Articles published in March, 2009

1. Casting the villains and victims! What role do the media play?

   Published on Friday, March 27th, 2009

   Junior Bailey Kuariki has once again come before the courts for allegedly breaking his parole conditions. Not a surprise it would seem, according to media who persist in calling him a baby faced murderer.  But don’t you think it is time the man was left alone, and if he should need to be sent back to jail, that will happen.

   Yes he committed a heinous crime, and I am not defending him for a nanosecond, but if there is any chance of him staying out of trouble, and therefore jail, he should be given that chance. Humpf, I hear many say; and you could be right. But we will never know unless the hounding and harassment stops.

   Unlike David Bain, Kuariki has no Joe Karam to shield him from media scrutiny, nor does he have a high profile and well respected individual to vouch for him. Contrast the demonization of Kuariki, with the celebrity status of Bain.

   Media really do have the power to cast not only individuals, but also organisations as villains or victims and the label can stick for all time.  No longer is the news today fish and chip paper tomorrow, instead it will sit in cyberspace for ever poised for the next Google search that finds it.

   Tony Veitch is another such example, and I am sure we can all think of many more. The demonising of individuals in pursuit of a good story sometimes serves no purpose other than to boost ratings.  But the impact on the individual can be profound and lasting. Hard to resist I am sure, and in the current economic climate with competition at fever pitch, journalists almost have no option but to take this route.

   In our business we regularly deal with a similar issue, where the emotive individual story is more compelling than the corporate position. When it comes to victims and villains, the tendency is regard all individuals as victims and corporates as the villains, almost regardless of the truth.

   Granted at times the advocacy role of the media in outing someone’s wrong doings has been extremely beneficial but in other instances it can cause irreparable damage.

   I do not envy the media’s job in the world we live in today.  Bald statements of fact with no emotion do not sell and the audiences want to be enthralled and entertained wherever possible. But how can the media balance this need to be as “newsworthy” as possible with the impact this might have on an individual or organisation?

   I would appreciate your thoughts and experiences on this issue.  It is a perennial problem that impacts on all PR professionals.

   

   Posted in Media landscape, PR Matters

2. Who Would Want To Be In Politics!

   Published on Monday, March 23rd, 2009

   John Key has my admiration for the way he is publicly handling the issue of ‘retaining jobs’ for New Zealanders.

   Within weeks of leading from the front at the ‘jobs summit’ where he looked great urged employers to do all within their power to retain their workforce, he is now placed in the embarrassing position of defending the decision of TVNZ to make some 90 people redundant so that it can meet its required dividend payment to the Government.

   Getting his head around the key messages to talk about both situations publicly while not appearing hypocritical is no mean feat.

   My perception is that he is pulling it off, in part because he still comes across in public as being honest, earnest and facing up to the issues.

   When Parliament first reconvened, John started to develop a reputation among media for being a bit of a word and meaning ‘mangler’. He is no dominant, razor sharp Helen; or silken, motor-mouthed Michael.

   However, what John lacks in the way of a persuasive tongue is compensated for by his honesty, believability and his freshness.

   Conversely, Phil Goff struggles to make any cut through in the believability stakes because we have been seeing and hearing from him for 20 plus years. Try as he might, his theme that Labour ‘lost contact’ with ordinary New Zealanders and it is now on a journey of ‘reconnecting’ just does not make it in the credibility stakes.

   In the months ahead John’s challenge is to retain his believability as the nation becomes more exposed to him. It is a far easier challenge than the one facing Phil, which is to prevent himself becoming a stop gap leader before a new leader emerges 12 to 18 months ahead of the next election.

   

   Posted in Media landscape, PR Matters

3. Don’t get caught with a broad brush

   Published on Thursday, March 19th, 2009

   The editorial in a weekly business paper seemed to be rejoicing in the potentially weakened prospects for so-called Gen Yers in the softening labour market.

   To me it seemed a bit crass to cast Gen Yers as the loser in the economic downturn, and take a ha, ha serves-you-right-view.

