Tales from The Dark Side

Originally posted to the SCPRSA's Palmetto Practitioner blog Sept. 19, 2013:

It first hit me a few months ago when I was scanning resumes for entry-level hires and realized that I have T-shirts older than most of the candidates: I've been doing this a long, long time.

Longevity is not necessarily an asset in a profession undergoing the kind of radical evolution we're seeing in public relations. New skills and methods can be harder to adopt for numbskulls like me whose careers have been defined by applying the same basic principles to a wide range of circumstances and achieving successful outcomes.

But longevity does offer perspective, and that perspective has come in handy now that I've moved over to The Dark Side. You see, a few months ago our agency, Erwin Penland, unbundled its PR department and embedded its PR professionals into various account teams to provide more seamless, comprehensive thinking and solutions to its clients. After twentysomething years focusing primarily on public relations -- albeit mostly in an integrated communications environment -- I'm now a group account director responsible for determining strategy and managing execution across the full spectrum of communications disciplines.

In this new role I've gained a completely new appreciation for where PR stands in today's communications mix. And from where I stand, it seems so-called marketing guru Al Ries was only half right when he predicted the fall of advertising and the rise of PR more than a decade ago. Because if advertising is dead, then so is public relations.

Now before you burn me at the stake for such heresy, hear me out. I believe there has never been a greater need, nor more opportunities, for PR professionals to help organizations change people's beliefs and behaviors. I just think that labels like "public relations" and "advertising" are irrelevant in an age when innovation and resourcefulness are significantly more valuable than discipline-specific expertise.

Public relations is essentially the vocational equivalent of the art of storytelling. As professionals we're trained to forge meaningful connections with our audiences, whether it's fellow employees, opposition groups, government overseers or consumers at large. In today's integrated ecosystem, I believe PR professionals are uniquely qualified to not just have a role, but to lead those efforts by harnessing the vast array of communications tools available . . . and by helping invent new ones.

Upon hearing about my new role at Erwin Penland, a colleague asked me the other day how I felt about leaving PR at this stage of my career. "Leave PR?" I asked. "I'm helping to redefine it."

Are you?

Do You Have Digital Tourette's?

So you think you're a social media maven. You've got a Twitter account. And a Facebook page. Maybe even a blog. But having a social media presence is only half the story.

I'm amazed by the number of people -- and especially the number of companies and other organizations -- that think social media is just another channel for pushing out the same information they disseminate via more traditional means. Using social media for one-way communication is like watching TV with the sound turned off . . . you're only tapping half of the medium.

I call it Digital Tourette's: repetitive, involuntary expressions devoid of any external context. Tweeting random bits of information. Using Facebook as an online press room. Operating a blog that doesn't encourage -- or even allow -- readers to post comments.

For decades PR professionals have chased the Holy Grail of true two-way communication with their target audiences. That day is here now, but the uninitiated -- or just plain chicken -- are applying the same old rules to these powerful new tools.

Let's put an end to Digital Tourette's. Let's put the social back in social media.

Why My 8-Year-Old Should Be Running Toyota

So my 8-year-old son, Adam, comes up from the basement the other day with a sheepish look on his face. "What's up?" I asked as he fidgeted nervously in front of me.

"Well, the DVD player kinda stopped working," he stammered while avoiding any eye contact.

"Really?" I said. "Just stopped working, out of the blue?"

Now, a year ago under these same circumstances, Adam would have hemmed and hawed, giving up only as much information as needed so as not to incriminate himself. But over time he's come to learn that, no matter what he's done, he'll be in far more trouble if he tries to hide it instead of taking responsibility for his actions.

Which makes me wonder why the leaders of Toyota haven't figured out what my 8-year-old has already mastered. I understand the lawyers' imperative of minimizing liability by not admitting fault. But not disclosing the true scope of problem that's already the subject of intense public scrutiny is just throwing gasoline on a raging fire.

There are dozens of examples of organizations that have gained public empathy and support by disclosing the the full extent of a problem at the earliest opportunity. Mistakes happen, and sometimes companies are as innocent as the eventual victims of those very mistakes. But the public -- and an increasingly zealous media -- won't forgive painstakingly selective disclosures aimed at minimizing potential damage in the courtroom.

