In my last post I promised to talk about the rules of using social media in corporate communications/PR. So in sticking to my promise, here we go. Bear in mind this is my view, and I welcome your comments on what I have to say.
Old-school corporate communications/PR is a one-lane highway leading to the media. In an earlier post (The Art of Effective Pitching: Relevance & Relationship) I detailed the best communication practices to the media so I won't be covering that here.
The new PR model is a two-lane highway - one lane for the media and one lane for direct-to-consumer (i.e., social media) communication. The rules for using social media as a corporate communication vehicle are different from those used with the media.
The first step in using social media for corporate communications/PR is to identify your target audience. Perhaps your target is consumers who buy your products. Next, you must gain credibility with your target audience. To gain credibility with your target audience you must first become part of that audience. Join the relevant target groups on social media sites like StumbleUpon, LinkedIn and Facebook, to name a few. Be completely transparent - make sure the group members know who you are. Read posts from group members, and where applicable contribute to the conversation with something RELEVANT. Don't under any circumstances enter the conversation by promoting your product.
Let's say, for example, you represent a company that builds recreational vehicles (RVs). So you join the RV Enthusiasts group on LinkedIn. A group member posts a question to other members about how to improve gas mileage. Instead of pounding the group over the head with your client's newest RV, you would be better served to educate the group. Respond with generic tips and advice about how to improve gas mileage in an RV. Even better, get an engineer from your client to write up a list. Include a link to a page on your client's Web site (or another source) which lists other tips about how to increase gas mileage. Make absolutely sure not to link to a product page. You promised the reader tips on saving gas so make sure you deliver on that promise. This gives you credibility as a relevant source of information, and it drives traffic to your clients' Web site. Building credibility is important because it positions you as a relevant resource of information - not just a product pusher.
I know I am using the word relevant a lot. But people join social media groups because the group is relevant to their life. Cat lovers, motorcycle riders, woodworkers - whatever your interest there is a social media group of people sharing content. So going back to my RV example, let's say one of the group members from the RV Enthusiasts group forwards your tips (with the link to your clients' site) to a friend who posts it on his blog about RVs. With the push of one forward button your tips/advice could reach hundreds, if not thousands, of readers depending on the blog. And if the blog ranks high in search engines your content, complete with the link to your clients' Web site, could wind up reaching millions. Welcome to viral marketing.
I am scrapping just the tip of the social media iceberg. If I learned anything from listening to webinars on social media and reading The New Rules of Marketing & PR (David Meerman Scott), I learned that content is king. Identify your target audience, engage the audience with authenticity (don't forget to be transparent) and relevant content.
Social media has changed the corporate communications/PR landscape. Make no mistake, the media is still a critical audience for you and/or your clients' messages. But you must incorporate social media into your PR efforts to reach and forge a relationship with your target audience.
Monday, December 22, 2008
Tuesday, December 16, 2008
Social Media and Mainstream Media - The New Communication Paradigm
Okay, so maybe social media isn't a "new" communication paradigm. But for me it is. I admit as little as four months ago I was a firm believer of old-school PR. I viewed the media as the sole distribution network for press releases and information. Under the old school, corporations distribute their news releases to the media in hope of gaining coverage.
The rules of corporate communication have changed, though, and I have become a convert of social media. The Internet and social media have changed the way information is distributed, consumed and shared.
Reading the book The New Rules of Marketing & PR has been an eye-opening experience for me. It has, without a doubt, played the largest role in helping me understand that old-school PR is an incomplete communication practice. Yes, the media is still important. Companies still value coverage in the print and broadcast media.
But I want to focus on my earlier statement – “incomplete communication practice.” The mainstream media is no longer the only game in town. Blogs and social media networks offers the opportunity for a virtually infinite level of “buzz” about their respective news. I would go as far to state that blogs and social media networks are equally as important as mainstream media outlets.
In my view, social media is about building influence among a targeted audience. In other words, deliver content that is relevant to the audience's needs and you'll quickly gain a long list of followers. I Tweet daily media industry updates on my Twitter page (http://twitter.com/jsalking) and in just a couple of weeks the number of people who follow my Tweets has grown from five to 25. I'm giving them relevant content they want.
