Articles published in November, 2008

1. Who’s really reading the news?

   Published on Wednesday, November 26th, 2008

   The objective of news is to inform an audience.  Yet what happens when the audience has no desire to engage with the news?  According to a recent study about news consumption in the US by the Pew Research Centre for the People and the Press, 34 percent of Americans aged under 25 say they get no news in a typical day.

    

   Despite our 24/7 news culture, this figure is up from 25 percent in 1998.

    

   The study calls this group the ‘disengaged’ and can be generalised as those who have a low interest in news and news consumption.

    

   Perhaps this is because there are so many media channels out there to choose from and so much information to digest, that they choose to become disengaged. However, we also need to keep in mind that while people may say they do not listen to or read news, they take in enough information from a variety of sources to remain informed.

    

   Interestingly, while social networking sites are very popular with young people, they have not become a major source of news. Just 10% of those with social networking profiles say they regularly get news from these sites.  Maybe an opportunity exists to ‘network and news’?

    

   As PR professionals, a core part of our business is supporting clients’ news opportunities, but are we sufficiently familiar with the needs of their target audiences and how they get their news?  How do we engage the disengaged? 

    

   The Pew report shows that trends in US news consumption continue to move rapidly towards online news usage and away from traditional news, especially newspapers.  That trend is less pronounced in New Zealand.

    

   “Net-newsers” are the fastest growing group, depending on online sources for all of their information.  Usually male, affluent and well educated, they read political blogs more than they watch network news and have a particularly strong interest in tech news. 

    

   At Network PR we have always known that relying on one high reader or viewer channel is not the most effective way to get to core audiences.  Identifying and using the myriad of channels and developing customised approaches are far more effective.

    

   For example, while hundreds of thousands might have read the Herald today, did every one of them read your story in the health section on page six?  And if they did, was it really your target audience?

    

   The term ‘target audience’ clearly needs to be examined carefully and their real life media consumption understood in order to reach them. 

   

   Posted in Media landscape

2. NASCAR* Blindness

   Published on Thursday, November 20th, 2008

   We all have a natural tendency to surround ourselves with people who are like us. It makes sense that we would want to fill our lives with people who think the way that we do and like doing the things that we like doing, because we naturally find them more enjoyable to be with.

   But as PR practitioners, this can be a fatal trap. Failure to recognise the enormous range of class, lifestyle, cultural and ethical differences that shape and drive individuals’ thoughts and behaviours puts us at risk of ending up as ineffective one-dimensional communicators.

   US advertising creative director and social media consultant, Alan Wolk, calls this “NASCAR Blindness.”

   *In case you’re suffering from it, let me explain that NASCAR stands for the National Association for Stock Car Auto Racing, and it’s one of the most popular sports in America today.

   Read on to learn about the pitfalls of this all too common affliction …

   

   Posted in Trends

3. How to look like a winner when you have lost big time

   Published on Wednesday, November 12th, 2008

   Most people are possibly a bit tired of post-election analysis and there are many more news cycles to come before we begin to look ahead to how National is actually shaping up as a new Government. 

   But despite the extensive discussion it seems that one major point has been lost on most people, and certainly none of our political commentators seem to have mentioned it. Or perhaps it is so obvious that there is no need to state it.

   Has Ms Clark not pulled the most clever segue of her career by announcing her decision to step down from Labour Party leadership on the night of her defeat? This move it seems has completely obscured the fact that Labour got trounced in the election while National, who were led by a smiling assassin (if we believe the negative campaign), had a huge win.  It seems there is very little criticism of the campaign run by Labour and the fact that we could all see the negative campaigning to be a wrong move.

   The majority of post-election comments regarding Ms Clark have been about her legacy, her leadership and the gracious, clever and magnanimous decision she has made.  Her posting to Foreign Affairs further keeps her in the spotlight and provides plenty of opportunity to show the in-roads Labour has made in foreign affairs and diplomatic relations. Could our own Ms Clark perhaps be the next head of the UN? 

   While personally not a supporter of Ms Clark I have always been a huge admirer of her communication skills.  Once again she has managed to set the public agenda herself and get her key messages across no matter what the question or the issue. 

   Yes, Labour has lost and National has had a huge win.  But watch the press in coming weeks and we are sure to see lots more glowing reports on the “legacy” that is Ms Clark. 

   One wonders if this is a good or a bad thing for the National Party.  Certainly it seems that their win is not being held up as such a major achievement after all.  There is a feeling of expectations to be met and no need to make such a big deal of it.

   On the other hand we have a brand new leader of the Labour Party who is likely to get as much, if not more, air time as possible in coming weeks than our Prime Minister in waiting.  We certainly do live in interesting times.

   

   Posted in PR Matters

4. Interpreting the political polls in the final week

   Published on Wednesday, November 5th, 2008

   We tend to suffer from poll fever in this part of the election cycle with individual news organisations falling over themselves to bring us breaking news of the latest snapshot to reveal what voters are thinking.  All stand by the accuracy of their own poll and tend to regard it as the oracle, neatly ignoring polls published by their competitors.  This is not very helpful to the interested observer who is trying to figure out what all this means.

   Political polls present a number of problems for those trying to interpret them.  They all use slightly different methodology, there is a necessary delay between the questionnaire going out into the field and the results being announced, and they are just a snapshot in time.

   Political scientists prefer to talk about trends over time rather than the significance of a single poll result – which introduces the concept of a ‘poll of polls’.  This is where individual poll results are averaged out and tracked over time and is probably the most useful way to attempt to discern meaning from political polls.

   Curiablog is currently doing a sterling job demystifying the polls.  It’s running an up to date public poll average which weights the poll results according to factors such as sample size and the date it was taken. 

   This is a good example of the blogging fraternity filling a hole left by the competitive sensitivities of the mainstream media and doing all of us a favour by making sense of the numbers.

   

   Posted in Media landscape

5. Don’t mess with recalls

   Published on Monday, November 3rd, 2008
   Regardless of where you are and what you are doing, if the New Zealand Food Safety Authority invites you to undertake a voluntary recall, you do it.

   This week there have been reports of a Southland dairy factory, Happy Valley Dairies, closing as a result of the recall.

   The 16-month-old business was something of a hybrid in New Zealand’s mega dairy market.  The milk from 200 cows was processed under the same roof as the combined milking shed and factory.

   After E.coli bacteria was found and reported, the NZFSA wanted a product recall. The owners Jeanine and Fran Venekamp who were out of town left it to the NZFSA.  (E.coli has been responsible for more deaths in the USA in the past two years than melamine in China.)

   The Happy Valley Dairy passed its responsibility to the NZFSA, and in this post-melamine era, you had to assume, the NZFSA was not going to hold back.  And it didn’t. No one was going to point the finger at the Authority, and what should and could have been a largely localised, regional story became a national one. 

   After fighting so hard to get their business approved and under way, it seems a pity that their approach to a recall was so casual.  The price?  Their business.

    

   

   Posted in Crisis Communications