Strategic Public Relations

P&G's Brand Buzz

The Cincinnati Enquirer is covering P&G's acquisition of Gillette from most every direction. The $57 billion deal makes them the largest consumer products company on earth. It will add the following products to its stable: razors, razor blades, coffeemakers, blenders, toasters and irons, flashlights, batteries, tooth care products and deodorant/anti-perspirants. To put this in brand terms, Gillette, Braun, Duracell, Oral-B, Remington, Dry Idea, Soft & Dri and Right Guard now sit on the P&G shelf.

"P&G's acquisition will add five $1 billion brands to its existing 16: Gillette and Mach3 razors, Duracell batteries, Braun electric razors and household appliances, and Oral-B tooth-care products."

So Cincinnati has a "P&G Brand Buzz" right now. Unfortunately, local media were downplaying one of the realities most acquisitions create—layoffs. In this case, 6,000 Gillette employess will lose their jobs.

It was a relief to see Cincinnati Enquirer editorial cartoonist Jim Borgman remind everyone. It is no shock that he is a Pulitzer Prize winner.

Opinion for Hire

And then there were three. The Associated Press and USA Today bring us Mike McManus who joins Armstrong Williams and Maggie Gallagher in the issue over not disclosing money they've received for promoting government policies.

The Department of Health and Human Services acknowledged Thursday that it paid a syndicated columnist at least $4,000 for work on behalf of Bush administration efforts to promote marriage.

On Thursday, a third example surfaced. Mike McManus, who writes a weekly column syndicated in 30 to 40 newspapers, said he was paid about $4,000 to train marriage mentors in 2003 and 2004. McManus was subcontracted by the Lewin Group, which had a contract to support community-based programs "to form and sustain healthy marriages."

McManus' non-profit group, Marriage Savers, also is being paid $49,000 by a group that received a Health and Human Services grant to teach similar principles to unwed couples who are having children.

Who's at fault—the government agencies, the journalists or the public relations agencies? All three of them are at fault.

Will there be more than three examples of this? I'm not sure, but this will surely bring a greater amount of scrutiny to the millions of dollars that the Bush administration has spent on public relations. In the meantime, I would like to remind public relations supporters and detractors of the following:

It is the unethical implementation of the tactics that are at issue here, not the tactics themselves.

While all three groups are at fault, none of the individuals involved accurately represent the government, the media or the public relations industry.

UPDATE: More on the topic from Editor and Publisher in the article "Pundit Payola: Williams, Gallagher Were Wrong, But What's Right?"

Paid Publicity Scandal Expands

The NYT shares more bad news on governement sponsored commentators. It turns out that a nationally syndicated columnist, Maggie Gallagher, is now in the spotlight.

"Ms. Gallagher, a marriage expert who has testified before Congress, admitted she had erred in failing to disclose to readers a $21,500 contract with the Department of Health and Human Services for writing and advisory work about marriage policy. Her syndicated column runs nationally, including in The New York Post.

That disclosure sparked new demands for broad federal inquiries and coincided with the release of a report from House Democrats finding that federal agencies had increased their use of outside public relations firms."

However, there is no mention in the NYT article of a public relations firm being directly involved with Ms. Gallagher. We will surely see.

"Also Wednesday, Democratic members of the House Government Reform Committee released a report on federal spending on public relations, reporting that Bush agencies spent more than $88 million on contracts with outside firms in 2004. That outpaces the $64 million spent on public relations firms in 2003, which was roughly equivalent to the amount Clinton administration agencies spent on such firms in 1999."

Goofus & Gallant: Promoting the Industry

Goofus goes to Ad Week for their loaded opinion poll on the Armstrong Williams' scandal and its impact on the public relations profession. Gee, with the choices offered, is there any question what the results will be? It is a silly, and not surprising, shot from this member of the marketing family.

Gallant goes to Shel Holtz. Fast Company Now just covered his New Communications Forum speech on crisis communications.

Holtz recently asked what we could do to help promote our industry in light of the Armstrong Williams scandal. He has answered his own question. We should start promoting our industry by doing our best work.

Speaking of Fast Company, Yahoo offers up their research on the best jobs to have in 2005. It is an interesting read.

Bacon's Monitoring Blogs?

Some blog research conducted on Media Map has me curious about Bacon's approach to blog tracking. Case in point, check out this timeline:
  Nov. 17, 2004:  A search shows 102 blogs monitored by Bacon's.
  Dec. 23, 2004:  Bacon's announces it will formally begin tracking blogs.
  Jan. 25, 2005:  A search shows 91 blogs monitored.

I know, not a huge discrepancy. I assume they are eliminating old, outdated blogs from the listings. But it has me wondering if Bacon's has announced HOW they are deciding which blogs they will be tracking?

The Super Bowl Ad Blog

See Spot.
See Spot Build Buzz.