Over the past three months I embarked on a crash course of social media learning. I've listened to webinars, read books and articles on the Web from social media experts. It's clear that old-school PR is, well, old-school. Effective corporate communications today requires a tag team approach using mainstream and social media, and each have a different set of rules, and I'll talk more about those rules in my next post.
The rules of corporate communication have changed, though, and I have become a convert of social media. The Internet and social media have changed the way information is distributed, consumed and shared.
Reading the book The New Rules of Marketing & PR has been an eye-opening experience for me. It has, without a doubt, played the largest role in helping me understand that old-school PR is an incomplete communication practice. Yes, the media is still important. Companies still value coverage in the print and broadcast media.
But I want to focus on my earlier statement – “incomplete communication practice.” The mainstream media is no longer the only game in town. Blogs and social media networks offers the opportunity for a virtually infinite level of “buzz” about their respective news. I would go as far to state that blogs and social media networks are equally as important as mainstream media outlets.
In my view, social media is about building influence among a targeted audience. In other words, deliver content that is relevant to the audience's needs and you'll quickly gain a long list of followers. I Tweet daily media industry updates on my Twitter page (http://twitter.com/jsalking) and in just a couple of weeks the number of people who follow my Tweets has grown from five to 25. I'm giving them relevant content they want.
Over the past three months I embarked on a crash course of social media learning. I've listened to webinars, read books and articles on the Web from social media experts. It's clear that old-school PR is, well, old-school. Effective corporate communications today requires a tag team approach using mainstream and social media, and each have a different set of rules, and I'll talk more about those rules in my next post.
Monday, December 8, 2008
Media Companies Aren't Fighting for the Future
A colleague of mine shared an article from Adage.com today titled "
Media Companies Cull 30,000 in Fight for Their Future." I believe the first part of the headline. Most of my recent Tweets have been about newly announced cuts in newsrooms across the country.
According to the article, "the media industries have shed more than 30,000 jobs in 2008, according to an Ad Age analysis of Department of Labor employment statistics and news reports. That's about 3.5% of the total media work force of 858,000. Since the bubble-inflated high-water mark in 2000, media has lost more than 200,000 jobs."
But I am not convinced media companies are "fighting for their future." Look, I understand the economy is awful, and company marketing budgets for advertising are shrinking. Fewer ad dollars means less revenue and less revenue means cuts. I get it.
Companies are watching every marketing penny, and determining where they can get the best bang for their marcom buck. So why are media companies responding by lowering the quality of their product? That's right - I said lowering the quality of their product.
Cutting newsroom staff leaves survivors charged with the impossible task of covering more beats in the same amount of time. Reporters must now divide their time among two, three even four beats - something has to give. While chasing down a story on one beat, another story is breaking on another beat and the reporter has to make a decision - which story do I chase? Either way, news coverage for one of the beats is going to suffer. News coverage begins to slip and readers start to notice. Maybe a few cancel their subscriptions or stop buying the paper at the newstand. Another hit to the bottom line.
The media industry is a lot like the airline industry, if you ask me. In response to high fuel prices, airlines started charging for luggage or booking your flight over the phone. They stopped serving beverages and those tiny little bags of peanuts or pretzels. In short, airlines have diminished the product and wonder why as a group, the seven largest airlines posted a 10.8 percent slide in traffic from a year earlier, according to an article posted on today's Chicagotribune.com.
What I am driving at is this. If media companies really are fighting for their future, they need to re-invest in their product. I'm not saying they need to maintain an overstaffed newsroom. But what I am saying is they need to devote enough resources so they can produce a high-quality product that attracts readers. People read newspapers and magazines because they want to know what's going on in the world - locally, nationally and internationally. Start giving readers less and they'll look elsewhere to get it.
So here we are in a viscious cycle. Ad revenue is down so media companies respond by laying off in the newsroom. News quality slips, readers go elsewhere and companies stop advertising in a declining product. In a few months it happens all over again. Are there any media companies out there who are truly willing to fight for the future of their product?
Media Companies Cull 30,000 in Fight for Their Future." I believe the first part of the headline. Most of my recent Tweets have been about newly announced cuts in newsrooms across the country.
