I was in the checkout line at the grocery store last night and, as I was throwing my purchases onto the conveyor belt, I noticed that almost every tabloid and entertainment magazine had a cover story about Jesse James’ marital affair and the word “monster” somehow worked into the headline. My first thought was, “How sad.” My second thought was, “What’s his PR team doing about this?”

With a client roster comprised of highly reputable, forward-thinking companies, I don’t often get to dabble in crisis PR, but this made me think about how I’d handle this situation.

Call me crazy, but under these circumstances, I think honesty and candor is the best policy. When celebrities like Tiger Woods and Jesse James go mum or offer vague statements and apologies (like James did) stating that the “vast majority” of the allegations are untrue, it drags out the process – and the criticism. We don’t need all the juicy details, but a direct response and an interview here and there might quell the speculation. Being elusive and running off to rehab only makes matters worse and gives the public – and the media – more time to hypothesize. When did rehab become the new crisis PR, anyway?

Take, for instance, the Tiger Woods situation. That saga continued for months until he finally surfaced and made public statements on Feb. 19. The news that followed was that Woods had hired former White House Press Secretary Ari Fleischer, that he was returning to golf and, later, that he and Fleischer had parted ways. Chapter over. Situation status quo. If he’s lucky, the next bit of news will likely be about his fifth win at the Masters.

Time may have been a factor in helping Woods smooth things over with the court of public opinion, but I believe that coming out of hiding and showing his face was the best thing he’s done yet. If I were Jesse James’ publicist or PR rep, I’d suggest doing the same, but sooner rather than later.

So now I turn to you, fellow PR pros and colleagues, what would be your advice to someone in those shoes? Let’s discuss …

I’ll admit, I’ve never been one for gambling, yet I can fully see its allure to others. There is something appealing about rolling a winning pair of dice, turning over a winning hand, or pulling down on the arm of a winning slot machine. Heck, even I wholeheartedly enjoy simply walking the floors of a casino and seeing all the excitement unfold. So why is it than that I don’t share in that excitement? Is it because I am not a risk taker? No, that can’t be it. Because as PR professionals, do we not take chances every day? Each time we go after a story and take all the necessary steps to land our clients in these stories, that is essentially what we are doing. Sure, PR is about relationships and utilizing those relationships for the better of our clients, but is there ever an element of pure luck and timing involved with our strategies? I wonder.

Recently, after months of pitching a long-lead story, an opportunity presented itself for one of our clients to be included in a national morning television show segment. As with any great hit, there was such a rush of excitement involved in the events leading up to the airdate. We dutifully prepped the reporter through email exchanges and conference calls, and continuously updated our client on the logistics surrounding the coverage. The pieces were in place. All that was left to do was to wait.

Only a few short days before the piece was scheduled to run, however, we received word that the portion of the segment that would include our client had unfortunately been cut. There was nothing that could have been done differently on our part to change this outcome. These things just happen and in cases that involve broadcast, they can happen at a moment’s notice. Next week’s “Balloon Boy” or an out-of-control Prius hoax could wreak havoc on what should be a shining day for one of your clients.

Times like this though can quickly remind us that no matter how great our efforts, nothing is ever guaranteed. As PR professionals we will forever be at the mercy of the ever changing news cycle, but it is our responsibility to keep taking chances and do everything in our power to make the next big hit happen.

Use of profanity is traditionally accepted as an occasional outburst reserved for situations of duress or frustration, but as recent events have demonstrated, it can also be used to ring in historic government change. By now, we all know that Vice President Biden said on-air, for millions of Americans to hear, that the new healthcare bill was a ‘big f***ing deal’. It sure is. However, as a PR professional, I find the response tactics employed by the White House and the national media disconcerting.

Putting aside all political alignment and opinions of the current administration, the fact remains that Vice President Biden and President Obama are international public figures and as such, the eyes of the world follow them and many aspire to one day achieve greatness like them. Is the use of profanity appropriate for the second-in-command of the free world? Of course it is…as long as no one catches you.

