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.