Intelliseek’s Super Bowl Ad project is ramping up and I am joining the fray. During the big game, I’ll be one of the panelists blogging some of the 59 ads that we’ll see.

OK, let’s do the math. A 30-second Super Bowl spot is going for $2.4 million apiece. So we’ll be blogging about ads costing more than $140 million just in airtime. KA-CHING!

This is one reason why I love Super Bowl advertising. It is an all-in hand of poker for a broad mix of brands—from veterans like Budweiser and Pepsi to rookies like Volvo and Ciba Vision. If you had more than $2.4 million invested in making a lasting impression on 90 million people in less than 30 seconds, what would YOU do?

Last year’s ads did not generate a lot of buzz. Most of the blame is placed on a wardrobe malfunction, but the ads’ creative failed to meet expectations. It would also be interesting to know if the advertisers optimized their investments with an online presence designed to extend each ad's life.

This year’s crop should be interesting. In addition to at least one ad aimed at women, the Associated Press claims it will be a milder year. Will that take the punch out of the ads? We’ll see.

Of course, all of the brands are still chasing 1984. Can anyone top this iconic commercial?

Blogs for each Intelliseek panelist are being created for the project and I will let you know when my blog, “The Super Bowl Ad Blog,” goes live. In addition to my take on the ads, I’ll be gauging my friends’ reactions. At the end of the game, I will award the Goofus and Gallant to two lucky spots.

The project also allows me to rehash my biggest issue I have with the Super Bowl—roman numerals. Cramming roman numerals into a design that looks great on everything from t-shirts to inflatable couches must be a designer's worst nightmare. Some events are only as good as their marketing tchotchkes and the Super Bowl paraphernalia could stand a redux.

Fine. 39 might not read as ominous and official as XXXIX, but this XXXIV-year-old blogger thinks the Bowl would be better with regular numbers.

Blogs, Crisis Communications and Ketchum

Ketchum's efforts at damage control are doing little to save their reputation. The firm is offering us an example of what not to do in a crisis—online and offline.

After an initial denial, Ketchum is acknowledging its involvement in the Armstrong Williams "pay for play" incident. Unfortunately, Ketchum's online presence is not reflecting this new information and this is making them come off more poorly than ever. Jay Rosen has been following the case from its inception and posted the following update at his PressThink blog.

The site shows no awareness at all that it is the "live" public face of a company in the news and under pressure from peers. This would be mildly comical in the case of a chemical company. It is more amusing, and ironic in the instance of a public relations agency fighting for its reputation and blissfully unaware of what its Web site is doing to that reputation.

For example: The front page boasts of an op ed piece, "Williams scandal is a 'transformational event' in PR, written by Ray Kotcher, CEO of Ketchum," in PRWeek, Jan. 13. This particular text is on its way to becoming notorious for its attempt to sow confusion in readers, who are treated as utter dupes.

It may be, then, that "a growing number of companies turn to Ketchum for help navigating the often treacherous paths of issues and crisis management," but a live, mismanaged website suggests this might have been a hasty decision on their part (the dupes.) And let's remember that this week Ketchum had to tap those very crisis-handling skills, which it lists as a practice area, in reversing course and issuing a damage-control statement.

Suggesting consistency between online and offline messages is simply common sense. And we already suggested that Ketchum could have avoided this inconsistency issue by creating a crisis communications blog. So here is one more idea, aimed at the blog-savvy agencies out there.

Tomorrow's Crisis Team
Create a SWAT team that is a blend of your crisis and online practices. This team:
  * knows both areas well, including blogs
  * is outfitted with the latest mobile gadgets and can be dispatched to the field to help clients in crisis mode
  * helps with traditional crisis needs and is in lockstep with the legal team
  * creates a blog to disseminate the facts and alerts key target audiences on where they can find the latest information
  * knows search engine strategy and can recommend keyword buys/sponsorships.

Search Engines: The Untapped Crisis Tool
Bad news travels fast. Purchasing keywords helps ensure awareness of your information. This is a temporary need if you are blogging; the content will quickly rise to the top of the results. Do a Google web search (not news) on "ketchum armstrong williams" and look at the top 10 results:
  * National Media: 4
  * Trade Media: 3
  * Blogs: 2
  * Wikis: 1

Instead of Ketchum's site, you receive everyone else's side of the story. A keyword buy/sponsorship is a worthwhile investment. No one is sponsoring this search. But where would Ketchum take them if they were? Ketchum, might we suggest bringing your online practice into future meetings on this issue? At this rate, the problem does not appear to be going away so you still have plenty of opportunity to do so.

Why Isn't Ketchum Blogging?

So, did I miss anything while I was in New York?

Wow. Jay Rosen sets off a flurry of posts that prove out Blog Power™. Jay, we’re listening. But before I submit my excuse, er, hall pass, let me respond to Ketchum’s wrongdoing.

