... in the wake of last week's barbaric murder on a Greyhound bus. 

Good judgement... Greyhound pulls its ad

Poor judgement... Peta creates one

Good judgement... Portage la Prairie's Portage Daily Graphic refuses to run it.

Poor judgement... Peta's attempt to justify it: A group spokesperson is unapologetic. "Like human victims, animals in slaughterhouses experience terror when they are attacked by a knife-wielding assailant," Lindsay Rajt explains in a statement. "We are challenging everyone who is rightly horrified by this crime to look into their hearts and consider leaving violence off their dinner plates."

"A clever way to make a point - or extremely bad taste and terrible timing?"... You tell me.

We don't have clients like this in the PR world... do we?

Finding smart people who fundamentally 'get' how digital and traditional intersect, who have 'real' experience  consulting with some of the largest brands in the world, who are both thinkers and doers in the social media sphere, and who have a fetish for steam punk and soviet-era posters, has never been easy.

In recent months, my colleague David Jones and I have realized just how difficult it is to find (and then recruit) that right blend of talent to add to the digital team. We've interviewed some very smart and uniquely experienced people who for, a variety of reasons, either didn't quite fit the bill or were snapped up before we could make an offer. As of this week, however, we're breathing a little easier. We're certainly still looking - because we know the business is there - but we're glad to welcome a new addition to the digital team in our Toronto office.

Given that many of you already know this individual, I won't tax your patience. His name is Collin Douma. His blog is Radical Trust. And his experience, depth of knowledge, passion for digital, support for the social media community, and portfolio of work speak for themselves.

Both David and I are pretty chuffed to be able to bring his skills to bear on behalf of our clients - despite his dubious cultural addictions.

Welcome to the team, Collin.

Summer in London may not be springtime in Paris, but at least it didn't rain last week for an internal digital and crisis conference I attended with fellow H&K crisis practitioners from across Europe, North America and Asia.

The key learning of the two-day event - other than to not let Cy Twombly's art truly aggravate you: digital can no longer be considered an afterthought when preparing for, or executing during a crisis. It must be burned into the system from the outset - the technology, the people and the processes. It must become an integral part of the training regimen, be designed to support various crisis thresholds and provide sufficient flexibility to evolve as the crisis evolves. And not only is it simply about launching a "dark site" or adding a line item to a manual. It is also about guiding employee behaviours online, assessing how and when to respond (and not respond) to misinformation and speculation that may be bubbling throughout the social web, considering new ways and formats to deliver content and messaging, and working with other functional areas (per my last post) to ensure the 'machine' operates seamlessly.

Developments on the activism and social media front and the impact of the citizen journalist on the newsmaking process also caught my eye this week. In Canada, much like what happened recently in the U.S. over downed cattle resulting in one of the largest beef recalls in history, activists using a hidden camera were able to reveal what many consider to be questionable practices related to the slaughter of horses. And while the footage generated considerable media coverage, it also raised a number of questions related to how the industry is regulated. Not only is this further demonstration of the increasing levels of transparency now being imposed upon organizations through the use of technology and the rising importance of video and images to communicate in a way that text never could, it also demonstrates how easily such footage can be taken out of context, according to one industry expert: 

"...Shanyn Silinski, executive director of the Farm Animal Council in Manitoba, an animal welfare group, noted regulations govern the slaughter industry... Silinski cautioned against drawing conclusions about a particular facility based on clips of camera footage." 

Finally, and on a more humorous side, props to Churbuck for Thewebsiteisdown.com, one sick video that, in the words of Homer Simpson, is funny cuz it's true.

June was never going to be an easy month, yet we're nearly half-way through and I'm starting to breathe a little easier. Two conference presentations down, and two more to go - although the latter two will be more internally and client-focused which tends to make life a bit easier (he says, knocking wood).

Over this past week, Amanda Brewer, H&K Canada's director of internal and change communications, and I have spoken at two events: the first being the 2008 CPRS National Conference in Halifax, Nova Scotia, and the second being to the Council of Human Resource Executives in beautiful Quebec City (currently celebrating its 400th anniversary - I suggest you go. I hadn't been to QC in years, and it's as stunning as ever).

Although slightly different in their focus, the general theme of the presentations were the same: that social media and Web 2.0 is transforming the role of the employee as "brand guardian". And while this transformation is creating opportunities to drive greater transparency and bring employees closer to those upon whom the company relies - customers, communities, partners, potential employees etc., it is also highlighting a number of potential risks and challenges with respect to employee behaviour online and the consequences that could follow, intentional or no. In the presentations we highlighted examples of companies who have done it right, and we explored examples of what happens when employees take it upon themselves to communicate on behalf of the organization through social media, to both positive and negative effect.

At CPRS, we dived deeper into how organized labour has adopted social media in their efforts to communicate their stories and messages beyond traditional media filters and mobilize their membership and supporters, and considered how corporations are (or should be) responding. In Quebec City, we explored how organizations could (and should) help to guide employees in their use of social media - realizing that the workforce of tomorrow will have grown-up using these tools as part of their daily lives. Both are areas of increasing innovation in public and private sector workspaces, and judging by the level of discussion that ensued, it's an area of increasing concern to those who practice in these areas.