Tell it. Tell it fast. And tell it all. It ain't rocket science. Just ask my 8-year-old son.

Tim Tebow: Brand Evangelist or Marketing Pariah?

In the interest of full disclosure, since the day I first set foot on the campus of the University of Florida I've been a huge Gator fan. Rabid, even. But I'm putting those feelings aside to take an objective look at the emerging PR controversy centered around Gator poster boy Tim Tebow.

For the uninitiated, Tebow is not only a champion quarterback, but a son of missionaries who wears his faith on his sleeve (and his eye black), goes to hospitals to pray with sick kids and visits prisons to turn hardened criminals into believers. A charismatic leader blessed with raw athleticism, he recently finished his college career and now has his sights set on disproving the popular theory that he's ill suited to be an NFL quarterback, despite his talents and accomplishments.

But Tebow's made even more news this week for appearing in a commercial scheduled to air during this year's Super Bowl. Filmed on behalf of conservative Christian group Focus on the Family, the ad is expected to tell recount how Tebow's mother, Pam, rejected doctors' advice that she get an abortion when she fell ill during a mission to the Philippines while she was pregnant with Tim.

Critics -- of which Tebow has always had his share -- have assailed his participating in the ad, especially women's groups that likely have no idea of Tebow's faith-based track record. Even sports pundits are questioning whether Tebow will damage his marketability -- and his prospects in the upcoming NFL draft -- by aligning with such a polarizing issue.

What can marketers learn from this episode? To me, it's a classic case of being true to one's brand. Tebow has always said he believed he was blessed with his athletic and other gifts to provide a platform for his pro-Christian message. Regardless of your stance on the issues at hand, you've got to admire the kid's sincerity and conviction.

The NFL has its share of bible thumpers, and I doubt Tebow's devout faith will hamper his draft prospects as much as his awkward passing technique might. As for his marketability, let's face it: on the heels of the Tiger Woods controversy, the sports world could use a squeaky-clean spokesman. The NBA can have its gun-toting Gilbert Arenas . . . me, I'll take Touchdown Timmy.

Gullibility and the Case for Monitoring Social Media

They say no good deed goes unpunished. I'm sure that's just how the folks at American Airlines are feeling these days after being victimized by a hoax on Twitter related to the tragic earthquake in Haiti.

The airline has an admirable record of stepping up in the face of disasters around the world, and this time was no different: American flew several planes loaded with relief supplies to Haiti within 48 hours of the event. The company even offered bonus miles to members of its frequent flier program for making donations to the American Red Cross's relief efforts.

But American suddenly found itself on the defensive when someone falsely tweeted that the airline would fly any doctor or nurse free of charge to Haiti to join in humanitarian efforts there. The hoax spread like wildfire on Twitter and elsewhere, even slipping into the Twitter stream of The New York Times social media editor Jennifer Preston. Similarly false stories about UPS and JetBlue soon emerged.

It's not even worth trying to imagine what would compel someone to put out this kind of misleading information in the first place . . . the world is full of creeps, and social media allows them to wield an amazing amount of influence. But I do believe there are two powerful lessons to be learned here.

First, if you're a corporate communicator and your organization isn't monitoring social media channels in real time, 24/7, what the heck are you waiting for? Your company's reputation is one inventive crackpot away from being possibly damaged beyond repair. Kudos to American, UPS and JetBlue for not only being aware of the misinformation being spread, but for setting the record straight swiftly and decisively.

Second, since diligent fact-checking exists only among traditional media (except The New York Times, apparently), we should all remember the lack of transparency that exists in the social arena. I predict that one day marketplace demands will forge the creation of a "truth engine" of sorts that will vet the accuracy of social media content. Until then it's Caveat Avis: Let the Tweeter Beware.

Too Little, Too Late for Big Mac?

Judging by this blog, there certainly doesn't seem to be any shortage of PR crises in the world of sports. But today's news that home-run slugger Mark McGwire finally admitted to using steroids may be particularly noteworthy in determining the statute of limitations for other disgraced champions.

