Being Right: Fresh Content

When we started the Fresh Content experiment several months ago, we established more than a dozen criteria for picking what the daily fresh content picks might look like. One of the criteria was simple enough. The authors had to be right.

I don't mean right as in "everybody agrees." I mean right in that their take on the subject transcends popularity and strikes at the truth. You see, topic popularity has very little to do with reality. For example, if you surveyed the masses to determine the shape of the planet several hundred years ago, the most common consensus would be that the Earth is flat. Um, it's not flat.

Best Fresh Content In Review, Week of April 26

• 4 Reasons PR Agencies Are Failing in Social Media.
Ever wonder why some public relations firms aren't finding peak performance with social media? Valeria Maltoni provides the four most common challenges facing public relations firms, including: too much reliance on the pitch, learning the client's business, measurement models, and ever-present reliance on media. As a fifth reason, Maltoni suggests that another problem is that many public relations firms believe social media always needs to be handled in house, by the client. She's right.

• Warning: Your Internet Marketing System Will Fail.
Ian Lurie suggests that most Internet marketing systems are developed using an invent-and-impose route rather than an observe-and-clarify route. What he means is that most professionals are launching a network presence, collect followers, and then yell at them until they submit. He's right and it does work. He suggests a different approach, attributed to Albert Einstein. Rather than impose an idea, he suggests understanding what exists and then clarifying a position. He's right.

• A Better Brain in Four Days.
Unless you missed several decades of marketing research, it's apparent that psychology and sociology play a leading role in communication study. But psychology and sociology aren't tools to simply be transposed upon audiences. Professional communicators can use them too. One recent standout example, backed by a study, comes from Roger Dooley. Remarkable new research shows that just four days of meditating for 20 minutes per day produced significant benefits as measured by a battery of tests of cognition. He's right.

• The Social Media News Release Isn’t Dead – The Audience Is.
Ike Pigott fails at staying out of the press release must die meme for the benefit of everyone. The debate is wrong, he says. The format of the communication is not as critical as the audience who is reading that communication and, probably, the quality of the information contained in that format. Given that we frequently find the best written releases — those that rely on news over pitch marketing nonsense — still have traction, we can't argue. He's right.

• More Proof The Echo Chamber And Reality Aren’t Related.
There have been many days that we've sat back and wondered if Jason Falls had fallen so deep into the echo chamber, we'd never get him back. And then within a single week, he surprised us not once but twice with posts that point to the most obvious conclusion: most social media experts believe things that are wrong. Edison Research, Arbitron, and Citibank are right. Social media is not the end all to communication. Far from it. It's only another beginning. Falls escapes the echo chamber and comes up right.

Rolling In Muck: Nevada Politics As Usual

In Nevada, mud slinging has fallen out of fashion. Nowadays, everyone would rather roll in the muck.

In one of the more ridiculous campaign moves in recent history, Gov. Jim Gibbons sent out a press release that attacked primary candidate Brian Sandoval for a comment he made eight years ago. Sure, the answer to the question asked was absurd. And it showed Sandoval's complete and utter ignorance about the Constitution. But to burp it out in a release in an attempt to make it a platform plank can only be described as novice or perhaps desperate.

A Brief Backgrounder On The Comment.

With Nevada still moving in the wrong direction of economic recovery (Las Vegas unemployment is over 13 percent), one might think the priority would be jobs. You'd be wrong. This week's issue is about an exchange between the Las Vegas Review-Journal editorial board and Sandoval, who was running as attorney general at the time.

According to the Las Vegas Sun's retelling of a Las Vegas Review-Journal story, it went like this ... Sandoval explained the AG is obligated to enforce any enactment of the Legislature, no matter how unconstitutional, columnist Vin Suprynowicz demanded: you’re saying that if the Legislature passed a law requiring all Jews to wear yellow Stars of David sewn on the outside of their clothing, you’d enforce it?

‘It’s my job to enforce it,’ said Sandoval.

This was the focus of the Gibbons release. You can read it in entirety here. Ironically but not surprisingly, the release misses two valid issues — it would be a vile breach of the Constitution and ignores basic fundamentals such as the balance of power between legislative, executive, and judicial branches — and attempts to build a case for anti-Semitism.