Interestingly, I also see these discussions as an opportunity for organizations to further bridge the silos separating HR and internal and external communications departments given the increasing visibility of employees as brand advocates. And, as always, when we talk about "tomorrow's employees", I started off by showing this video - in my view, a creative and powerful perspective of the changes taking place in our society and mindset. (kudos to Dr. Michael Wesch at Kansas State University)

Next week, I will be in the U.K participating in an internal conference on crisis and digital, and working with our network of senior crisis practitioners to ensure our counsel and strategies reflect the digital dynamic and the potential for digital tools to support organizational communications when the stakes are highest - much as we've seen during the California Wildfires, and recent campus shooting. Interestingly, the area of crisis is another where the potential for employees to both support or, unfortunately, harm an organization's communications efforts is becoming increasingly important.

The week following, my colleague Boyd Neil and I will be in Vancouver (I get to spend a whole 16 hours in Ottawa in between, yay!!) where I hope we'll be able to take some of the learnings from the UK and apply them to a joint presentation to a global corporation (and client) on reputation, issues management and the impact of digital and social media.

Then Canada Day... and then a long rest.

If you're in London and are able to get together on the night of the 20th or 21st, do get in touch.

Everyday, innovative campaigns and tactics emerge from all sides of virtually every issue. At the same time, it's encouraging to see corporations increasing their level of experimentation in the digital space around the areas of reputation management.

Here's just a few recent examples of highly visible campaigns designed to both challenge and reinforce the reputations of leading corporations:

• Few organizations understand how to trigger a response better than PETA... and their latest MTV-style video campaign is no exception. The campaign - including the site itself - is reminiscent of the recent spate of cinematic gorefests - think the Hostel or Saw series - and, as such, primed for the youth segment that it's attempting to reach. It reinforces the importance of the "extraordinary" idea (and the power of video) to be heard above the "noise", while also effectively demonstrating - as any activist campaign should - how to bridge seamlessly between entertainment, education, and engagement.
• On the other side, Southwest Airlines has recently taken their already impressive "Nuts About Southwest" social media campaign up a notch and added a slew of new features - including a Flickr group, video blog, and links to their Twitter feed and Facebook group - to further connect with their massive community of fans and advocates (and to directly address emerging issues as they've done with their blog in recent months). 
• Lastly, in the footsteps of Ideastorm and MyStarbucksidea, American Express has launched Cardmembers Voice as a way to solicit ideas on how to improve their products and services, and to strengthen their engagement with cardholders. [update: Amex is an H&K Canada client]

More to follow in the weeks ahead.

Another Third Tuesday is behind us and, like those before it, generated some interesting and healthy debate. And although intended to focus on "Shiny New Objects" (SNOs), last night's discussion really did anything but - to the consternation of some, but not I think to others (myself included)... Key takeaways? In no particular order of importance, I felt they were as follows:

1. It re-affirmed that while SNO's are emerging every day, the reality is that the majority of our clients are only now taking their first steps into what might best be described as the "tried and true" - blogs, Youtube, Facebook etc. - for the most part because it is these tools that align best with their objectives, and where the most examples of success exist.
2. It highlighted the challenge of co-organizing a meetup that attracts a broad cross-section of people who not only represent communicators experienced with social media, but also newcomers, designers, advertisers, developers, enthusiasts, those who work in the private sector, those who represent start-ups and not-for-profit, and those in government. Personally, I'm not sure we can continue to try to be all things to all people. At the same time, the networking is always fun.
3. It hammered home that social media - within the context of my work (and that of many others) - must be viewed for what it is: an enabler of communication and interaction. More important still is the quality of the content delivered by that technology (be it a video, a blog post, a comment etc.) that makes that communication relevant, or simply turns it into "white noise".
4. It begged raised the question as to whether social media will ever be adopted in a significant way, within an enterprise context, so long as the application is in "permanent beta"?
5. Not surprisingly (though I would certainly argue this fact), it demonstrated that social media in a corporate context remains, for many, an apparent contradiction (in their eyes) between the "motivations" that drives corporate behaviour and the social media ethos of transparency, engagement, and community.
6. It clearly showcased the hunger among public servants to expand the use of social media more broadly within government, despite the apparent roadblocks (political and otherwise).
7. It revealed Joe Thornley's fascination with video - particularly when witnessing his attempt at getting those low-to-the-ground angles (double-chin, anyone)
8. It gave as good as it got - and that's something I think we don't do enough of in this space. Glad to see we challenged each other.

I spoke at an IABC event last night on crisis communications and social media, and it prompted an interesting question (particularly given that many of the audience hailed from government organizations): How do you reconcile the importance of timely communications with the need to communicate in both official languages?

The question was posed by a communications advisor at a prominent federal agency. But it's also a topic that has arisen several times in discussions with clients around the development of their crisis dark sites.

It's an important question, as strict adherence to "official language" regulations could impact an organization's ability to respond quickly to an issue.

Ultimately, my position - based on discussions to-date - is that  stakeholders will forgive uni-lingual communication if the effort is focused on pushing out vital information in as timely and transparent a fashion as possible. What they will not forgive is knowing that you intentionally withheld critical information for the sake of political expedience.

Granted, this deviation from "regulation" would tend to apply more to situations such as accidents or disasters whether man-made or natural, and where risk to health and safety requires rapid communication. Whereas, with a crises of confidence where a few hours spent ensuring communication in both official languages is coordinated, timing might be less of an issue. Likewise, this holds true in situations where you're communicating more than a few lines or paragraphs that could easily be translated within minutes.

But when you look to how Northern Illinois University was, for example, rapidly updating their site as events of the shooting unfolded (see attached image), would anyone have complained if (and were this a Canadian institution obliged to abide by Official Language laws), they had only communicated in one language? 

Naive, perhaps? You tell me.