It's time for marketing and communications to take a stand!

One area where marketing and communications has always lagged is that it allows itself to be seen as a strictly tactical tool by the C-level executives. The past recession has made this even worse. The corporate communications function has struck a new low by becoming simply a reactionary tool which has offered hardly any strategic contribution to the organization's success.

2011 should be the year in which we take back our profession and reassert it as the strategic tool that it is. Speaking as someone who works as a free-lance consultant, I have the advantage of offering strategic advice to senior level executives on what to do, and then to go and execute it on a tactical level. My experience with this is that even when speaking strategy, and trying to draw marketing and communications into a larger corporate theme, it is virtually impossible to have the senior level executives see MarCom as anything other than a tactical tool. When it comes to communications all we hear is that the C-level wants more press releases, a new web site, more literature and so on. We rarely hear about using it as a strategic tool to drive sales.

This is really the fault of the marketing managers out there who are more than happy to coast along doing as little as possible and figure that if they go along and get along they will survive. Sadly, this has left our field scattered with a bunch of mediocre managers who lack the courage and drive to challenge management and encourage it to see marketing and communications as a long term tool which, when executed properly, can drive the entire branding and sales function.

One thing we can do as a profession is to drive our field and commit to standards of excellence. How many other fields would sit by and allow anything other than excellence be their guides. Such fields and medicine and law have high barriers of entry and require educated people to make informed decisions. Also, a certain specialty is not only expected but in many cases it's required.

Marketing and communications could benefit greatly by taking on more of trappings of an elite profession in 2011. By doing this, we can establish ourselves as legitimate stakeholders and contributors to the organization's success. By standing up and wanting to be counted as a profession and not just a job, we can have a stronger impact on the entire business community!

Is the Press Release Dead?

There was an e-mail or blog posting which went around a few weeks back asking if PR was dead. That seemed to raise an ire within the PR and marketing communities and I believe the general answer is that PR is most certainly NOT dead. Still, one can't help but wonder if it may be sick because certain sickly elements of it give it the appearance of death.

Case in point is our old friend the press release. Many a PR person has burned the midnight oil waiting for a C-level executive to make sure that the i is dotted and the t is crossed. One thing is certain and that is that senior executives love to see a good old fashion press release. They love to pontificate like a prophet from the hill top, extolling the ignorant masses with the blessings of their brilliance.

What is shocking is that from a cost perspective the press release often is a huge money loser. Consider that most distribution services charge you for every word after the first 500 and the first 500 usually only get you past the headline, sub head and maybe the introduction paragraph. Very rarely do the bean counters want to stop a senior level executive from having their pulpit and thus most press releases cost between $1500 and $2000. The saddest part of all is that no one outside the organization is reading them!

Yes that is the sad and true fact. Information both anecdotal and factual indicate that the news media do not read news releases and choose not to receive information for the news they cover from them. Modern technology has allowed press releases to be distributed via Google and other aggregate services so people are seeing them, the level of penetration and how much information is being absorbed still remains questionable. Sadly, the more this becomes apparent, the more we seem to double down on the press release.

So back to the initial question is the press release dead? Well not entirely. Contractual and regulatory requirements plus the the need to distribution information will always require some form of the press release. What needs to be changed is how the information is distributed. For one thing, try a mental exercise. Ban the use of the term press release in 2011. Instead substitute the term news release. While this may be an exercise in semantics, it can also force people to think long and hard about what they really want to say versus putting every iota of information that crosses their desks.

Secondly, once you have adopted the term news release, try putting a hard cap on the number of releases issued. Say for example you agree to 6 per quarter. This will allow you to focus on the most important news and not on the trivial. Secondly, you can focus on delivering your message to key spokespeople and not simply drafting, approving and distributing a release. Lastly, you can significantly cut the costs of your PR operations and deliver results which will have an increased ROI and thus make PR a more significant player in your organizations marketing programs.

The press release is dead in 2011. It's offspring, the news release its younger and more productive offspring the news release. By focusing on news and choosing information which will raise visibility, strengthen the brand and ultimately sell more products we will create a strong and more responsive PR operation. PR does not stand for press release!

Time to stop falling for the latest fad

One of the great weaknesses in marketing, or any aspect of business for that matter, is when a certain technology or skill is seen as unassailable and/or beyond criticism. A very worrisome trend is that social media is beginning to approach those standards in some respects. When any media vehicle is seen as a cure all that every one is in love with then it is time to take a step back and wonder if we're really doing something intelligent, or if we are like a herd of lemmings about to plunge over the cliff.