Traditional crisis communications theory calls for managing the court of public opinion as diligently as the court of law. For years McGwire ignored this tenet, particularly in 2005 when he refused to discuss any possible steroid use during sworn testimony before a Congressional subcommittee.

While refusing to implicate himself allowed McGwire to steer clear of perjury charges -- unlike Barry Bonds and Roger Clemens, who are widely believed to have lied to government officials in denying steroid use -- Big Mac's public image (and Hall of Fame prospects) were hopelessly tainted by his skirting of the issue.

Now, on the eve of his return to baseball as hitting instructor for the team with which he accomplished his amazing feats, the St. Louis Cardinals, McGwire has finally come clean. The question is, will it be too late to salvage his reputation?

I always wondered why baseball players of McGwire's era didn't simply own up to their actions. Steroid use was not illegal, nor was it in violation of the sport's own code of conduct at the time. Those who have fessed up have largely been forgiven by both the public and the pundits.

Conventional wisdom in crisis management consists of three imperatives: Tell it, tell it all, and tell it fast. McGwire's 2-for-3 performance equates to a .667 batting average . . . Hall of Fame numbers to be sure.

Waiting for Tiger

As a golf enthusiast and PR pro, I'm doubly eager to see how the Tiger Woods saga will unfold over the next few months. While the PGA Tour won't be the same without everyone gunning for arguably the greatest golfer to ever play the game, I'm more curious to see how the fallen hero will seek to repair his image off the golf course.

I applaud Tiger for making it his top priority to repair the damage in his family . . . if that's even possible. But his choice to go into hiding instead of confronting his situation in a more complete and forthright manner is troubling evidence of the "above-it-all" arrogance that helped land him in hot water in the first place.

My question is, why aren't Tiger's advisers providing him with more effective counsel during this tragic episode? His painstakingly crafted mea culpas, placed in the secure domain of his personal Website, fall far short of the honest acknowledgment his sponsors and supporters deserve.

Let's face it: Tiger's star power is such that he could command any public forum, under the most favorable terms, for his "come clean" interview. A guest spot on Oprah would go a long way toward restoring his integrity, with little threat of the kind of questioning a more cutthroat interviewer might employ.

Instead, Tiger continues to exhibit the stubborn behavior personified by Kevin Costner's Roy McAvoy in the movie "Tin Cup." Struggling on the fringes of golf for over a decade, McAvoy amazingly needs only to par the final hole to win the U.S. Open and the woman of his dreams. Instead of playing safe by laying up on the long par 5, he goes for the green in two, putting five shots in the water before miraculously holing out for a scorecard-bloating 12.

My advice to Tiger: put the 3 wood back in the bag, lay up, and get on with the business of winning golf tournaments.

Transparency (Finally) Comes to the Blogosphere

Kudos to the Federal Trade Commission for updating its guidelines on endorsements and testimonials in advertising for the first time since 1980. In a clear sign of the times, an FTC panel unanimously voted to require bloggers to clearly disclose any "material connection" to an advertiser, including payments for an endorsement or free product.

Rather than have a chilling effect on marketers seeking this type of third-party endorsement, I believe such visibility will now have increased credibility and value. In fact, I suspect communicators to become even more engaged with these "non-traditional media" as more mainstream outlets shut their doors. How ironic, then, that on the day the FTC announced its new guidelines, Conde Nast folded several of its top magazine titles.

Don't Pick Fights with Those Who Buy Ink by the Barrel

Here's an interesting crisis communications strategy you won't find in any textbook: file a lawsuit against the newspaper that shed light on your alleged misconduct.

That's exactly what generic drug maker Mylan Inc. did today, demanding the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette immediately return “internal confidential and proprietary documents” the company claims were “improperly obtained without Mylan’s knowledge or consent.”

In Mylan's defense, the FDA investigated the allegations of production irregularities at Mylan's Morgantown, W.Va., plant and found no problems. But Mylan's stock took a major hit as a result of the newspaper's coverage, so it's understandable the company would be upset.

The paper says it stands by its newsgathering and reporting. Of course, the Fourth Estate has Constitutional protections from surrendering sources, so unless it can be proven that the confidential information was obtained illegally -- which Mylan has not alleged -- I can't imagine the courts forcing them to return the material.