Moments after the bomb dropped, White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs tweeted, ‘And yes Mr. Vice President, you’re right…’  As surprising as this bluntness and lack of embarrassment may be, Mr. Gibbs was simply following suite with what was coming down from the big man himself.

President Obama was later quoted at a press conference saying “You know what the best thing about yesterday was? Joe’s comment.”

The White House further dismissed the incident as Biden told supporters at a fundraiser in Baltimore late Wednesday that Obama was not mad at what he delicately termed his “faux pas.”

CBS News later made light of the story by stating that Biden’s F-bomb was ‘the highlight of the day.’ 

From Twitter to late night television, the Biden F-bomb is being tapped as a source of comedy. With a bit of Googling, one can even find and purchase a t-shirt with an image of Biden and the phrase in question scrolled across it. Some comedic highlights from Tuesday night include:

Jimmy Kimmel suggested that Biden get a “swear jar” after playing the video on his show Tuesday night. Jimmy Fallon: “Joe Biden got himself in a bit of trouble. Did you hear about that? Apparently it sounded like Biden said to President Obama, ‘This is a big f-ing deal.’ In response, NBC picked Biden to host the show, ‘Big F-ing Deal or No F-ing Deal.’”

Jay Leno: “In my lifetime, I’ve been fortunate to hear presidents say great things. I heard John F. Kennedy say, ‘Ask not what your country can do for you — ask what you can do for your country.’ I remember Ronald Regan saying, ‘Mr. Gorbachev, tear down this wall.’ On this historic day, I got to hear what Joe Biden said to our president. This is real.”

So, comedy is the answer, right? Well, what was the alternative – a formal apology? In my opinion, yes, a very brief formal apology would have been appropriate and would have shown Americans and more importantly children, that this is not an acceptable way to speak. I don’t think it’s a stretch to imagine a child seeing someone they are taught to admire uttering this phrase and then seeing people respond by smiling and laughing about it, and then feeling comfortable repeating it. Perception is reality and I think that Biden and to a lesser extent Obama, have lost a bit of respect by shrugging this incident off. If history has taught us anything, it’s that public figures can do some pretty heinous things, but as long as they apologize, their halo will not remain tarnished for long.

Procrastination – we’re all guilty of it at some time or another. Heck, I did it with this blog post (shh).

I’ve usually looked at procrastination as a bad thing, and I think we can most agree that’s the common connotation associated with the word. But there’s always something on your to-do list that you’re just not keen on starting. Be it writing a highly technical bylined article, putting together a product mailer, or maybe just a chunk of research – I think we’ve all been at that point where the number one priority on our list just isn’t the task that’s getting done.

However, I came across a great article on Fast Company (a wonderful mélange of business, design, and media news) that suggests procrastination isn’t all that bad. The trick is to use that time to do something else that needs to get done. Don’t use your procrastination time on checking Facebook or arranging your pens – use it to do some of those less urgent things on your list that keep getting pushed down. In that sense, procrastination actually creates motivation to get other activities completed.

I’ve found the Work Smart series, of which this article is a part, very helpful. And recommend that while you’re procrastinating on that next big project, you head over to FastCompany.com and give them a read – I’d count that as a few minutes well spent.

In the competitive environment of PR, our job is to not only know everything about our clients and their messaging, but also to know their competitors businesses and PR strategies. Between google searches and constantly scanning headlines, keeping up with the competition isn’t as difficult as it used to be. Recently, members of the Matter team successfully and single-handedly polluted a major PR story a competitor was pitching. Because the team was privy to information the competitor distributed over a wire service (thank you, Google alerts), we quickly took notice and planned “an attack” to pollute the story. After informing the client of the competitors’ news, we drafted a statement letting journalists know that our client was first to market with the service that the competition was touting.

The team rapidly jumped on the phone and emailed applicable media contacts to set the story straight and provided factual context from a competitive standpoint.  This aggressive approach was so successful that the team was able to get Matter’s client into eight out of the nine stories that would have otherwise been exclusive to our client’s number one competitor.