Now to be absolutely clear this is not by any means an assault on the viability of social media. Quite the opposite it is in my opinion a rare attempt to assess it based solely on its merits and avoid repeating the errors made when the web first came on the scene. For those not around or of short memory the Internet was seen as a magic cure for all that ailed the organization. Of course when this proved false organizations were forced to scramble because now they had to rely on more traditional marketing methods which had been largely shelved if not forgotten.

There was an insane posting I saw lately that I think demonstrated just how much the disease which is the passion for social media has infected marketing. One blogger actually referred to social media as marketing on steroids. So if I understand it clearly, and I think I do, social media is being compared too a drug which provides very little short term benefit, no long term benefit and ultimately kills its user? This is yet another brick in that wall of why PR, communications and basically marketing are not taken seriously as disciplines. We fall in love far too quickly and seem to completely lack any sound judgment or discipline.

Marketing people need to learn the art and science of self-discipline. We need to remember that gorging on appetizers will not allow us to properly enjoy the main course. Instead we need to focus on building a well balanced, well formed plan which combines the best of the old and the best of the new. That means that we will use some elements of both and that we will not use some. To act as if one program is completely without fault because it is new is as foolish as disregarding it for the same reason. It is up to marketing people to get their heads on straight and to think long term and constructively and deliver results which will build a brand!

Is PR Dead?

A good friend of mine, and a journalist no less, asked on his blog if PR was dead and, or dying. This wasn't a shot at PR in so much as he was questioning why companies spend a great deal of money on something which, in his opinion, is of very little value and which the news media pays no attention too. I corrected him on the two errors I see in the story, the first being that PR offers no value and the second being that we offer members of the media no value.

Now the easy thing to do here is to fly off the handle and say that this person has no idea of what we do and how important we are. But that would be only petulant and self-serving. I think we are better served if we use this as a means of examining the value we do bring and if we are offering true value to the organization or if we are muddying the waters and are a professional in search of a role?

I will say that I believe that a number of PR organizations, specifically some agencies, do a great disservice to the organization by being petulant and immature in their dealings with the media but also being petulant and immature in how they deal with the concept of public relations. Having worked with a great number of agency people I have seen no shortage of immaturity and almost infantile behavior. Now before I am strung up by my colleagues in the field I will freely admit I don't believe they are the majority but that they are a large enough minority to give those who do their job's right a black eye.

I also disagree, in the strongest terms possible the stereotype that all PR people are spin doctors or that we all bend the truth. First, I believe strongly that there are two sides to every argument and they deserve to be heard. Granted it can be an argument between right and wrong but that still is an airing of opinion which in an open society is a very good thing. Secondly, certain professions tend to get smeared by the acts of a few. Lawyers can certainly attest to this. But let's not forget the positives that have come out of these fields.

If not for public relations, we would have never heard of the ills of smoking, the need for seat belts or advocates for people with disabilities. All of these great causes were advocated by pressure groups which all use PR to advance their messages. Are there excesses in PR, of course, but there are in education, finance and even in media.

There is one thing PR can do a much better job at and that is letting the world know about how it helps make us healthier, happier and safer thanks to PR. Is PR necessary, absolutely because every legal organization, now matter what we think of it has a right to have its voice heard. Also, despite crying how much they hate it, the news media would be lost without a public relations person to help them meet the right people. Good journalism owes its life to good PR. So PR does contribute to the success of so many organizations. We are not just a cog in a machine, we are a strong driver or a full gear and when used properly we help the entire engine run much smoother.

Sorry but the rumors of the death of PR are greatly exaggerated!

Are Communications People Tough Enough?

There was a very interesting scene in the season premier of MadMen. Be prepared for a spoiler you haven't seen it yet! During a meeting with a client who was trying to market a two-piece bathing suit for modest people, Don Draper had enough and threw the potential clients out of the office. A lot of my fellow PR and Corp Com friends admitted to enjoying what Don did and wishing they could have done it themselves.

I bring this up because it focuses on the concept of toughness and doing what's right in Corporate Communications. I will also stick my neck out and say hurray for Don Draper. He went to his clients with an intelligent and well-thought marketing campaign. He obviously knew the market better than they did and when they balked at his proposals and he saw they were being stubborn for no reason than to be stubborn and closed minded, so he ended the relationship. Granted, it was for the sake of television he threw them out of the office, but ultimately, he did these people a favor by pointing out how deeply flawed their brand premise was. We can only wonder if they got the message or just went to another agency who was happy to smile, cash their checks and do what they want regardless of how wrong it is.

