• Published:September 8th, 2008
• Comments:No Comments
• Category:Online Media

While I am enamored with the potential impact of online media (news, social media, social networking and so on), I can’t help but think we are missing out on a sizable portion of the public that either don’t have access to the Internet or don’t care.

Consider this recent study by the Pew Research Center.

• Pew considers those that get their news mainly from TV to be traditionalists. Demographically, these folks are older, less educated and less affluent. This is 46 percent of Americans.
• Another category are the disengaged, about 14 percent of the population. Of this group, 69 percent completed high school or less.

60 percent of the U.S. population isn’t doing much online as it relates to news - which is the target of a lot of online outreach. While not game-changing, these statistics should be a cold shower to those that get randy every time another company joins Twitter to give us updates on their latest venture.

We are largely reaching out to the groups Pew calls the integrators - those that combine online and traditional outlets to get information and are largely affluent and well-educated - and net-newsers - who are similarly well-educated and affluent, but use the Internet as their main new source.

So you could say the online audience for news is probably not getting their khakis at Wal-Mart, maybe The Gap or Banana Republic.

The Internet has those with money - a good thing for brands - so it still makes a great deal of sense for brands to engage publics via social media.

What might be alarming is that while 65 percent of those ages 18-24 have a profile on a social networking site, only 10 percent get their news from these sites. Even more so, 34 percent of those younger than 25 say they get no news on a typical day.

Does this mean that the social media release may not be as useful as I thought? Maybe - it could just be that there aren’t enough interesting SMR’s to be shared on social networking sites.

It may be that online outreach truly becomes separate from public relations as it focuses on community building online - a new form of community relations  - while the other side of the PR team focuses solely on media relations - both online and off.

I’m not a fan of specialization, but I can see that community building online and dealing with the media - bloggers and traditional media -  are two vastly different undertakings, but both can fall under the public relations umbrella.

How can you increase the likelihood that people will share your news or bother to track you on Twitter? Does it work to target one group online and one group off or do we need to find out where on the Internet the traditionalists and the disengaged are hanging out?

• Published:September 4th, 2008
• Comments:No Comments
• Category:Research

Publics is one of the favorite words of public relations professors everywhere. I’ve hardly heard it in my current job, but gosh darn it, academics love the word.

Looking through some class notes, one section about publics caught my eye and I think it is worth taking a look at, especially with the advent of social media as  PR tool.

The section is all about categorizing and prioritizing publics. The interesting thing is that my professor never directly mentioned social media, but the premise is so applicable that I had to blog about it.

Here are the four categories for publics, as defined by my professor, with my thoughts on each:

Advocate – active and supportive – These are like Apple fanboys and sports fans - they take pride in being associated with a brand and wear it as a badge of honor. We should be cheering this group on and giving them the tools to help further support the brand.

Dormant – inactive and supportive – I liken this group to foodies. They like when new restaurants open in their area, but they won’t recommend the food until they try it themselves. Do what you can to get them in the restaurant and if your food is good, you have instant advocates who will spread the word about your new cafe like wildfire.

Adversary – active and non-supportive – Too often we ignore this public. They don’t like a brand and they let people know it. There are a couple of approaches to take, but my professor nailed it when he said we should listen. The whole social media community loves listening and social media tools like Twitter and FriendFeed make it even easier, so we really don’t have any excuse to continue to ignore this public.

Apathetic – inactive and non-supportive – This is probably the most difficult public to reach because they just don’t care. I think this group is a target audience for local politicians. Sure, there are diehards, but most people just want to blame a city council member for the pothole on their street. They aren’t going to go to the effort of attending a council meeting, they just know it is some local council member or city official’s fault that their car suspension is screwed up. Maybe as a city official you could knock on some doors and let them know who are you. Put a face to their anger and maybe you can learn about some problems or issues they have that could benefit everyone if rectified.

For those that haven’t hit the books in - let’s just say a while - you can thank Professor Lamb at the UNC J-School for a refresher course on categories of publics.

Do you have any additional categories to add? What category do you think is too often ignored or taken advantage of?

• Published:September 2nd, 2008
• Comments:No Comments
• Category:twitter

Thumbs up to Chicago Tribune reporter James Janega who created the Twitter account, “GustavReporter,” providing updates on Hurricane Gustav, as well as conversing about the storm. 