Keeping close tabs on news relevant to clients is PR 101 – and thanks to technology, we can capitalize on this age-old tactic at speeds faster than ever before. Whether quickly latching onto a trend or muddying up a competitors news, part of being an effective PR practitioner is to read, read, read and scan, scan, scan.

Last week’s Harvard Business Review blog post by Dick Patton got me thinking about some of the challenges Matter has recently been tasked with. On more than one account, we’ve been asked to blur traditional PR boundaries to help our clients develop installed base marketing programs. It’s no secret that it takes less resources to market to existing customers, and yet, start-up firms and established companies alike can be so focused on customer acquisition that they lose sight of this fact. Tight economic conditions, a rapid shift in the competitive landscape and limited resources are all reasons companies take their eye off their installed base. But doing so comes at a cost. So our clients are increasingly turning to us for help.

It makes sense to tie installed base marketing programs to public relations programs. For one, customer testimonials have long been a staple of traditional PR programs, building a foundation for case studies, bylined articles, awards programs and press releases. But looking at today’s PR – traditional programs plus social networks – gives us an even greater opportunity to marry installed base marketing with PR programs.

As Patton points in the HBR blog post, a marketing program on ‘ROIDS must look beyond the four P’s of marketing to include:
(1) Responsibility marketing
(2) Organizational leadership
(3) Insights about customers
(4) Digital marketing

PR firms have long been responsible for driving awareness about (1), (2) and (4) – so adding customer insights – and ultimately – installed base marketing – under the auspices of communications makes a lot of sense.

If you’re not getting this kind of integrated value from your communications partner, call us.

Much has been written about newspapers and their ongoing transition to digital (the topic was covered on Matter Chatter last year); but what about magazines? On Monday, the Columbia Journalism Review (CJR) released the findings from its survey of practices at magazine Web sites (in addition to a related article), which reveal some very interesting, and at times unexpected, information about the state of magazines’ online content. Like newspapers, magazines are facing decreased readership and advertising, coupled with budget reductions. They’re also learning to navigate the waters of the online world and trying to identify the business models and practices that will enable their Web sites to succeed.

Despite the challenges magazines face in the evolving digital age, I was surprised by some of the findings from the CJR study, which represent 665 consumer magazines. While the survey explored a variety of topics related to Web site practices and profitability, I was most intrigued by how the magazines reported developing online content and their standards for digital publishing. For example:

- Two-thirds of respondents’ staff are involved in producing online content, but only 26 percent of those staffers have prior Web experience

- Fact-checking (excluding blogs) is less rigorous online than in print for 35 percent of respondents

- 59 percent of those surveyed reported either there is no copy editing online (11 percent), or copy editing requirements are less strict in comparison to the print edition

Stephanie Clifford of the New York Times wrote about the “slack editing” on websites last week, asserting, “The only thing standard about magazines’ Web sites is that there are no standards.”

Personally, I hope the magazine industry will unite to develop some sort of online publishing standards, for the sake of journalism and readers everywhere who rightfully expect high-quality, error-free articles from their favorite magazines. However, this will likely take time, as magazines increasingly transition to the Web and determine if and how they can be profitable online.

In the meantime, we can consider how the CJR’s findings affect PR pros. For instance, we should be aware of the policies of each of the magazines we pitch, in order to maximized our clients’ coverage and set realistic expectations. We should recognize the differences (if they exist) between content for print and content for the Web at individual outlets and how that content is produced. As an example, after recently securing a contributed article placement for a client in an online outlet, I asked how we could be considered for the print version in the future and was told the magazine selects the best of the online content to be included in the print issue. Interesting. We should also keep in mind, for now at least, many outlets tend to favor speed above all, when it comes to publishing online content. PR pros can alter pitches accordingly, by offering reader tips from our clients or short contributed articles, both of which can quickly and easily be posted on a Web site.

Like other media, it will be interesting to watch how magazines continue to evolve in response to the digital age and how the changes will affect PR pros. Have you already adapted your tactics for pitching print or Web editors at magazines? Please do share! (more…)