Now of course standing up to a client, be it internal or external is always worrisome and dangerous. Many people think that by giving us a check we surrender all intelligence and basically become some type of puppet for them to manipulate. Others, think that since they have hired a communications professional or a team of pros, they need not worry anymore about the issue of communications.

Sadly, there are a great number of communications professionals who tend towards being more reptilian than mammal. They will also do what is solely in their best interests and will tell the client what they want to hear and will focus on personal advancement to the exclusion of all else that makes for an effective and dynamic team. For some reason, the communications community focuses on people who make us feel good and tell us what we want to hear than the ones who tell us what we need to know.

Put it into a different perspective, if you're 30 pounds overweight, smoke and eat the wrong things, do you want a doctor who will keep telling you all is well and that you look great. Of course not. Now doctors HAVE to tell you the truth but communications people SHOULD do so. It is interesting when communications are direct and honest because there are two initial reactions generally speaking. The first is that the executive or client jumps back like they have received an electric shock and the look on their face is like they've been given a dose of some terrible medicine. The second reaction is that usually within 24 hours one of the snakes in the grass will offer reassuring words that all is well and try to endear themselves to the client.

We all need to understand and agree that pleasing a client is not the same as servicing their needs. Just as we need to say no to a child to help their growth we sometimes need to say no to a client to help them grow. The stock answer by the appeasers is that clients can always find someone else to do the job if you're too harsh, mean etc. That is true, but if they can find a communications pro who is willing to be bold enough and offer them the honest opinion which will make the brand stronger than the organization will be the better for it.

The question we need to ask as communications professionals is are we willing to do what is right or what is expedient? Are we going to be a profession bound by some type of ethics and guidelines or are we simply going to collect a check and do a job that requires the minimum amount of both risk and morals. These are tough questions we need to think about in our profession because the past ten years have been so brutal that survival skills have trumped good management skills. The next ten years should either be really interesting or quite scary.

Why can't most communications people communicate?

Being a sole proprietor has one great advantage. Yes the commute is great and all that, but what I am referring too is that I am a review committee of one. There is nothing that destroys a great work worse than the review of dozens of people each of whom wants a change to the document. Often this results in a weak and diluted piece of work, much like a painting, hit with a fire hose.

There is a great story about how when Michelangelo was painting the Sistine Chapel in Rome, one of Pope Julius's Cardinal's told him to paint as if God himself were painting the Chapel. Supposedly, Michelangelo told the cardinal that if the Pope wished for God to paint the Sistine Chapel he should have given him the commission. The point I see in that story is that many of us in communications are used to receiving the input of others, sometimes welcome, other times not. Often the worst type of input to receive comes from those who think they are helping and the worst type of advice to give is to those who we are trying to help.

In my experience working with and for communications people we often see advice presented as fact. For example a document we produced edited as if we didn't know what I/we didn't know what we were saying when in fact it said exactly what the edited copy did but in a different format. Of course this is indicative of another long standing fault with communications people and that is that we do not offer strategic alternatives to senior level executives but rather position communications to meet their expectations which is nearly always tactical. (The news release for example.)

I once had the opportunity to see an advertising team brainstorm and it was a very impressive feat. While it was as far from Mad Men as you can imagine, it was still a very impressive feat. For 30 minutes ideas were freely offered, discussed and debated. No one idea was dismissed out of hand and, in the end, the solution was really a group effort and quite impressive. Sadly, communications people seem to think that they are too busy or, too important, for such niceties. A document isn't considered perfect unless someone higher up has marked it up, changed yes to no and made 100 other unnecessary changes more to appear busy than to accomplish anything else.

Lastly, what's also missing in most communications environment is the idea that once a person has reached a certain level that he or she is now above the nitty gritty world of writing and editing. In certain branches of the military there is the concept that every service man or woman is a rifleman first (forgive the sexist terminology) and everything else second. Besides helping to project a certain esprit de corps, this also keeps people focused on what the job really is about and keeps people's eyes on what needs to get done and how to set proper priorities.

There is a woeful gap of internal communications within the world of communications. Most communications professionals see the profession as back and white and really believe that they know all and there is nothing they can learn. That is sad when you compare it to fields like medicine and engineering which believe the exact opposite. The best way to manage our profession and better guide what the executive levels think of us is by realizing we are a profession and not just a bunch of people fumbling around in dark. By working, sharing and collaborating more, we can actually turn communications, (PR and MarCom mostly) into a real profession.

