Hill+Knowlton Strategies

Mike Manuel points to this interesting tidbit from Businessweek and, although an entertaining read, from this PR practitioner’s perspective the title of the article “PR missteps and masterstrokes“ does not seem an entirely accurate nor fair representation of our industry.

It may simply be a matter of semantics, but to consider Airbus’ problems with the A380 a PR misstep is, in my opinion, giving our industry way too much credit. Airbus’ problems were largely operational. And while these issues resulted in a significant negative hit to their reputation (and bottom line), it would be more accurate, from a PR perspective, to analyze the effectiveness of Airbus’ communications efforts to help repair the company’s credibility post-crisis.

A similar argument could be applied to many of the other examples cited. For the most part, the crisis in question was the result of poor business judgement or operational mishaps vs bad PR, which likewise led to negative perceptions among the audiences upon whom these organizations relied. In my view, only Wal-mart’s “Wal-marting across America“ campaign could be considered an example of a crisis generated through PR.  

It would be interesting to consider whether some of these incidents would have happened had an experienced communicator been at the table. However, in all liklihood and as with Airbus, the real case study is the effectiveness by which these companies use(d) PR to help preserve or rebuild their reputations following these crises.

Now I really think I’m done for the year. See you in 2007.

you never knew, or you might have guessed but weren’t entirely sure… or at least hoped either was or was not the case, and were simply afraid to ask… in any event, Bob sent the latest meme missile in my direction, so here goes with the self-flagellation:

1. I am (or was, since I haven’t written in nearly a year) a part-time poet… and you didn’t even know it. Criticism accepted though not welcomed as that was a few years ago. I’m hoping I’m better now.
2. I nearly joined the British Army… but a long, and rather drunken discussion with an ex-Foreign Legionnaire persuaded me otherwise… as did the rather unbecoming environs of Aldershot.
3. I cycled from Scotland to Tunisia during one summer (not the whole way, actually, as I took a ferry from Marseilles to Tunis, but you get what I’m saying).
4. The real reason I wrote my last post was because a friend challenged me to use a specific word… although, in the end, I think I’m right about what I said, and it was an interesting – even challenging – exercise (a flashback to my j-school days when we’d challenge each other to fit a word into our stories). And don’t worry, I don’t do that often.
5. I’d never seen the movie ET until about two weeks ago… and I’m not sure the wait was worth it.

 I guess I’m supposed to hit up some others… so I’ll think about it, and update this later (if ever, since I’m no big fan of chain letters and pretty much everyone I know seems to have gotten one)…

Update: I just noticed that Michael over at the Client Side, also tagged me on this… cheers.

More and more, I find that in our profession, in addition to being communicators, publicists and information brokers, we are also obliged to play the role of both sociologist and anthropologist.

What started this line of thought? A recent study out of Lancaster University found that teenagers used just 20 words for a third of their speech. Granted, I’ve not lived in the UK for more than 30 years. However, the fact that I still chat with my cousins and other family members living there led me to believe that I could successfully complete the BBC’s “slang test” based on the survey (on which I scored a pathetic 4/10).

But it left me thinking about this business of ours.

In our industry, trend-spotting is big (though not as big as trend-making which is yet another holy grail). We’re expected to be on top of the latest fads, fashions, and phraseologies – youth being just one. But I think it speaks to something bigger. Our clients also expect us to see what others simply take for granted. They expect us to almost instinctively understand the “what” that drives changes in perception, motivation and behaviour. And why not? In virtually everything we do, our objective is to foster some kind of positive social interactions, one that impels individuals to some form of intellectual or behavioural change. And, in many instances, we’re asked to do that on a mass scale.

And to do that, we clearly need to understand the cultural and behavioural patterns of the audiences that we (or, more specifically, our clients) are seeking to influence – historic, geographic or otherwise.