According to the article, "the media industries have shed more than 30,000 jobs in 2008, according to an Ad Age analysis of Department of Labor employment statistics and news reports. That's about 3.5% of the total media work force of 858,000. Since the bubble-inflated high-water mark in 2000, media has lost more than 200,000 jobs."
But I am not convinced media companies are "fighting for their future." Look, I understand the economy is awful, and company marketing budgets for advertising are shrinking. Fewer ad dollars means less revenue and less revenue means cuts. I get it.
Companies are watching every marketing penny, and determining where they can get the best bang for their marcom buck. So why are media companies responding by lowering the quality of their product? That's right - I said lowering the quality of their product.
Cutting newsroom staff leaves survivors charged with the impossible task of covering more beats in the same amount of time. Reporters must now divide their time among two, three even four beats - something has to give. While chasing down a story on one beat, another story is breaking on another beat and the reporter has to make a decision - which story do I chase? Either way, news coverage for one of the beats is going to suffer. News coverage begins to slip and readers start to notice. Maybe a few cancel their subscriptions or stop buying the paper at the newstand. Another hit to the bottom line.
The media industry is a lot like the airline industry, if you ask me. In response to high fuel prices, airlines started charging for luggage or booking your flight over the phone. They stopped serving beverages and those tiny little bags of peanuts or pretzels. In short, airlines have diminished the product and wonder why as a group, the seven largest airlines posted a 10.8 percent slide in traffic from a year earlier, according to an article posted on today's Chicagotribune.com.
What I am driving at is this. If media companies really are fighting for their future, they need to re-invest in their product. I'm not saying they need to maintain an overstaffed newsroom. But what I am saying is they need to devote enough resources so they can produce a high-quality product that attracts readers. People read newspapers and magazines because they want to know what's going on in the world - locally, nationally and internationally. Start giving readers less and they'll look elsewhere to get it.
So here we are in a viscious cycle. Ad revenue is down so media companies respond by laying off in the newsroom. News quality slips, readers go elsewhere and companies stop advertising in a declining product. In a few months it happens all over again. Are there any media companies out there who are truly willing to fight for the future of their product?
Monday, December 1, 2008
How would you save the media?
A few months ago a colleague of mine pointed me to a website - http://www.angryjournalist.com/. It's a virtual and anonymous venting forum for journalists to air out their anger. I read it every morning because it provides insight into what's wrong with the media from those on the front line.
It's no surprise that most of the comments are about the low salaries journalists are paid. Having been there and done that I know reporter salaries are very low. It took me about 10 years in trade publishing to get to the mid $30s which was just enough to cover rent and bills with little leftover.
There's also a lot of anger among journalists over the current state of the media industry. A few posters to the site have likened the media to the automobile industry - outdated and to slow to react to changes in the marketplace.
Reporters/editors are screaming for the execs in charge to fix the industry. Yet it's those same execs who led this industry to where it is today. Why are we asking them to fix it? These are the same execs who think Twitter is the feeling you get in your stomach right before your first kiss. Where are the young thought leaders in newsrooms? Where are their ideas? Why aren't they standing up for change and presenting a plan?
Journalists are lamenting the death of the media. Instead of just sitting there, do something. Don't let it die. The problem is, most of us don't really - I mean really - know what is wrong. It's a complex issue but someone, somewhere needs to analyze the problem and come up with a solution.
My solution? I'll present it in a future post. But for now, I am asking everyone what they think. What would you do to save the media industry?
It's no surprise that most of the comments are about the low salaries journalists are paid. Having been there and done that I know reporter salaries are very low. It took me about 10 years in trade publishing to get to the mid $30s which was just enough to cover rent and bills with little leftover.
There's also a lot of anger among journalists over the current state of the media industry. A few posters to the site have likened the media to the automobile industry - outdated and to slow to react to changes in the marketplace.
Reporters/editors are screaming for the execs in charge to fix the industry. Yet it's those same execs who led this industry to where it is today. Why are we asking them to fix it? These are the same execs who think Twitter is the feeling you get in your stomach right before your first kiss. Where are the young thought leaders in newsrooms? Where are their ideas? Why aren't they standing up for change and presenting a plan?