Don't Blame the Weatherman Because it Rained on Your Parade

I remember the late great George Carlin had a great bit on corporate success and failure. I don't recall the exact words but it was along the lines of, "Do you ever notice that we succeed and you fail?" As we all know success is the child of many parents and failure is an orphan. I think this was on perfect display at the press conference held by Steve Jobs on Friday. I would call this part press conference, part explanation, part near child-like tantrum.

Steve Jobs is well known for having a large ego and a short fuse. In that respect he is like a number of CEO's. He, and Apple of course though it's getting harder to separate the two, have been on a tremendous hot streak. Between the iPod, iPhone and iPad he has been raised to a level few non-deities ever see. Unfortunately, like a lot of diva's, the start to believe their own press clippings and really do believe that they are just an amazing and completely important person.

He made an astonishing mistake in my opinion by laying blame for this not at his own feet, nor his engineers but at everyone outside of Apple especially the media. We heard that this problem was well known within the industry and other carriers had the same problems and no one commented on them. Then he ripped into the news media for what he determined was taking a minor flaw and blowing it out of proportion. As we clearly can see, Jobs is totally tone deaf to keep his customers happy and in the long run that can't be good for Apple the organization.

In a great many respects Steve Jobs is certainly a genius. In others he is a dinosaur whose extinction time may fast be approaching. We saw that he has no interest in working with the media and that he will settle for nothing less than fawning coverage of himself, his company and his products. We also saw his ugly side when, for once, he wasn't calling the shots and showing everyone how great his products were. This is not someone who likes criticism and thinks he can control what is being said about his company without the benefit of mutually beneficial media relations. I watched him on stage and said "thank God I am not in his PR department."

In some respects he is like a lot of CEO types I have met down the line. I always remember one CEO who was interviewing me to head his PR operation. He told me before asking any questions that reporters only want creative stories so how would I pitch his company. I told him, very politely of course, that I disagreed and that the media wants to write for their audiences. I further explained that a PR strategy should target outlets his customers were likely to be influenced. I had to hold back my eyes from rolling when he looked at me and said, "reporters and customers put together don't equal half an idiot."

Needless to say I decided then to not take the job but I did enjoy the chance to try and tell a CEO how wrong he was. Of course there was no changing his mind and I could tell how furious he was that anyone dared question him. So in typical imperious fashion he cut the interview short and they hired someone within the company who wouldn't make any waves.

The lessons learned from all of this is that no company is solely about the CEO no matter how brilliant he or she is. A strategy revolving around that will eventually lead to the organizations failure. Also, it is terrible communications practice to blame the media for your own short comings. Yes the media loves to kick someone when they are down but, often, most wounds are self inflicted. Lastly, as communications people, we are responsible for protecting the company's brand and reputation and that is much more valuable that any CEO and his or her ego.

How Communications Can be a Value Add to the Corporate Mix

A common refrain from people in marketing and corporate communications is that we are indispensable when times are good but completely disposable when the fickle winds of the business world change. A part of that negative aspect of our role is the fault of short sighted corporate executives who can only see to the next quarter and lack the vision to build their brands. But we are kidding ourselves as a profession if we think that the fault is in everyone but ourselves. Crying like some grumpy child who believes the world just doesn't get them.

Having the experience of having worked in both the corporate and agency side of marketing and corp comm there is one thing that stands out right away. By and large we take the easiest way out and go down the path of least resistance. There is an old story about an older scientist and his young protege conducting an experiment. At some point, the older scientist turns in amazement to the protege and says, "what did you think of that?" The protegee has no idea what he is talking about so he says "hmm,,,what did you think of it." After the older scientist gives a long winded answer about what a profound discovery he's just made the younger apprentice says with a smile, "yes, I saw it too; we're going to be famous."

The point of the story is that we all too often try and give a client what they want rather than what they need. We want to please when we are really supposed to instruct. Would you feel comfortable with a doctor who seemed dodgy and wanted to know if you wanted surgery or tests? Expertise is something we pay for and it is something that we earn. However it is something we very rarely practice out of fear of stepping on someone's toes.

So many people in communications value the fact that we have the ear of the CEO. But in many cases the CEO is like Cesar of old who claimed he makes the sun rise in the east and set in the west. Cesar could do it the other way he once claimed but the roosters would all die of fright. Well the CEO is not the organization and any half way well run organization has a plan to succeed the CEO so that is another blow to the idea of the CEO as a deity.