So does this mean becoming so immersed in cultural anthropology that we need to be on top of such nuances as the “language of clothes“? (I was amused by the description of the necktie as a representation of the phallus, and the accompanying headline: “Ties Banned in Hanover Workplace as ‘Phallic Symbols’” SEXISM ROW AS WOMAN ORDERS MALE CLERKS…TAKE OFF YOUR TIES HANOVER, WEST GERMANY (AUG. 28) REUTER – Male civil servants in a West German office are hot under the collar after their female boss banned neckties as phallic symbols), or the peculiarly seductive powers of Tangerine Dream (which if, as a teenager in the late ’70s and early ’80s, was considered a form of aphrodisiac).

Probably not. However, I do believe that more is expected from us than we ourselves even imagine – and that PR is more than the definition given to it today.

PS… This is likely the last or, at least, the penultimate post for 2006. Have a great holiday!

“We spend 20% of our time online, according to Google or Yahoo,” Mr. Sorrell said, “so by logic, 20% of all dollars should be spent online.”

I wouldn’t mind 20% of the PR budgets we see at H&K. The challenge, as I see it, remains convincing clients (and even some colleagues) of this fact…

Oh, and hooray to me! I’ve reached a century…

The holiday season is upon us. And what better way to celebrate than with a song – nay an anthem for the modern man – a hymn to all that is traditional and wonderful and which, without, would make my Christmas just a little bit less of the celebration that it is.

And despite the overblown sacrilege born of Ron Howard and mangled by Jim Carrey, I bring you the “Disgruntled Bloggers Ode” as written by Dr. Seuss:

You’re a mean one, Mr. Grinch.
You really are a heel.
You’re as cuddly as a cactus,
You’re as charming as an eel.
Mr. Grinch.

Your soul is an apalling dump heap overflowing
with the most disgraceful assortment of deplorable
rubbish imaginable,
Mangled up in tangled up knots.

Copyright © 1957, Dr. Seuss.

… at least not when it comes to cell phones and the niggly concern that’s been floating around for years in the digital ether that every time you put one to your ear, you’re firing cancer-causing radio waves into your cranium.

But hallelujia, it seems our concerns have been for nought.

WASHINGTON — A huge study from Denmark offers the latest reassurance that cell phones don’t trigger cancer. Scientists tracked 420,000 Danish cell phone users, including 52,000 who had gabbed on the gadgets for 10 years or more, and some who started using them 21 years ago.

They matched phone records to the famed Danish Cancer Registry that records every citizen who gets the disease _ and reported Tuesday that cell-phone callers are no more likely than anyone else to suffer a range of cancer types. The study, published in the Journal of the National Cancer Institute, is the largest yet to find no bad news about the safety of cell phones and the radiofrequency energy they emit.

And yet with 23,000+ blog references  to cell phones and cancer curdling away in their various corners of the blogosphere (granted not all are bad, and some are spam), what’s a company to do? As the old adage goes, and pardon the earthy simile … “taking something off the internet is like trying to take pee out of a pool.“… (and if someone knows who actually said this, pls let me know).

Short of unleashing the dogs of war (aka, the lawyers) at some ungodly hourly rate to track down and hurl the ubiquitous “cease and desist” letters at every instance of potentially slanderous commentary, I would suggest it’s virtually impossible. To make matters worse, it’s likely the increasing numbers of bloggers citing and re-citing questionable sources will only make the matter of credibility even worse.

So how do company’s – whose futures are linked to debates such as this – overcome the crushing stigma of a thousand digital lashes? 

In the end, trying to play whack-a-mole with every prospective critic – right or wrong - just won’t work. Nor is it right and proper – or even possible - to try and comment on every blog that cite’s questionable findings. 

Rather, this is where I believe companies must use the tools they have at their disposal (digital and otherwise, including social media), to elevate their side of the story, to create a community of advocates, to reinforce their messaging with the most credible information possible, and seek out the sources of erroneous information (the dated and questionable studies) rather than the channels (the blogs themselves) in order to engage them in a dialog based on the latest findings. And this is where traditional forms of PR are still required – to elevate the discussion, to raise awareness, and to drive changes in perception based on credible third-parties.

Because in the end, it seems too much of what we read is all sound and fury, signifying nothing.