Isn’t it amazing that a journalist looking to cover a story turns to Twitter? How cool is that?

Twitter is getting all sorts of good press for aiding those impacted by the Hurricane is some way, but to have a journalist turn to Twitter to help report a story is something I don’t think any of us would have expected just a year ago.

Now that some reporters are taking to new methods of reporting the news, PR pros have to look at new ways to deliver client news. Twitter, RSS, social networking sites - whatever you like, but it looks like the changes are coming faster than expected.

Side Note:

Even though Gustav wasn’t as devastating as Katrina, consider donating to Habitat for Humanity in New Orleans.  Help them continue to rebuild New Orleans by donating here.

• Published:August 27th, 2008
• Comments:1 Comment
• Category:Case Studies, Communication Tools

If you want a how-to guide on building a brand using social media, just check out the Democratic National Convention this week. Republican or Democrat, marketing and public relations pros have to be impressed by how Barack Obama’s campaign has managed to walk the fine line of empowering the public to carry a brand forward and still maintain control over the messaging.

The Obama campaign has given potential supporters every opportunity to become a part of Brand Obama. Don’t have the spare cash to donate? Donate your time and make some phone calls using the online tool. Have a lot of connections on Facebook? Post some Obama videos so your friends can check them out in their friend update feed.

Check out McCain’s Web site.

No site badges for bloggers. No online phone call tools. No downloadable fliers or wallpapers for your computer.

Unlike McCain, the Obama campaign provides the tools to spread the messaging and that allows them to maintain a large amount of control of said messaging.

To compare apples to apples, check out the two campaigns blogs:

Obama: Multiple updates a day with videos, behind the scenes photos and personal stories from the road.

McCain: An update about once a day and lately, just a spot to repost ads.

What is Obama saying with this type of campaign? I trust you.

The Obama campaign is doing is what a lot of brands are afraid to do online - relinquish some control of the brand by empowering their publics.

It is amazing how far a little trust can go.

• Published:August 25th, 2008
• Comments:No Comments
• Category:PR Commentary

There has been a lot of blog buzz lately on the value of public relations agencies.

Many of these posts are simply attempts to get attention, but what concerns me is the larger issue of respect for public relations as an industry. It seems like the entire PR industry - more so than many others - has to pay for the sins of a few.

So why doesn’t public relations get the respect PR pros know it deserves?

Embarrassment

I think the public still thinks of public relations as pure spin and thus the media is not inclined to acknowledge our existence for fear of being accused of bias.

Just look at The Wall Street Journal, the pub has several reporters dedicated to covering advertising. People can tell the difference between advertising and editorial content - most of the time. However, there is really no way to distinguish between an article that uses information from a PR pro and one that doesn’t.

But isn’t that the point?

Should a journalist be embarrassed for using a PR pro as a source of information? Do you lose “newsroom cred” for taking information from a company representative rather than finding it on your own or leaving a hole in a story?

I don’t know for sure - I’ve never worked in a a non-college media newsroom - but I think this plays a role.

Laziness

PR pros are in a difficult position. It is really easy to still do a decent job by being lazy. If you have a half-decent story you can probably get away with sending out mass e-mails and get a few placements. Probably not as many placements as if you did things the right way and reached out personally to each reporter or blogger, but you can get the job done.

Sure, you ignore relationships, which hurts the confidence reporters can have with a PR pro, but you can get a project done quickly and without eating a lot of budget. I don’t recommend it, but a lot of agencies operate this way.

Another bit of laziness creeps in when you don’t know your client. The media has a lot more respect for PR pros that know their client and know the industry. Especially dedicated beat reporters.

When you don’t know the industry, you may accidentally appear to be spinning something because you call it revolutionary when it has already been done.

Transparency

This one really can be stated as a source for lack of respect without much discussion.

The issues the industry has had with transparency are well documented. It is one of those things you must do - you have to be honest about who you are and who you represent.

Overall, the industry is still fairly young and some of these issues are growing pains, but the lack of respect for the industry is really concerning when you’ve seen some the great things public relations can do.

We can help raise awareness for non-profits, bring attention to a useful product and help companies better understand their consumers.

Now all we need is some R-E-S-P-E-C-T.

What do you think - is public relations disrespected? If so, what can the industry do to get the respect it deserves?