That said, the company is also seeking compensatory damages for the impact the paper's actions had on the company, which is a whole different ballgame. A court may well determine the paper acted improperly in printing the information, whether as a result of misinterpretation or sheer recklessness. It'll be interesting to see how this story plays out.

S.C. Press Secretary Gives Lesson in Integrity

As a former resident of the fine state of South Carolina, I've been more than a little embarrassed by the recent shenanigans of Gov. Mark Sanford. But I'm encouraged by the news that Sanford press secretary Joel Sawyer announced he's stepping down in a few weeks.

There can only be a handful of reasons for Sawyer to part ways with the governor he's served since his first term in office. He could be leaving for a better opportunity in the private sector or to spend more time with his family. But why now?

I'd like to believe it's because Sawyer was fed up with being lied to -- or, worse, being asked to lie for -- the man he so faithfully served. But we may never know, for Sawyer is taking the high road despite being put in a position no PR person ever wants to be in: telling falsehoods to the media.

PR Should Embrace Mommy Blogger Blackout

I know I should feel insulted by the call to arms on website MomDot for Mommy Bloggers to reject all overtures from PR people the week of Aug. 10-16.

Instead I'm actually thankful, because the move will call more attention to the unseemly practice of pay-for-play in blogs of all shapes and sizes. Nowhere is the practice more abused than with the mom blogs, whose authors are usually well-intentioned but typically unfamiliar with the principle of editorial objectivity.

I suspect an unintended consequence of this "Flak-out" will be a deeper appreciation among some bloggers of the value good PR people provide in helping them share useful information with their readers. We all have our roles to play, and recognizing that we can't do our jobs without each other is an important step toward a harmonious existence.

PRSA's "Pay for Play" Measures Not Good Enough

Kudos to the Public Relations Society of America for updating its Code of Ethics to require greater transparency with regard to "pay for play," the exchange of products, services or any inducement that encourages a journalist to provide editorial coverage.

Notably absent, though, in PRSA's new guidelines is any mention of the thousands upon thousands of quasi-journalists -- bloggers and other online influentials -- who hold sway over an increasing percentage of the opinion-seeking population.

The vast majority of bloggers have no Code of Ethics . . . they're just highly engaged, mostly well-intentioned individuals whose interest or passion for a particular subject has led them to a position of influence most never sought or envisioned. They don't know it's wrong to accept freebies, even if there's no quid pro quo requested or implied.

PR professionals should know better. In fact, most do. But to protect the profession from a handful of rotten apples, PRSA should put more teeth in its Code to address to address the potential abuse of the continually evolving digital landscape.

Who Do You Trust?

A recent Neilsen study shows user-generated content vaulted into second place behind recommendations from a friend in terms of trusted sources of consumer information. And brand websites, along with other forms of company-driven communication like TV ads and sponsorships, are making gains, suggesting a softening in overall consumer skepticism.

But the news isn't all positive. Newspapers were the only information source that saw a decline in trust, down 2% since 2007. And while they each saw modest increases the past two years, search result ads (41%), online banner ads (33%) and mobile text ads (24%) still languish well behind their traditional brethren.

The implications for PR pros? If you aren't already fully engaged in social media, this study illustrates the incredible power of online word-of-mouth. And don't overlook the good ol' company website as an opportunity to inform consumers seeking more detailed information.

Crisis Communications: If You Can't Beat 'Em, Mimic 'Em?

I was troubled but not surprised to learn that Chevron hired former CNN reporter Gene Randall to put together a story rebutting a "60 Minutes" piece on the $27 billion environmental lawsuit the company faces over alleged damage to the Amazon rainforest.

Telling your side of the story in the face of scathing news coverage is a tried and true PR tactic. But the piece is produced to appear like a purely journalistic exercise, with no attribution to Chevron. Randall is identified with an on-screen super that reads "Gene Randall Reporting," and he signs off the piece with the same language.

The 14-minute video is posted on YouTube and no doubt making the rounds of other social media channels, avoiding the scrutiny and editorial objectivity of mainstream news organizations. Regardless of the facts, I can't help but believe it's intent is not to inform, but to obfuscate. And how could a guy like Randall allow his name and reputation to be used in such a manner?