Reactions from Around The Race.

Sandoval kept his response short. "Jim Gibbons' statement today is so repugnant it is beneath the dignity of the office of Governor," opened his three sentence statement.

The other candidate vying for votes in the Republican primary, Mike Montandon, had even more fire. He called on Gov. Gibbons to apologize to Sandoval and the citizens of Nevada.

The outrage has been as irrelevant as the initial blunder. Political columnist Jon Ralston offered the better response for the two candidates. "How about a lack of respect for anyone with a triple-digit IQ, no matter his or her religion, with the use of a repulsive analogy that was neither on point nor relevant?" And Steve Selebius offered the better round up, overall.

At the same time, it seems nobody can leave it alone. The release and the comment has generated more media and blog headlines than any other story about the original comment and any other issue discussed in the entire race.

Some claim anyone who compares someone to anything close to a Nazi has lost the argument. If only that were true. Nazi is the word of the day in Arizona too. Dozens of people opposed to the recent law in Arizona, including Nevada Democratic gubernatorial candidate Rory Reid, are comparing it to a Nazi policy. Interestingly enough, the media doesn't slap that analogy away. Nowadays, it takes a sports writer to offer up some semblance of reasoning against the rash of boycott.

The Psychology Of Modern Politics.

All of this demonstrates an increased reliance on angry voters, with politicians and special interests throwing up diatribe bait on a regular basis to see what sticks. Generally, the media loves it too (despite selective denunciations) because diatribe means ratings. The more colorful the controversy, the more it is covered.

So what could have the politicians done instead?

• Gov. Gibbons had a legitimate complaint in that Sandoval once said he would surrender the Constitution in favor of a populous vote. The initial comment had nothing to do with anti-Semitism as much as it had to do with being ignorant about our country. Had Gibbons merely probed to see if Sandoval had reversed his opinion, the release might have worked.

• Sandoval could have used this opportunity to put the comment to rest. His response could have been a mix of Ralston's suggestion and an emphasis on the idea that he would not support an unconstitutional law as governor. He should just say he misspoke in 2002. The fact that he did not ought to trouble voters.

• Mike Montandon should have just stayed out of it, despite still coming up third in the polls. If there was an opportunity here, it would have been to change the subject. No such luck. He jumped right into the muck.

• Rory Reid was smart to stay out of it, especially given he jumped on the Gestapo comparison bandwagon too when talking about the Arizona law. Different puddle, same muck.

When you add it all up, all four candidates help clarify there is a continuing slide in state politics. Instead of mud slinging, it's all about muck rolling. It's simple to do, nowadays. Make a puddle of muck, invite the media, and every candidate will dive right in. They can't help themselves.

Saving Wildlife: Dawn Responds To Oil Spill Crisis

Although Procter & Gamble (P&G) has a Web site dedicated to the cause, it doesn't employ much push public relations to draw attention to its role in saving wildlife. Other people do it for them.

Brenda Swindle, a stylist at Hair Impressions salon in Alabama, is one of them. Bobbie Lowe, a patron at Harvey's Supermarkets in Georgia, is another. It was top of mind for rescuers from Delaware too.

Dawn Dish Soap Saves Wildlife.

The sudden surge of attention didn't start with a press release. It started with casual mentions by people who know. For 30 years, wildlife rescuers have used Dawn dishwashing liquid to gently remove oil and help save wildlife affected by oil spills.

It wasn't until the media began to draw upon Dawn dish soap as an example of how people can help that P&G responded. Since, it has communicated its increasing role as part of the solution in an oil spill that could eclipse the Exxon Valdez disaster. Since, the company has released news that it is stepping up production, clarified its efforts to raise money for conservation projects targeted at cleaning wildlife hurt by oil spills since last July, and how the company donates Dawn dish soap to the Bird Rescue Research Center (IBRRC), Marine Mammal Center, and other rehabilitation organizations.

