did not ask any questions related to the client's business model. They were impressed with the technology demonstration. They like gadgets.

The reporters on the east coast generally asked about revenue models in the first five minutes. The common question: "How do you make money?"

Questions about west coast versus east coast have permeated my entire career in PR. My first-hand experience provides clear on-the-ground evidence of the split.

Extra Credit: If you have not seen it yet, you should read an account by Scott Kirsner, who freelances for the Boston Globe, on why Boston lost Facebook. It describes how an idea hatched on the east coast ultimately earned financing out west.

Posted by Ross Levanto on October 16, 2007 at 12:39 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)

Theory: Expensive Tchotchkes = Hot Market

I propose a new theory: You can tell whether a specific market is hot based on the value of the give-aways at that market's tradeshows.

Tradeshows are part of the foundation of any good PR program. Perhaps most importantly, a trade show offers a chance for key players and influencers (including reporters, partners, analysts and end users) to congregate at the same location. The concept of a press tour today is somewhat hard to grasp--reporters, analysts and bloggers tend to live and work all over the place. But they all come to a tradeshow if it represents a market they follow.

So can one base the "hottness" of a technology market by its trade show? Sure. Look at the number of attendees, number of exhibitors, and number of reporters and analysts attending. See if large recognizable vendors are sponsors. And, perhaps, per my theory, take a look at what exhibitors are giving away.

Joan Geoghegan, a senior vice president at Schwartz, recently attended VMworld, the trade show run by VMware, a leader in the virtualization market. Anyone will tell you virtualization is hot. So given that, let's take a look at what certain vendors were calling tchotchkes at the event:

-- EqualLogic: A $40K Harley

-- Wyse: A Mercedes Smart Car

-- Dunes: A hardened PC fully loaded with their software (one a day)

-- Microsoft: A 42-inch flat TV screen (one a day)

There were too many iPods, Nintendo Wii consoles and other "basic" give-aways to count, she notes.

I don't know about you, but if giving away a Wii at a specific show is blase, that show must be very hot.

Posted by Ross Levanto on October 15, 2007 at 12:00 PM
Comments (0) | TrackBack (0)