So back to the question at hand, what can communications add to the corporate mix? First and foremost we should be the truth tellers in the organization. One term I have used to executives time and time again is that, if you lie, you die. This doesn't necessarily involve some grand conspiracy of competitors out to get you; instead it involves building mutually beneficial and open relationships with key stakeholders. The reason they need be mutually beneficial is that there will be a time when the organization will need the help of a stakeholder or maybe even multiple stakeholders. It's best to have them think kind of you before you ask for help than having to go, hat in hand to someone who is lukewarm in how they view.

The other way that communications can be of value to the overall success of the organization is by being a fair and just counsel. While that may seem obvious, it is very rarely practiced. Too many communications people seem to think that their job is to follow orders without question. If I had a dime for how many times I have been told, well, so and so pays the bills so we do what they say, I could retire now. This is the wrong type of mentality that I am talking about. The fact that we are being payed for our expertise is proof we need to offer opinions which may fly in the face of what the client wishes to be told. It's business, not a nursery school!

Telling someone they are wrong is neither easy, nor pleasant but it is often times necessary. If an organization has any hope of success it will be run by people who realize they do not know everything and who trust those beneath them. Sadly, as we all know, most organizations don't function this way. The best course of action is to fight hard for your view and when it is rebuffed, make it clear that this is happening against your counsel.

The long and short is that corporate communications can add a tremendous value to the corporate mix if we, as corp comm professionals, are willing to be brave enough and bold enough to take a stand. There will always be the shallow careerists who think that by kissing up to the client they will be rewarded. But by and large they damage us and damage the profession. We should try and avoid them. We should offer the value of our expertise and experience and let it be known our views are as correct as those of a doctor or a lawyer. You are welcome to ignore them but you do so at your own peril. After a few experiences being burned by poor judgment, perhaps the decision makers will realize we actually know what we're doing!

Where is the leadership in Public Relations

A friend sent me an interesting article showing that a Chief Petty Officer in the Coast Guard who was responsible for crafting the government's message about the BP spill also worked for BP's PR agency. While the article was unclear regarding the exact role of this person and if they worked on the BP account it did raise some distributing questions about the roles of public relations, ethics and leadership.

One issue PR people deal with is the concept that we are nothing but spin masters. Basically, many people both outside and, quite sadly, inside the organization, think it is our job to take manure and turn it into lovely fertilizer. The sad fact of the matter is that the PR profession and many of its leaders are the greatest factors in ensuring this is not simply a stereotype, but, sadly the state of affairs in PR.

Going back to the case of the Chief Petty Officer I was reminded of an ethics question posed to both doctors and lawyers in law and medical school respectively. They are basically told that if they need to ask themselves, "is this ethical?" comes up, then it is most likely unethical, or at best a gray area and they should avoid it. While lawyers are hardly seen as the paragons of ethics and doctors can be compromised, the fact is they have a set of rules in their professions which say what is and what isn't wrong.

What's also missing in PR that is found in both professions (legal and medical) is that young professionals entering the field are thrown into the field where they are required to make decisions, act professionally and deliver results. In this respect, PR is quite similar, where we diverge is that the doctor or lawyer is also given the benefit of constant feedback; good, bad or otherwise.

Sadly, in public relations, and marketing too, we see virtually no mentoring like what is seen in most professions. Rather we see an assumption that the person who has been hired at an entry level knows what they are doing and it is up to them to do it right. There is also what I would call a twisted sense among senior levels that this is how they learned it and if you can't swim you shouldn't be in the pool.

This all circles back to the issue about the Coast Guard CPO and BP. No one in an agency setting I have seen conducts anything even approaching real training for their staff. Very few people give honest and educational feedback to a junior PR person so they may learn. Senior PR people do love to bring junior people on the carpet and dress them down and self serving lectures are all a part of office politics but genuine and true leadership that challenges PR people to be critical thinkers and to engage in dialogue is very rare indeed.

I do wish to be clear this is not simply an agency problem. In some respects, the corporate PR world has a greater leadership gap than agencies. For one thing, they are usually held responsible for stroking the ego of a CEO or some other senior executive and telling them what they wish to hear and not the truth. Corporate PR tends to be about turf and privileges and not about doing the best job possible. It does mirror agency life in that junior people are expected to not make any mistakes but, at the same time, avoid asking any questions, even if they may learn from it.