In addition to its own fundraising efforts, P&G is asking fans of its program to make direct donations to the IBRRC and Tri-State Bird Rescue & Research center. They also direct would-be volunteers to contact the Unified Command Volunteer Request line at 1-866-448-5816 via its dedicated Dawn Save Wildlife Facebook page.

The description introducing the page says it all. "An Everyday Wildlife Champion views saving wildlife as an everyday thing."

You can find additional information about the company's efforts on its Dawn Save Wildlife Web site. Currently, the company has raised $385,091 of its $500,000 goal. The site also supports an interactive map, which identifies which states have contributed the most.

The $500,000 goal is in addition to all other fundraising efforts and direct support. The company has said it is just as happy (if not more than happy) for people to make direct donations.

What Public Relations Professionals Can Learn.

It is a good lesson for public relations practitioners. Sometimes the best public relations efforts are not what you can draw attention to or capitalize on, but rather a long-term investment of doing good and then being caught doing it.

In this case, Procter & Gamble demonstrates a perfect balance between being responsive to the attention without attention seeking as many companies did during the Haitian earthquake. The results speak for themselves. The effort is closely aligned to a product benefit and the company demonstrates what it means to be a good corporate citizen for others to emulate.

Playing Catch Up: Olympus Cameras

Despite a steady decline in online conversations about cameras as most tech buzz is about testing for kinks in Apple's armor (yawn), the hierarchy of camera manufacturers remains unchanged. As conversations move, they all move together with no one really making gains or losing ground.

When you look at the landscape, Canon and Nikon lead the pack, with Sony in the ball park (mostly because the general brand name gives it a boost). Somewhere on a lower plane are the next three: Olympus, Samsung, and Panasonic. It has been this way for some time, with Canon and Nikon as camera market share leaders.

The reason is pretty obvious. Nikon and Canon made an early push into social media, seeing the significance in an online world that loves photos. Olympus missed the window, and has been playing catch up for a year. It might take ten.

To do it, Olympus tapped Mullen to develop a 10-step solution for social media. I've listed the steps, but you can read the rationale on Mullen's 10-Step Social Media Plan For Olympus.

Mullen's 10-Step Social Media Plan For Olympus.

1. Make A Commitment.
2. Define The Community.
3. Determine Objectives.
4. Engineer A Presence.
5. Build A Following.
6. Inspire Participation.
7. Get Attention.
8. Mobilize Community.
9. Measure Results.
10. Keep going.

Yep. There are some critical elements missing. There are some steps patently out of order. And with the exception of a stated commitment, I don't understand why they are still going through the motions. It's a scripted tried-and-tired social media plan.

Unfortunately for some, social media is adaptive. In fact, about the only thing that hasn't changed is that social media skews toward front runners. Nobody likes that fact, but it makes sense. It's news when you launch the first social media campaign in an industry. It's not news when you launch the first campaign for a company.

So, how does this plan execute? Here we go.

The Latest Pitch For Olympus.

The latest pitch for Olympus from Mullen is pretty standard fare. It consisted of a faux personalized hype e-mail about a "pretty awesome contest" that they call blogger outreach. Oh, golly gee. They told be about a contest and that it would be perfect for my creative-minded readers. Um, that would be you? And it might even be perfect for me. Ho hum. Not me. I get paid to do that stuff.

So here is the skinny minus the hype (and there is plenty of hype). You shoot a video (probably with a Flip or Sony or whatever) about what you would do if you had the new Olympus PEN E-PL1 and a $5,000 budget. Then upload it to YouTube. The pitch says that the Olympus community will pick the finalists. From those six, they receive an all-expense paid trip for two to New York, where whatever they shoot with the $5,000 budget will be displayed at the U.S. Open. Pretty simple.

A Few Areas Where Things Get Muddled.

Let's start with the contest voters. They say the community will judge it so it might make sense to know who this community might be.

Well, you won't find social media links on the Olympus Web site, but you can find a community of sorts. It would include 5,700 people on Facebook, 500 members on Flickr, 500 subscribers on YouTube, and 4,100 folks on Twitter. If we skew for multiple account holders, it might consist of 7,000 (some of whom know each other). Okay, it's small. If you're new, it's a disadvantage.