More troubling, and particularly surprising, are the number of seasoned PR pros who are defending the practice, suggesting the existence of social media channels makes such blatantly one-side, pseudo-journalism permissible. That's like saying it's OK to cheat on your taxes as long as you don't get caught.

There's an old saying in crisis PR that the court of public opinion can be more damaging than the court of law, so it's easy to understand Chevron's motivation in mounting this defense. But that's no excuse for tossing aside transparency, a crucial ingredient to earning trust and corporate reputation.

The 43-Year-Old Virgin

This is kind of embarrassing, so please be patient as I stammer out the words.

I've never Tweeted.

I know, it's 2009, and I'm Director of PR at an integrated marketing agency pushing to be at the forefront of all things digital. But for the life of me, I couldn't see the value of tapping into the stream of consciousness of the collective digerati. I mean, do I really care what some teenager in Spokane just ordered at Starbucks?

Then yesterday, I had an epiphany (note to self -- I need to have more epiphanies). I was in a cab headed to Midway with two MARC USA colleagues: Vivek Saran, who heads up account planning; and Adam Kmiec, our new wunderkind head of interactive. As Adam mindlessly tapped on his iPhone, Vivek asked him if he knew of an iPhone app that would allow him to work on Microsoft Office documents. "Nope," was all Adam said.

Then Adam tapped his phone and, I promise, not 30 seconds later chimed in with the answer. I don't even remember what it was . . . I was just struck by how quickly and easily he arrived at the solution by tweeting his fellow Twitterers.

You see, Twitter's not about indulgent self-expression. It's about connectivity, plain and simple. It's a pure expression of the power of the digital realm: by "crowdsourcing," Adam was able to tap a knowledge base broader than his own.

The implications for professional communicators are profound. The opportunities to tap this human network for delivering information are limitless. And I can't wait to start the journey with my first tweet.

Corporate Credibility in a 2.0 World

Seems you can't take anybody's word these days. First Motrin pulls its ad campaign after bloggers come to the defense of baby-toting moms. Then US Airways shelves it plan to charge passengers for soft drinks, followed by Tropicana scrapping its new packaging just weeks after unveiling the multi-million-dollar redesign. More recently, Skittles candy went from visionary to pariah when it yanked its Twitter-centric website in favor of Facebook a mere 24 hours after going live.

What's behind this corporate indeciveness? Looks to me like yet another example of The Law of Unintended Consequences.

For years communicators have been striving toward a paradigm in which they don't simply throw messages out to their targets audiences, instead engaging them in true conversation and dialog. Problem is, the response from some audiences isn't always what you hope it will be.

The digital world has made it incredibly easy for anybody -- from an ardent enthusiast to the most ax-grinding detractor -- to shape perceptions of companies or their products. While communicators grapple with these new realities, here are three basic tenets all companies should embrace:

1. Plan for the worst-case scenario. Back when companies had sole control over the flow of information, they could develop communication strategies on their terms. Now that control has shifted to the public, you've got to be ready to act when consumer activists, disgruntled employees or even your most loyal followers react in a manner contrary to your intentions.


2. Learn how to listen. These days, it's not good enough to have a customer service e-mail or toll-free number. You've got to be plugged into the blogosphere, chat rooms and other social media channels, because what people say about you is far more important than what they say to you. Ask the folks at Motrin, who returned to their offices Monday morning to be confronted with an avalanche of negative blog posts that materialized over the weekend.


3. Stick to your guns. For the life of me, I can't understand why Tropicana spent millions of dollars developing its new brand identity -- including, I'm sure, extensive focus group testing -- and then yanked the packaging after a handful of folks complained about not being able to find their favorite OJ at the grocery store. I'm not saying I love the new look. But if it was a good idea a few months ago, why is not a good idea now?

Bottom line is this: corporate communictons in the 21st century is not for the feint of heart. It takes foresight and confidence, which seem to be in short supply if the examples above are any indication.

As Trust in Banks Wanes, Whither PR?

Credit crisis? I think the current crisis of confidence facing the financial industry is far more dire, which is why it's so surprising how quiet banks, brokerages and other institutions have been the past few months.