The sad fact of PR is that there is a vacuum of leadership in the PR industry. Yes, that's a broad brush statement and I know personally there are very good leaders in public relations today. But compared to other professions we lack leaders who are willing to be mentors, teachers and to lay down a series of rules that will help define us as a profession. Would you trust a lawyer who wasn't a member of the bar? Would you trust a doctor whose license to practice has been revoked? Then why do we trust PR people who owe their positions to being able to survive the various business cycles. Remember the old story about what survives a nuclear war? Cockroaches and Twinkies? Well PR deserves to have its leadership be true leaders and not just cockroaches and Twinkies.

How to really measure your PR results?

I was looking at a site for a company that was interested in hiring some PR help lately. Based on an initial conversation, they seemed to take a great deal of pride in what they had done up until that point and were seeking someone to come in, take up the baton and carry forward. I had to be a bit of a spoil sport when it came time to ask questions and ask them why they were so proud of what they had already done. I was not trying to lessen their accomplishments, rather I wanted to understand why they believed their PR program was in excellent form.

I told them in my opinion they had an impressive amount of coverage. I saw a number of very well known publications, including some very solid business coverage. What I did not see however was publications which may be read by individuals who are interested in purchasing their services. In other words I saw the very evil shadow of trophy hunting and nothing that would help the brand to grow and excel.

Let me give you an example. Say your company invents a robot that can fit into your garage and diagnose problems with your car in layman's terms and even perform minor repairs like oil changes. Now this is cool stuff and of course you may wish to get it covered by Time and the Wall Street Journal and your local big business publication. But I would argue that Car and Driver and maybe even Simple Life may be more appropriate as this is where people would go to make buying decisions regarding these products.

The issue boils down to the fact that one hit in a solid industry publication is one that will go to deliver your message to your customer base. They are not always glamorous, but they are highly influential among the consumers of your product. A hit in a big business publication like The Wall Street Journal may feel good and may give the impression of success, but it will prove to be an empty victory.

Remember that people do not turn to mainstream media for information on specific industries. They usually go to specialized media outlets, web sites and so on. The best way to measure the success of your PR efforts is by monitoring how much of an increase you see in a tangible factor such as web site hits, contacts or leads. Of course, you need to factor in the role of the other elements within the marketing mix such as direct mail,advertising and the web in your calculations.

The strongest advice I can offer to any organization who wishes to measure your PR results is determine what you hope to accomplish from public relations and then base all measurements against that. Avoid the pitfall of thinking that a big name will result in a flood of new business and realize that, ultimately, the goal of your PR efforts is to work with the marketing team to drive sales and create revenue!

Are wire services still relevant in today's direct contact age

One question I face when dealing with new clients, especially start ups is if wire services are still relevant for information distribution. Now lets exclude those organizations, like publicly traded companies who for legal reasons have to distribution information via a public forum. They use these services and should continue to use them.

The question for the rest of the body out there is given the cost of the various wire services, and their scatter shot approach to hitting the news , is if wire services remain relevant to the rest of us? I would have to argue that for most companies the answer is no.

In this day and age there are a number of reasons not to use wire services. First and foremost they represent a cost of several hundred dollars up to several thousand dollars. When you use these services you are hitting an outlet and not necessarily a reporter. Given the immense volume of releases issued on a given day, (90% of them are of no news value what so ever), there is an excellent chance any one release will be buried on the day it is disseminated.

What I recommend to clients is that this is an opportunity to build a relationship with key reporters who you should be building your relationships with your A list reporter. So this means that the Wall Street Journal is out as a publication in most cases. What a smart, smaller company is doing is going after its a list of industry centric publications and hitting up your a list contacts there. You should be offering these folks the information prior to public distribution and in rare cases, if you're trying to build a relationship with a key editor, offer the information under embargo or in even rare cases as an exclusive.

Wire services are going no where that much I can guarantee you. They do still serve a need but I have to say that they are not something that a small company needs and should be used only because there are regulations that require it. They bring no value add to your business and WILL NOT result in hits. Yes you will show up on Yahoo or Google News but that is as relevant as graffiti. When was the last time you noticed a graffiti vandal's tag?

So spend your PR dollars wisely. The wire services will try and lure you in with the bells and whistle's but in the end you are spending your money on items that do not deliver value. In these days of smaller budgets and increased ROI you are better of distributing it on your own.

What in the heck do we do about social media?