No worries. As it turns out, the Olympus community doesn't really pick the winners. Only the YouTube account holders vote. And those voters won't vote for 20 semi-finalists. They only influence who might make it the final six.

So how does it really work? The six finalists will be determined by judges based on creativity, quality, and contest theme. YouTube members will still get to vote, but their votes only count for 49 percent of the tally. The same goes for determining a finalist, except the finalist videos will be about what finalists did with the Olympus PEN E-PL1 and $5,000 budget. The finalists have about a month (maybe two or three weeks depending on how fast they get the camera) to complete for the prize.

If you poke around, you'll also discover that the community is young, with the number one question about the contest being tied to the age requirement. Most can't enter. What they don't ask about is the total prize, which includes two lenses, a stereo mic, extra battery, and camera bag for a estimated retail value of $6,200. That's not bad, along with $5,000 cash.

If you're wondering why there is an emphasis on the U.S. Open, a quick search reveals that Olympus is a sponsor. Otherwise, there is no connection to the contest.

Chances For A Social Media Win With This Contest.

While anything can happen online (sometimes marketers get lucky), the chances of Olympus gaining ground with this contest is marginal. Sure, Olympus cameras usually have an advantage for lightweight travel and stabilization built into the camera body, but Nikon and Canon dominate every other category, including the pro line, market share, ISO performance, and expandability.

But beyond that, the problems can be found in the approach. There are plenty, but we'll stick with the basics today.

1. Olympus started out of the social media gate slow because it entered the game so very, very late. But worse, it's relying on contests to introduce products to a community that just doesn't exist. Seriously, with the exception of huge brands, contests work better as an engagement tool than an introduction vehicle (unless the prize is HUGE or the community is established).

2. Olympus didn't compensate for the lack of community by leaning on the networks or communities where they participate. Specifically, this contest could receive a boost from three groups: YouTube members (assuming it's heavily promoted), amateur photographers (since pros have settled on Nikon or Canon or both), and tennis fans.

3. Coincidently, this also underpins one of several problems with the ten steps from Mullen. If they had laid out all of the assets and defined their objective first, these three audiences (maybe more) would have been obvious.

4. It seems pretty clear that the primary objective is pinned to generating "awareness." Almost every seasoned communicator ought to know by now that awareness is not objective. In one case, Mullen even counted a "See Also" link mention as an actual "awareness" result.

5. It seems likely Mullen adopted the very trendy "load and launch" approach to social media at the start. They call it engineering a presence. But basically, they chose a few popular platforms and launched accounts. This tactic also forces the social media team to build four communities at once with no central hub. Really, entering social media almost always works better one platform at a time because a percentage of your first platform will help populate the second, and so on.

6. There is also too much emphasis on influencers. While almost every program includes some influencer consideration, over emphasizing influencers inserts too much emphasis on building relations with "seemingly" popular people. If you're lucky, they write what you want them to write about. If you're not, they write about the campaign. Worse, it positions someone between the consumer and the product. Think about that.

Conclusions Before A Living Case Study.

Hey, I'm all for being wrong. And maybe I am. The only way to be sure is to track the results as part of a living case study, with this post serving as the backgrounder and indication of how far Olympus has to go to gain any ground. It looks uphill.

However, if you are interested in the contest, you can find the details on the GetOlympus YouTube Channel. Just make sure you watch both videos. The videos have a weird early 90s throwback vibe, which is probably the only time I owned an Olympus camera. More importantly, you'll discover another problem. I don't think they know who their audience really is.

Playing On Periods: Right Message, Wrong Colors

Two years ago, Procter & Gamble (P&G) drew some minor fire for bringing the "Have A Happy Period" to life in 2005. While many women felt put off by the promise of playful bliss from Always, one letter captured the spirit and set the spark of some push back surrounding the campaign.

"What I mean is, does any part of your tiny middle-manager brain really think happiness — actual smiling, laughing happiness — is possible during a menstrual period?" — Wendi Aarons

Never mind that Snopes discovered the letter was never sent to P&G. It resonated for awhile, just not enough for P&G to pull the campaign. They have worked harder to explain the thinking. The Web site clarifies the idea: "Have a happy period? It can't get any worse." Or can it?