Evn the most pessimistic economist will tell you that consumer sentiment --fueled, no doubt, by relentless media coverage of every layoff and stock-market hiccup -- is contributing heavily to the current climate. The question is, when the fundamentals of the economy are restored, how much will lingering fear keep the population from resuming their normal purchasing behavior?

As a communicator -- and a consumer -- I see a tremendous void in useful information about what's happening in the economy and what we should do about it. I'm not talking about sugarcoating the situation. I'm talking about informing and educating the public, a role for which PR is ideally suited.

Yet the financial services industry is eerily silent. Maybe they're afraid of getting caught with their pants down, like the Big 3 auto execs flying on private jets to court Congress for billions in bailout money. One PR consultant told me her mortgage lender client absolutely forbid any proactive media outreach until the storm passes.

PR pros may be staring at the proverbial once-in-a-lifetime opportunity. By reassuring the public during these turbulent times, they can restore confidence in the financial services sector and demonstrate the tangible value of thoughtful, purposeful public relations.

Integration Starts with Shared Goals

It seems so obvious, yet for some reason so elusive. Decades after the phrase "integrated communications" was first coined, most brands and organizations are no closer to realizing its potential despite a communications landscape that increasingly demands such a comprehensive approach.

While countless companies and agencies explore methods to coordinate their various communications activities, I believe integration is more a question of philosophy than process. And it starts with one pivotal question: are your communications efforts oriented around a shared set of goals?

Imagine a football team without a common purpose. Wouldn't the offense go for it every time on fourth down regardless of field position, putting their defensive teammates in a hole if they're unsuccessful? Understanding the bigger picture -- in this case, the importance of field position -- allows for decision-making that supports the overarching goal of winning the game.

More than any other communications discipline, public relations encompasses an organization's relationships with the full range of its stakeholder groups -- customers, employees, investors, government and likely many others. That's why I believe PR pros are uniquely qualified to drive integrated thinking, because of our uniquely comprehensive perspective.

"Say It Ain't So, Mike"

It'll be interesting to see what kind of fallout results from the picture of Michael Phelps smoking pot that ran in a British tabloid.

Still basking in the adulation earned through his herculean feats at the Beijing Olympics, Phelps proved he was human after all -- not because he smoked marijuana, but by being foolish enough to do so in the presence of strangers. To his credit, he issued a prompt, sincere and painfully scripted statement admitting his poor judgment.


Phelps caught a lucky break by having the news break on the day of Super Bowl XLIII. I suspect he'll catch another break from sponsors who won't toss him overboard -- unlike, say, Michael Vick -- because marijuana use is considered a pretty minor indiscretion these days.


Good crisis management? Unfortunately, probably just a sign of our times.

P.E.T.A. Pros at Drawing Attention . . . But Does Anyone Care?

Love 'em or hate 'em, you've got to give the folks at P.E.T.A. credit for drumming up boatloads of publicity.


Their latest coup was in getting NBC to reject a racy ad advocating vegetarianism -- an ad almost certainly never intended to see the light of day. In fact, it's a ploy P.E.T.A. has used successfully in the past, yet the media keeps taking the bait.


A few weeks earlier, P.E.T.A. earned another round of free airtime by calling for psychological testing on Michael Vick -- after first duping the disgraced QB into considering appearing in a P.E.T.A. PSA to restore his tarnished image.

While you've got to tip your hat to them, you've also got to wonder whether the PR avalanche is doing anything to change public attitudes and behavior. Isn't that supposed to be the ultimate goal of any PR effort?

A few years ago, a friend of mine told me about a PR stunt she participated in as a member of P.E.T.A. They dressed someone in a chicken suit and, armed with a sign decrying the inhumanity of the chicken processing industry, headed to Atlanta's Georgia World Congress Center for the annual meeting of the Georgia Poultry Federation. But the chicken farmers didn't get it . . . they thought the costumed character was their own mascot, and mugged for photos to the dismay of the P.E.T.A. posse.

Like the boy who cried wolf, at some point the media and the public will tire of P.E.T.A.'s self-indulgent PR efforts. Until then, though, it's sort of fun imaging what outlandish stunt they may try to pull off next.