As I look around the PR landscape today, many executives are looking at social media like a young girl in love with the high school's star quarterback. All they see is a positive and in typical fashion decide that they need to be on board that band wagon and need to do it yesterday. Often, they do not take the time to figure out how to best use the technology to meet current and long term needs or even how it fits into current and future marketing and branding strategies.

Social Media can also be compared to an all you can eat buffet. Someone sees a sign in Las Vegas that says $9.95 all you can eat buffet and thinks, "wow that is great, I need to do that." So they plunk down $10 and head to the table and of course load up on tons of stuff and usually end up feeling bloated, not very satisfied and usually seeing that the plate is still have full. Then to top it all off, they are usually hungry again in a few hours. Social Media is certainly an interesting phenomena but like anything else in business, it needs to be approached with purpose and with a clear goal regarding how it will be used to achieve corporate goals. Social Media does not exist to serve its own ends.

Social Media also presents risks regarding the potential for information leaks. While you need always be on guard for intellectual espionage, Social Media presents another concern where you may have employees who are proud of their accomplishments and take to the blogsphere or Facebook to brag about what they do. Pride is a human weakness and as well all know, pride preceds the fall. Employees should be instructed to treat any communication with outside parties the same regardless of whether they are meeting with friends for drinks or writing on a blog.

For my own two cents, I believe an approved blog is the best Social Media vehicle today. It allows for a disciplined and measured interaction with the world at large. It also allows the most secure and disciplined means of reaching a target audience and offers the benefits of the two way channel of communication we want with Social Media. Twitter is a close second when done properly but Facebook to me, still needs to prove its value as a business tool for social media.

More good news from the Sox yesterday. Nick Green hit a great walk off home run on Father's Day and ended what was a really fascinating and gut-wrenching day for both teams. I felt sorry to Tim Wakefield as the bullpen really did him no favors, but then again that's nothing new. But Green's homer was just a shot and only left a question of fair vs. foul. Oh and once again, Julio Lugo on the bench = Red Sox don't lose!

Well still no sign of summer or warm weather. The weather forecaster's say later this year and all I can say is that we shall see! Funny Foxborough has already put its water restrictions in place for the summer. I hope they are right!

An amazing streak for the Red Sox

Well if you did not hear it on your own news, last night the Red Sox had their 500th consecutive home sell out. That is a streak going back to 2003 and is quite impressive. Granted, those of us who are real Red Sox fans have to deal with the pin heads who sit there with their pink hats and sit behind home plate on their cell phones mugging for the cameras. Still real Red Sox fans know these are great times for the Sox and make us realize how well run the Red Sox for the first time in their history.

There is a great book out now titled "It was Never About the Babe." This is a very well written and researched history of the team and lays most of the blame for the team's failure at the feet of Tom Yawkey and his heirs, right where it belongs. Yawkey bought the Red Sox as a tax shelter and ran them with his drinking buddies for a number of years. The stars could do anything and developing younger players or talent was never a serious chore for him. Worst of all, Yawkey's racism prevented the drafting of black players and shamefully made the Red Sox the last team to field a Black player. Even into the early 1990's the Sox seemed to have a cap on the number of non-white players they would have on the roster. Ironic how they won the Series with a roster mostly Black and Latin.

Last night I had the opportunity to hear Ambassador Ray Flynn speak at Bad Abbott's in Quincy. First off, Bad Abbot's is really quite bad! I was not impressed. Ambassador Flynn how ever was quite impressive. There are two things I respect about Ray Flynn, first, he is a man of his convictions. He is one of the few political commentators who is willing to speak for the poor and working class. Second, he is a self-made man and as a result he speaks his mind. Yes he is a shrewd political but at the same time he makes it clear he can sleep very well at night being criticised for doing what's right than being cheered for doing what's expedient or popular.

I noticed a trend in PR that I find worrisome and concerns me. I think too many PR people are falling in love with social media and seeing it as this perfect solution to whatever problems you may have communicating with your audience. For those of us who can recall the emergence of the web in the mid to late 1990's, the terminology is very similar. While yes it is great to see those brave souls in Iran using Twitter to communicate about their revolution, I can't say that I see Twitter, or Facebook, as universal applications for all businesses. PR people tend to paint a broad brush to impress clients or management and I think this is simply another example. Just like you don't put out a news release every time you sign up a customer, you don't need to tweet every time you are stumped about the name of that Val Kilmer movie from the 1980's where he builds the death laser (Real Genius).

Well to close out on a Red Sox note another great game on the field. Brad Penny pitched well though he got whacked hard in the chest. Big Papi is hitting well by the looks of it and as I said yesterday if only the weather would turn we may think it is summer!