Journalists are lamenting the death of the media. Instead of just sitting there, do something. Don't let it die. The problem is, most of us don't really - I mean really - know what is wrong. It's a complex issue but someone, somewhere needs to analyze the problem and come up with a solution.
My solution? I'll present it in a future post. But for now, I am asking everyone what they think. What would you do to save the media industry?
Sunday, November 30, 2008
No Good News for Newspapers
From The Gray Lady to Belo, newspaper stocks are getting hammered. CNBC's David Faber gives a grim rundown of the carnage.
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=942851153
http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=942851153
Monday, November 24, 2008
The Art of Effective Pitching: Relevance & Relationship
We live in an age of information relevance - journalists are constantly fine tuning the content they provide for their respective audiences to deliver news and information that directly affects their readers.
Relevance is a word the Media Relations team at PR Newswire hears often during the conversations we have with hundreds of journalists each month. Journalists use words like “disappointed,” “baffled” and “aggravated” to describe their feelings about the lack of relevance in pitches they receive from PR professionals.
“I receive irrelevant pitches from time to time, and I agree with other journalists that this remains a problem in the PR industry,” said Derek Gale, Senior Editor, Hotels Magazine, Oak Brook, IL. “For journalists, there is nothing lazier than a PR person not doing the basic work of researching what specific publications cover.”
“We get hundreds and hundreds of things a day,” said Wendie Feinberg, managing editor of PBS’s Nightly Business Report. “We do a very focused program and our biggest problem is that people who pitch us have no idea what we do or have never seen one of our programs. It simply amazes me that PR people don’t take the time to learn about us and what we do before pitching us.”
Journalists are starting to fight back however, by blocking e-mail from PR people who purvey irrelevant pitches. ("Sorry PR People - You're Blocked" http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2007/10/sorry-pr-people.html). Feinberg uses a spam filter to block all email addresses from which she received an irrelevant pitch. “Once I send your email address into the spam filter you stay there,” she said. “Everyday I take email addresses and stick them in the spam filter and tell the system not to send me any more emails from that address.”
Relevant, thoughtful pitching will keep you out of the spam filters, and will increase the likelihood that journalists will consider your idea. Best practices include:
Doing your homework first
After you identify the outlets you want to pitch, browse their web site, read articles from past issues, request hard copies of back issues and read them cover to cover, download their media kits and editorial calendars, and watch or listen to past broadcasts. In short, familiarize yourself intimately with the outlets.
Cultivating the relationship
It is absolutely critical that you get to know the journalist before making a pitch, and the first step in building a relationship is an introduction. Make your first call to the journalist an introduction, not a pitch. “That is a phone call I rarely get, and one I would not hang up on,” Feinberg said.
Feinberg, a former PR executive for a telecom company, understands how difficult it is to get a story placed. “But I always made an effort to get to know the reporters I was pitching,” she said. “I traveled to newsrooms all over the state. I wasn’t pitching – I was building relationships.”
More than just pitching
While PR efforts focus on editorial coverage of a client’s news, Ed Silverman, editor of Pharmalot, (http://www.pharmalot.com/), a pharmaceutical industry news site owned by The Star-Ledger, said PR professionals can forge a solid relationship with journalists by making an effort to become a resource for journalists that goes beyond just pitching. Silverman writes about insights in the pharmaceutical industry – the effect of a new product on a company’s fortunes and FDA approvals.
“One of the key things I need is the opportunity to talk with more people inside the company,” said Silverman. “I want access to people who are immersed in the issue and want to talk about it. As an agency, you are in the unique position to deliver if you can get me on the phone with that person.
“But,” he cautions, “it only works if you deliver.” “It’s rare for me to have this source relationship with an agency but it’s one I would welcome having.”
Silverman advises that you lay the groundwork ahead of issuing the release. “Get the spokesperson set up before you issue the release,” he said. “This way when the release goes out, you have someone ready to talk about it. Not enough PR people lay the groundwork ahead of time, and I wish more would do that.”
You must invest time and effort into doing your homework and cultivating relationships before you pitch. By pitching journalists only relevant stories you not only increase your chances for pick up, but you also build credibility with journalists who will recognize you as a trusted resource they can depend on.