Ketchum’s “pay for play” was wrong and unethical. Unfortunately, it is not the first time they have crossed the line. From video news releases (VNRs) to paid endorsements, they single-handedly call our tactics, and our industry, into question. AdWeek has a great article supporting my opinion that Ketchum misrepresents the industry and the tactics they used so irresponsibly.

The issue is not the tactics, rather how they were used by Ketchum. As I have noted before, VNRs and paid endorsements have their place in the public relations arsenal. Used wisely and responsibly, there is no harm, no foul.

Secrets & Silence? Not Smart.
My big question is why doesn’t Ketchum start a blog to respond to all of this? Is it because they are guilty? Wrong answer. Blogs are perfect for quickly getting out the right information in a crisis. Not to mention, they seed the search engines with your side of the story.

Ketchum should learn from Martha Stewart. She eventually created a Web site that got her on record with her side of the story. Martha used the Web to her advantage, marshalling support and pointing visitors to positive op/ed articles.

Ketchum needs to state the facts, admit their guilt and detail what they are doing to rectify the situation. It will take much more than simply firing a top executive. Ketchum needs to donate money that brings together IABC and PRSA to create a cross-organizational task force to truly, finally, really and seriously look at ethics and accreditation in our industry. What we have currently has no teeth. Ketchum has clearly shown this to be the case.

Maybe the above is not enough. But we need to move quickly as public relations takes over accounting’s role in the media as the most ethically-challenged profession.  Much like Arthur Anderson, not everyone realizes that Ketchum does not accurately represent the public relations industry. PR bloggers can help shine light on the examples that prove out this fact.

Bloggers vs. Journalists?
The answers to why the PR bloggers did not cover Ketchumgate with a vengeance are much less interesting and dramatic than the published theories. Take me for instance—I have a day job. While in New York this week I was so busy that I was unable to meet up with any NYC-based bloggers, including Robb Hecht, Steve Rubel and B.L. Ochman. Heck, even my Bloglines account went unread. If I had been reading it, I would have shown up at Grand Central Station to skew Rubel’s anecdotal research.

Secondly, my blog sits at the end of the news cycle. The tail of the news curve is getting longer every day and the Ketchum story is taking on a new life, well-beyond the initial impact. Blogs are working. Unfortunately all of the PR bloggers are not always staring at their monitors, hitting refresh every few seconds in wait for a news ping on their radars.

I prefer to do more substantive posts that hopefully do more than just link to something before anyone else. This takes time—if only because I have a small brain. For the most part, you will find features here and not breaking news. This allows me to enjoy blogging a bit more and throw off the shackles of posting frequency that were forged by this push-button publishing technology. Hopefully it also differentiates Strategic Public Relations from other blogs? You tell me.

So Rosen asserts that blogging vs. journalism is over? I think this flap shows it is not completely worked out. I agree with Rosen when he notes that blogs are journalism—sometimes. I will note that I am NOT a journalist and that the Blogging, Journalism and Credibility conference could not have better timing.

You should check out all of the posts that Jay Rosen inspired. You can start at a few blogs to find all of them. Jeremy Pepper and Tom Murphy point the way for us. They also posted on Ketchum prior to Rosen’s piece. I also want to point out Richard Edelman’s responses. It occurs to me the PR bloggers took Richard to task after he first launched his blog. It not only appears he has settled in and established a nice rhythm of posts; he brings a much needed C-Level perspective to all of this.

OK, now I need to go fill out my expense report and dig out from a week on the road. Have a wonderful weekend.

Trade Show Time

I've been busy gearing up for the National Retail Federation Show next week in NYC. As a result, posting has been even lighter than usual. But if history is an indicator, I'm sure I'll have something to say post show.

I've done a ton of trade shows before but, for some reason, none have taken place in New York City.

Scheduling media briefings is more fun than usual. This is mainly because most of the media are based in New York and do not have to finalize their plans until a few days prior. But on the flip side, I will get to visit with a few books that won't be attending the show since their offices are a quick cab ride from the Javits center.

It looks to be a good trip.

iPod Needs Satellite Radio

USA Today reports car electronics manufacturers are rushing to create an adaptor that lets folks listen to their iPods in the car using their car stereo controls.

Here's an idea I will submit to the gadget blogs for consideration. Satellite radio has established a hard-earned beachhead in cars with more users signing on each day. It would seem to me that iPod and either XM or Sirius should, er, seriously consider how these two super-hot technologies might combine forces.

If I had an iPod, I would love to use it in my car (safely through the stereo controls). It would be even better if I could use the iPod to track songs I heard on satellite radio so that, once I got home, I could look them up on iTunes for purchase. This is just one of the possibilities if these two technologies worked together. It seems they would complement each other nicely.

If this ever comes to be, you heard it here first. But remember: blue sky ideas are easy when you have NO grasp on what it takes to make something like this possible.