September 3, 2010

bad for journalism, terrible for pr

Abu-Ghraibit is sometimes joked about in public relations (pr) circles, that the slashing of journalism budgets will be a boon for pr professionals. the truth is the decline in good journalism starts us down a path that neuters one of the most powerful checks and balances in a democratic society.

keeping the bastards honest

if this is the only thing that you remember about the australian democrats, etch it fast.

a democratic society exists in a state of fluid contention. one side can never have too much power, because what we do know about power is that it corrupts. to this end, most of our power structures are such that there is always a counterpoint, hence:

  • a bicameral system of parliament
  • separation of powers between the executive, legislative and judicial branches
  • government and opposition
  • prosecution and defence
  • mcdonalds and kfc (i might be joking here)

if we didn’t have this system, power shifts to one group and then we have a problem.

public opinion

public opinion, and consequently consent, is where all our human institutions derive their power. much of that opinion is informed by the media (old or new). the media is where we tell our stories, and stories are told of us. these stories over time form reputation, credibility and ultimately for a basis for power. be that market power, social power or governmental power. power influences consent.

the hacks

we rely on the hacks to watch our institutions and ensure that the public are informed on what they are doing, so that we, the people, can give our consent. we rely on them to be honest, accurate and fair. as humans though, their stories will be coloured from their experiences and biases. this is often not a problem because often an experienced journalist with have insights that add value and interest to a story.

unfortunately, this is not always the case. bad news sells better than good news and a scandal is always titillating. coming at a story from a negative angle is always juicier.

the flacks

as flacks, we are the advocates for our clients. we tell our client’s stories from a positive angle and always with our best foot forward. this is neither a secret nor is it an earth shattering revelation. for us good news is always better than bad news, and a scandal is a nightmare. besides telling everyone anytime we have good news, we try to limit the damage of bad news.

this hack/flack contention, hopefully draws us somewhere to the middle of the road, and as close to the perception of truth as humanly possible. this system of story telling gives us as a society a balance of power.

the decline of good journalism

advertising revenues are drying up and media houses flounder trying to find an online model monetisation model. money is not being spent on good journalism and funding longer well researched pieces, rather journalists are being asked to churn out x number of stories per day.

this skews the power balances and this is not a good thing. In the long term, this means that the power starts to shifts to one group, the flacks.

i’m sure we’re a wonderful bunch but we are we are human and definitely not the untouchables. we are part of a symbiotic system that ultimately only works when there is equal representation on both sides.

i’m not sure what the strategy to monetise will be. there are ideas floating around. i do believe that with every media downsizing the checks stop balancing.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to Ping.fm Post to StumbleUpon

don’t believe the social media jihadists

i have been thinking alot lately about the development and evolution of social media. i have also been tuning into alot of twitter conversations and reading alot of blogs. what is becoming apparent is that there are many social media jihadists out there that think social media is the only form of media for the future.

to a certain extent, i think we need the extreme viewpoints because it’s the extremists the fuel the discussion. you don’t get the moderate middle without the extremists on both sides. like religious extremists though, i am quite ready to listen to their viewpoint but i certainly would not counsel anyone to act on their diatribe.

the problem with social media jihadists is that they make social media the point of the conversation, rather than the media that facilitates the conversation.

social media is irrelevant. whatever. i couldn’t care less.

what is relevant and what is important, is the contents of your message, the people you need to hear your message and choosing the right medium to talk to those people.

there are people out there who would have you believe that everyone needs to get onto twitter now, and that friendfeed is the the bee’s knee’s of all social networks. rubbish.

if your customers, friends or family are not on the these networks, you need to ask yourself the: “why?” question.

in ten years time, it won’t be “social media” it will just be media. it is media because it is simply a medium of communication. the general public doesn’t care whether it’s social media or web 1.0, or web 2.0. to them it’s just the internet. the important part is they get the information they need.

when the phone rings, do you care that it’s a cell, landline, voip, copper line, cordless, or the line uses 8 kHz using 8 bit ulaw coding? i don’t. i care about what the person on the other end is saying though.

as practitioners sometimes we get carried away with our subject matter because we’re immersed in it every day. we also have to defend our views on social media everyday, thereby enforcing them. it is important though that for our clients – who pay us good money to help them communicate better with their publics – that we advise them objectively and not get carried away with the medium.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to Ping.fm Post to StumbleUpon

social media 101: help! i need to get into this social media thing

when i was in i.t. (and even now) i was fielding technical support questions for friends and family. now that my day job has changed, the questions have changed a little. people now ask me about the social media. the most common question i get asked goes along these lines: “i’ve heard about this social media, should i start a blog, start twittering or create a facebook page?”

they generally want a nice short answer which i can’t give them. i want to take some time to answer the question here.

the single most important question i want them to answer is “why?

  • why do they want to engage in social media?
  • do they view it as a medium to drive revenue?
  • is it because someone told them they should?
  • is it because everyone is doing it?

why?” is a question that had to be answered on every project i’ve ever worked on and particularly in business it should always be a question that is asked.

i have never been able to justify an infrastructure upgrade, software development or deployment to the cio/cto with “we just should”. i need to know why and what benefit or return i hope to achieve and be able to articulate it in a business case.

once you answer the “why?” then we can start talking about the “what?“:

  • what should we do?
  • what tools should we use?
  • what are the success metrics?

treat a social media project as you would any project. you are spending your company’s (or your own) money for an expected benefit. now what you do need to be careful about is, like other business projects it may be difficult to prove the r.o.i. as a tangible on your balance sheet. in that respect, you may liken a social media project to be like a c.r.m. project. nobody disputes that having good customer satisfaction is essential to a successful business, but it’s difficult to use customer satisfaction in a business case.

to work out the why’s you might want to think in terms of who you intend to reach, or the “who?“. in p.r. we call these groups your intended audience or your target public:

  • clients
  • suppliers
  • employees
  • the general public
  • regulators
  • shareholders

the list goes on. the reason you ask this is because if you don’t know this you can’t really decide what to do can you? it would be akin to telling senator conroy we don’t want his broadband censorship plan wouldn’t it? it would fall on deaf ears.

the second thing to remember is, social media is not a one-way street. it is very clearly two-way. you can’t just advertise at people. so if you want to drive a quick buck, social media will generally not work for you (there are exceptions, but they’re rare so forget about it). the thing about social media is, it’s about getting feedback. this is why i like to compare it to a c.r.m. project. it’s about listening as well.

so if you are able to answer the  “why?” and the “who?” you’re off to a good start and stay tuned for the next 101.

Post to Twitter Post to Delicious Post to Digg Post to Facebook Post to Ping.fm Post to StumbleUpon