Relevance is a word the Media Relations team at PR Newswire hears often during the conversations we have with hundreds of journalists each month. Journalists use words like “disappointed,” “baffled” and “aggravated” to describe their feelings about the lack of relevance in pitches they receive from PR professionals.
“I receive irrelevant pitches from time to time, and I agree with other journalists that this remains a problem in the PR industry,” said Derek Gale, Senior Editor, Hotels Magazine, Oak Brook, IL. “For journalists, there is nothing lazier than a PR person not doing the basic work of researching what specific publications cover.”
“We get hundreds and hundreds of things a day,” said Wendie Feinberg, managing editor of PBS’s Nightly Business Report. “We do a very focused program and our biggest problem is that people who pitch us have no idea what we do or have never seen one of our programs. It simply amazes me that PR people don’t take the time to learn about us and what we do before pitching us.”
Journalists are starting to fight back however, by blocking e-mail from PR people who purvey irrelevant pitches. ("Sorry PR People - You're Blocked" http://www.longtail.com/the_long_tail/2007/10/sorry-pr-people.html). Feinberg uses a spam filter to block all email addresses from which she received an irrelevant pitch. “Once I send your email address into the spam filter you stay there,” she said. “Everyday I take email addresses and stick them in the spam filter and tell the system not to send me any more emails from that address.”
Relevant, thoughtful pitching will keep you out of the spam filters, and will increase the likelihood that journalists will consider your idea. Best practices include:
Doing your homework first
After you identify the outlets you want to pitch, browse their web site, read articles from past issues, request hard copies of back issues and read them cover to cover, download their media kits and editorial calendars, and watch or listen to past broadcasts. In short, familiarize yourself intimately with the outlets.
Cultivating the relationship
It is absolutely critical that you get to know the journalist before making a pitch, and the first step in building a relationship is an introduction. Make your first call to the journalist an introduction, not a pitch. “That is a phone call I rarely get, and one I would not hang up on,” Feinberg said.
Feinberg, a former PR executive for a telecom company, understands how difficult it is to get a story placed. “But I always made an effort to get to know the reporters I was pitching,” she said. “I traveled to newsrooms all over the state. I wasn’t pitching – I was building relationships.”
More than just pitching
While PR efforts focus on editorial coverage of a client’s news, Ed Silverman, editor of Pharmalot, (http://www.pharmalot.com/), a pharmaceutical industry news site owned by The Star-Ledger, said PR professionals can forge a solid relationship with journalists by making an effort to become a resource for journalists that goes beyond just pitching. Silverman writes about insights in the pharmaceutical industry – the effect of a new product on a company’s fortunes and FDA approvals.
“One of the key things I need is the opportunity to talk with more people inside the company,” said Silverman. “I want access to people who are immersed in the issue and want to talk about it. As an agency, you are in the unique position to deliver if you can get me on the phone with that person.
“But,” he cautions, “it only works if you deliver.” “It’s rare for me to have this source relationship with an agency but it’s one I would welcome having.”
Silverman advises that you lay the groundwork ahead of issuing the release. “Get the spokesperson set up before you issue the release,” he said. “This way when the release goes out, you have someone ready to talk about it. Not enough PR people lay the groundwork ahead of time, and I wish more would do that.”
You must invest time and effort into doing your homework and cultivating relationships before you pitch. By pitching journalists only relevant stories you not only increase your chances for pick up, but you also build credibility with journalists who will recognize you as a trusted resource they can depend on.
Friday, November 21, 2008
A good magazine is like a warm glass of milk
I don't know about everyone else, but I just love reading a magazine. No, not on my laptop, not on Kindle (Amazon's wireless reading device) but holding it in my hands and flipping the pages. One of my favorite times to read a magazine is right before bed. I prop myself up with pillows grab a magazine off the nightstand and flip it open. It's like my warm cup of milk.
I subscribe to three magazines: Consumer Reports (my wife and I don't buy a thing without consulting CR), Family Handyman and Muscle & Fitness. Maybe it's the pretty pictures, maybe it's the glossy four-color printing. I don't know. But I know I love holding a magazine in my hands.
