Hill+Knowlton Strategies

Despite being in PR, we still make the odd mistake - spelling or otherwise – but one has to feel rather badly for this fellow Canuck (particularly given the company he works for)…

Strangely, and perhaps because it’s Thursday and vacation starts tomorrow, but I couldn’t find a copy of the release on TextTrust’s site anywhere… do they even have a media room? Perhaps this little fiasco scared them off.

Warren Kinsella, media columnist for Canada’s National Post and prominent Canadian blogger, recently challenged Canada’s Federal Liberal leadership candidates – via an email that is subsequently posted to his personal blog on July 17 - to comment on the ‘escalating conflict in the Middle East’. You can read the email request here, and I’ve included Mr. Kinsella’s preliminary squib on his blog below as it requires a bit of scrolling to find it…

“I am posting the email here to ensure that no one can say they didn’t see it/didn’t receive it/etc. They all read this web site (I certainly hear from most of them on a regular basis), and I want to ensure there is no room for excuses, post facto.”

The next day in the Post, Mr. Kinsella recounts his approach, and reports on responses received to date. Over the next several days, and seemingly spurred on by Mr. Kinsella’s request, most of the candidates (including Ken Dryden, Gerard Kennedy, Hedy Fry, Bob Rae, and Carolyn Bennett) subsequently post statements of varying length and legibility to their respective web sites. 

This, in my view, is a good thing. I question if many of these candidates would have made any statement without being publicly exhorted to do so? Given the volatility of the issue, methinks not (Scott Brison’s July 13th post aside). In reading some of the responses, you almost feel the campaign scribes’ collective pain in having to undertake such a messy task.

But from a PR and public affairs perspective, it raises additional questions. Is this format of transparent questioning a harbinger of things to come, or simply an extension of what traditional media already does? Of course, activists and others have been publicly calling out politicians and businesses for years. However, will this type of on-the-record ‘public’ solicitation of elected officials (and increasingly others, ie. CEO’s) by journalists and professional and amateur pundits alike further transform the political landscape, empowered by the Internet and the growing influence of social media? Will it be influential bloggers, and not only journalists, that politicians will be required to respond to next. Politicians are already engaging with bloggers regularly. At the same time, should there be a quid pro quo that requires journalists/pundits, who elect to call out these folks, to publish in full the responses their solicitations receive, or at least link to the responses in each of the candidates web sites? And will corporations find themselves being similarly challenged, held to the same level of accountability and transparency on specific issues as their political counterparts?

With all the snarkiness going on around Dell’s entry into the blogosphere and the subsequent reaction (and even more reaction)…  a bit of perspective might be required.

Mistakes by silly interns aside, let’s keep in mind that (as I commented on Kevin Dugan’s excellent blog) reputation does not change overnight, or with the arrival of a single blog. Like any other relationship-building exercise, it takes time, engagement, and a degree of trust built between the parties involved. What we forget is that these are real people writing here… it’s not the corporation.

Put it another way: starting a blog (corporate or otherwise) is – from this uninformed male’s perspective - like giving birth. It’s usually painful and what emerges rarely has any identifiable personality. But nurture it, help it grow, give it time, and it will develop personality, good habits (hopefully), and an ability to socialize with others. It might even become your friend.

In attempting to satiate my increasing addiction to Digg, I came upon this website for an airline-in-waiting created by a German entrepreneur to cater to the smoking traveller.

Now, I’m not a smoker. And while I believe sufficient evidence exists to unequivocally demonstrate that smoking can kill you and, worse, harm those around you, if said smokers elect to imperil themselves amid the luxury trappings of a flying coffin between Dusseldorf and Tokyo, then who am I to tell them what they can or cannot do (unless, of course, they’re bringing children along with them, then all bets – in my view – are off).

But from a purely communications perspective, I would wish to make a few suggestions:

If Smintair’s market research demonstrates that demand does exist for such a service as this, then would it not make sense to simply identify that a solution exists, articulate the value of that solution, and provide an appropriate call-to-action (ie. book, invest, advertise etc.)? But to use the site (and whatever other communications channels these folks are using) as a vehicle to grandstand against decades of widely-accepted scientific research is, in my view, folly and can only have an adverse impact on the credibility this company is trying to build – around its business model and its people – in order to succeed. I would imagine that most of the smokers who could afford the 7000-10000 Euro price-tag most likely already understand and accept the risks, but simply seek to ignore them.

More importantly, associating anything with Nazism just can’t be good for business.

Rather, where Mr. Schoppmann should focus his communications efforts is on emphasizing the company’s commitment to safety, quality of service, and on-time arrival and departure.

Interestingly, according to a recent CNBC interview, non-smokers have also expressed interest in this service, though for the life of me I can’t imagine why. I would take wailing infants and stinky toe jam over smoking (though barely) any day.

My name is Brendan, but I have likely forgotten yours.

It is a failing, I admit. Does that make me a bad communicator? I think so. It sits alongside the ‘listen don’t talk’ and ‘maintain constant eye contact’ rules for effective relationship building. And although my wife and I have a set procedure when socializing which requires that I proactively introduce myself to someone she knows (but whose name she cannot remember) if she hasn’t made the introduction within about 5 seconds, and she likewise, that safety cushion doesn’t exist when I’m flying solo.

So thanks Merlin for this.

A clear example of the perils of seeking publicity around what would be seen (at first glance) as a morale-raising  initiative and then having it backfire when the terms and conditions of that initiative aren’t made entirely clear – either to employees or to the media.

While National Semiconductor spokeswoman LuAnn Jenkins is quoted as saying “they were not a gift,” and that “we were very careful on the language we used talking about it,” the real question, in my view, is whether they were careful enough with respect to the language they used in communicating this initiative to their own employees.

It would seem not.

When you read the release, what would you think? Is it a business tool, reward, or both?

“Our employees were vital contributors to our most successful year in National’s 47-year history, and we wanted to equip them with the tools to help us create more value for our customers,” said Halla.  “The Apple iPod exemplifies the next stage of the consumer electronics revolution as content such as downloadable music, movies and digital photos –as well as a compelling user experience– takes center stage.  And, it’s analog that makes the difference.  This is where National, and our employees, deliver value to our customers.”