Getting the week off to a slow start

Oh goodness, what is it about starting the week with a dreary, gray Monday that does nothing for me. This is perfect weather to just go back to sleep and enjoy a nice long nap! Yesterday was a washout and once again the weather forecasters got it all wrong. Boy, I wish I could have a job where you could be wrong most of the time and people not only expect it, but reward you for doing so! What a life!!!

I have been watching the news from Iran and my own opinion is that the bozo who runs the country, and I couldn't be bothered to spell is name, stole the election. I mean if he won 51 to 49 I doubt that anyone would be more than upset and sad but to do it so flagrantly is only to stir up the hornets nest or poke the bear or insert metaphor here. There was a line I recall from the Brink's Job movie where one of the characters said that the only mistake they made was to rob from Brink's. The point being that how and who you steal from matters almost as much as what you steal.

I saw a very interesting position this morning at Bank of America and of course sent my resume in for it. I am curious that they are hiring and if so they are doing it very quietly. I like the idea that the plan is for community service grants as well which interests me thanks to my work with a number of non-profits through the years including several years on the Price Center board. Well as they say, time shall tell you know.

Yesterday I went to a First Communion for my cousin's quadruplets. Yes you read right she had four kids, two boys and two girls and they had their First Communion yesterday. It was a shame about the weather but oh boy was the food amazing. I love good BBQ and this was great BBQ. Of course I ate like a pig and when I came home last night could not move a muscle. More accurately, I had no desire to move a muscle.

Sadly the Red Sox could not pull off the sweep of the Phillies yesterday. Josh Beckett had his first bad start in almost two months and it was bound to happen. Of course Julio Lugo played so my theory of playing Lugo means the team loses still stands. Kudo's to Beckett for hitting a home run in the loss though!

Well today's big goal is finalizing the name of my company with my partner and once we have that done we can start to move faster. The devil is truley in the details when it comes to starting a company. But it is also more fulfilling. You feel like you are doing something, rather than just going through the motions.

The Weekend Is Starting Well

Well today's job report was quite the stunner. It came in well below expectations which makes me wonder if the numbers aren't wrong. Much as one can not look at who the Patriots take in the first round, you have to look beyond the first number to see what's going on. And also keep in mind that this means companies are firing less and not hiring new employees. But still I am optimistic that we are beyond the worst. I think we went down too fast and that when we come back it may not be as fast but pent up demand will have to be unleashed at some point.

In other news I am pumped that the Sox swept by the Tiggers :) Tim Wakefield is having a heck of a season and Jason Bay, or the Anti Manny, is proving that the trade for Manny may be the Sox's best move since they traded for Tek about ten years ago. I am also rooting for the Magic in this year's finals. Basically anyone vs. the Lakers gets my vote and the fact that the rapist Kobe Bryant should be in jail and not playing basketball should also be enough reason to go against the Lakers.

I did get a laughable treatment from a guy looking for a PR person. He wanted someone to write press releases because he knew that's how you get coverage. Of course this is wrong and I tried to tell him this but he knew. I asked him how he knew and he told me that you see all these press releases out there and all those articles get written so they must be getting written from the press releases. I thought wow this guy must also think that since he only sees the sun during the day it must dissapear at night. Amazing the thoughts and the certainty that goes through some people's minds.

Well a quite day. Once the rain is gone it looks like a nice weekend so I will take Max the Wonder Dog out for a walk and try to work off some of his fat!

Welcome to my first ever blog post

Welcome to my first ever blog post. I have a wide and varied number of interests, ideas, thoughts and ideas. Sometimes I think I am the Wikipedia of useless information until I realize that Wikipedia is already the Wikipedia of useless information. Setting up this blog is long overdue and was not easy due to the fact that my blog host/partner who I will not name (Google) made it needlessly difficult.

As for those who don't know me, I am just your regular working fool, trying to survive the current recession, picking up freelance marketing and PR jobs here and all the while looking for something more permanent which in my chose profession may be a bit of an oxymoron. I do love what I am doing but it can often drive me nuts especially when those in the peanut gallery feel obliged to chime in with how my job being done. Those who work in marketing and PR and often faced with a situation that baseball Hall of Famer Leo Durocher described when questioned about his many critics as a manger. To paraphrase Leo, my job is like going to church, many attend, few understand.

So during the coming weeks and months check back for my random thoughts, actions, adventures and the banalities that passes for life.

Cheers!
Rick Sheehy