I have always had a soft spot for magazines. I got my start in magazine publishing as the assistant editor of a small health food trade magazine in NJ. It was like a dream. My own office with a window, lots of responsibility and the office was 10 minutes from my house. Want to know how old I am? We used wax paste up with galley paper. Working at the magazine gave me a chance to cut my teeth in newspapers. You see the salary was so low that I took a part-time sports writing job at the local daily for extra income.
I always cringe a bit when I read about magazines ceasing or folding the print edition to go solely online. I understand the reasons - ad revenue is down; printing cost savings. But I still like licking my fingers to turn the pages or dog-earring a page to hold my place for future reading.
The media world is changing and magazines are certainly not immune to the those changes. PC Magazine recently announced it is moving to an online format and ceasing its print version, and other magazines are sure to follow suit.
So maybe I'll ask Santa for a Kindle. On the good side I'll have a lot more room on my nightstand. I'll just have to be careful not to spill my warm milk on it.
I subscribe to three magazines: Consumer Reports (my wife and I don't buy a thing without consulting CR), Family Handyman and Muscle & Fitness. Maybe it's the pretty pictures, maybe it's the glossy four-color printing. I don't know. But I know I love holding a magazine in my hands.
I have always had a soft spot for magazines. I got my start in magazine publishing as the assistant editor of a small health food trade magazine in NJ. It was like a dream. My own office with a window, lots of responsibility and the office was 10 minutes from my house. Want to know how old I am? We used wax paste up with galley paper. Working at the magazine gave me a chance to cut my teeth in newspapers. You see the salary was so low that I took a part-time sports writing job at the local daily for extra income.
I always cringe a bit when I read about magazines ceasing or folding the print edition to go solely online. I understand the reasons - ad revenue is down; printing cost savings. But I still like licking my fingers to turn the pages or dog-earring a page to hold my place for future reading.
The media world is changing and magazines are certainly not immune to the those changes. PC Magazine recently announced it is moving to an online format and ceasing its print version, and other magazines are sure to follow suit.
So maybe I'll ask Santa for a Kindle. On the good side I'll have a lot more room on my nightstand. I'll just have to be careful not to spill my warm milk on it.
Thursday, November 20, 2008
Does traditional media matter to corporate America?
More than 20 years ago I served an internship at a small public relations firm in NJ. I remember sitting in on strategy meetings on how to promote our clients' news. During the meeting we would develop a hit list of key media outlets as targets for the release. We'd mail the release, wait a few days and make the dreaded "did you get my release/are you going to use it" follow up calls.
Today, mailing press releases has gone the way of the parachute pants (hey, I had a pair). Now it's all done at the push of a button and releases are emailed to journalists.
And the winds of change are swirling again - actually, they've been swirling for a while. Social Media and Web 2.0 - are there any bigger buzzwords in the PR/corporate communication industry right now?
SM/Web 2.0 is the sexy, now, hip thing (but so were parachute pants). PR firms and corporations are hiring social media experts. The focus has shifted from generating traditional news coverage to creating a conversation on the web. Corporations want their news blogged about, tagged and shared delivering a large consumer audience to their news, and they see SM/Web 2.0 as the vehicle to do so.
And there, lies the heart of my question. Does corporate America still care about the mainstream media? Is the mainstream media model outdated - doomed for extinction?
Today, mailing press releases has gone the way of the parachute pants (hey, I had a pair). Now it's all done at the push of a button and releases are emailed to journalists.
And the winds of change are swirling again - actually, they've been swirling for a while. Social Media and Web 2.0 - are there any bigger buzzwords in the PR/corporate communication industry right now?
SM/Web 2.0 is the sexy, now, hip thing (but so were parachute pants). PR firms and corporations are hiring social media experts. The focus has shifted from generating traditional news coverage to creating a conversation on the web. Corporations want their news blogged about, tagged and shared delivering a large consumer audience to their news, and they see SM/Web 2.0 as the vehicle to do so.
And there, lies the heart of my question. Does corporate America still care about the mainstream media? Is the mainstream media model outdated - doomed for extinction?
Welcome
Greetings and welcome to my blog. The Media Mind is about one thing - the media. I'll be posting and commenting on news stories that affect the media industry, and I welcome your feedback.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