The Daily Blonde thinks so. The new ads for colorfully compact Kotex shouts "Oooh! It comes in my color!” as it introduces feminine products that come in yellow, pink, blue, and green. (Hat tip: Krystal Hosmer.)

"I never match my bag and shoes anyway, so there’s not a chance I’m going to coordinate my tampon with ANYTHING." — Cheryl Phillips, The Daily Blonde

So what gives? In 2005, P&G set on a course to turn the period frown upside down. The idea (as Kevin Crociata, brand manager for Always put it) was to aim at "having a little fun with (a period) rather than dreading it so much."

Don't worry. It wasn't just his idea. Patti Gregoline, then senior vice president and executive creative director for Publicis Groupe's Leo Burnett worked on the campaign too. Gregoline, however, didn't work on the color-coordinated line. I'm only mentioning the original campaign to give people a sense of where this all started. (The new ads are by Organic and JWT.)

P&G does understand the issues, as evidenced by an advertisement that makes fun of its past attempts to woo customers.


Unfortunately, for all the sense that the advertisement makes, the product line doesn't make much sense. Well, maybe it does, for what P&G says amounts to 85 percent of women who are embarrassed to be seen with a feminine product.

Basically, the idea is that if it falls out of their purse, they'll feel more comfortable about it because it's a different color.

P&G is close to having it right. The thrust of the Kotex campaign is to stop all the weirdness about periods. I'm all for that. And yet, if there is an irony, the product colors and non-descript cases actually cater to the opposite concept.

There are better options to get over the weirdness. Vinnie once had the corner on cases despite the media's unwillingness to allow him to advertise. And then came the vintage collection. And then the mini-purses.

Sure, I'm hardly an expert. But I've never been afraid to talk or listen to people's take on just about anything. And from what I'm hearing from women, Kotex is thisclose to making the topic less embarrassing, but this far from delivering the right product/campaign combination. Until they do, they'll have a hard time gaining full support for their social media outreach efforts.

Analyzing Budgets: Public Relations And Communication

Despite the gloom and doom atmosphere of the public relations and communication industry, 57.5 percent of public relations/communication departments in the private and public sectors saw an increase or no change in their budgets last year. This year, 78.5 percent expect the same in 2010.

Those were among the findings of the Sixth Communication and Public Relations Generally Accepted Practices (GAP) Survey, published by the Strategic Communication & Public Relations Center at the University of Southern California. The study, and previous study, can be found here.

Characteristics Of Companies That Grew Public Relations/Communication

• They do not report to marketing, but directly to executive management.
• Most characterize their organizations as focused on long-term strategic planning.
• Budgetary spending is cautious, but neither frozen or reactive to the economic climate.
• Most indicate they have strong internal communication, with proactive people-driven environments.
• The increase in optimism for 2010 is tied to organizations that grew or expanded budgets during the recession.

Government agencies fared even better than the private sector. Almost 70 percent of government agencies were either not impacted or saw budget increases in 2009; 53.4 percent of nonprofit organizations saw no change or increased budgets.

Interestingly enough, government agencies and nonprofit organizations also allocate more of their total communication and public relations budget to staff. Most private sector companies allot approximately 42 percent of their budget to staff (except for the largest companies). Nonprofit organizations allot 55.3 percent to staff (and increased staff in 2009); government agencies allot as much as 56.8 percent to staff.

In general, only 23.2 percent reduced staff, within a modest .8 to 5.5 percent range. And among organizations that did make cuts, they typically scaled back work sent to outside agencies. In a previous study, companies reported allocating 26.6 percent of their budget to outside agencies. In 2009, only 15.4 percent was outsourced.

Organizations in the United States also fared better than international organizations. However, U.S.-based companies are less optimistic than their international counterparts. Smaller companies also tended to fare better and have more optimism.

The study helps pinpoint several conditions in public relations and communication last year. The numbers demonstrate why external agencies faced greater hardships. It also alludes to specific geographic areas in the United States that were harder hit, with their localized economies more reliant on short-term reactionary companies such as auto manufacturing, residential and commercial construction, tourism, and real estate.