   As a more senior labour market participant, I must say I value a mixed-age office and what each can contribute, and resent the implication that a “lack of ambition” might make me more employable right now.  Phiffle.  I remain ambitious, but not for the same thing as when I was younger.

   More than ever the PR and communications industry requires the full mix of skills experience in order to meet the expectations of its clients and their communications challenges. After all we are looking for new solutions to new challenges, and the old hands simply do not hold all of the cards.

   The danger of using a broad brush to paint your employment scene is that the client will commission a Bruegel.

   

   

   Posted in PR Matters, Trends

4. Poorly served by media accuracy

   Published on Thursday, March 12th, 2009

   We have no right to expect accuracy from the media.  And the media has no right to promise that they will give us accurate reports.

   I came to this Damascene realisation only recently, or more correctly, I only recently faced up to this realisation. This is tough when you’ve spent a career working with the media and for a time even being part of it.

   What brought this on? Well, in fact it was media’s treatment of the teacher stabbed at Avondale College, a person known to me through a shared recreational pursuit over a couple of years*.

   The stabbing occurred late morning on Tuesday, March 3. By the next morning it’s hard to believe that anyone following the story did not think that the incident was in large part due to racism. Indeed, most people would have tended to believe this teacher was prone to racist comments.

   This is because in their pursuit of this story the media recorded the comments of anyone prepared to say anything, and if they did not have the comments first hand, to leverage the report of other media.  Those making such statements were guaranteed anonymity.

   Under these circumstances it was impossible to present an accurate report, so in the circumstances why impugn someone’s reputation?   For the sake of a story I guess, regardless of accuracy and integrity.

   In its own defense, the media insists that it searches out balance, by getting comment from or on behalf of the victim. When they can’t, it is a matter of editorial judgment – or lack of it – to go, or not, with what they’ve got.

   In such cases, the media tends to justify its position by stating the obvious: These are the statements of those we interviewed; we do not vouch for their accuracy.

   Following the earlier media reports, we learned through the court process that the stabbing was premeditated and, through a report of what police told the school community, “racism was not a motive”.

   Inevitably this does not resonate as deeply and widely across the media as the earlier, lasting accusations.

   Not trusting the accuracy of media is one thing, but not trusting the statements made by a government department is quite another. In Tuesday’s Dominion Post I read the disturbing report of how the strategic communications manager for Internal Affairs, according to his boss, seemed to be “talking at cross purposes with the media” over the timing of the return of Winston Peters’ ministerial vehicle.

   ‘Talking at cross purposes’ is a euphemism for avoiding factual, accurate responses.
   The comment of the Dominion Post’s chief reporter on this sad incident was (in part) that the public should be able to expect civil servants… to give straight answers.

   I agree whole heartedly. I hope he will agree with me that consumers of the news media have a right to fairness, balance and good editorial judgment.

   * I visited my paddling buddy in recent days, but we did not discuss any details of the incident, aside from the bodily impact and affect of the stabbing, or the likely causes.

   

   Posted in PR Matters

5. Mad about Copyright

   Published on Monday, March 9th, 2009

   The new Copyright Act was all set to come into effect on February 28, but just a few weeks shy of that date an on-line campaign was waged that saw government call timeout and stop the Act becoming law.

   Regardless of your position on Section 92A, the approach taken by the on-line community is one to learn from.  It was unique in its effectiveness and in outcome, but most of all its speed. The campaign demonstrates the power of on-line communities – both as a friend and foe.

   The so-called ‘Guilt upon Accusation’ clause caused the storm in a laptop for many in online and artistic communities.  Section 92A of the Act provided for Internet Service Providers to cut users web access on suspicion of a breach of copyright, and this was at the heart of issue. The strategy to get their views heard was very simple. The community opposed to section 92A blacked out their online avatars on social networking sites Facebook and Twitter. The idea, inspired by an All Blacks supporters call for fans to switch their avatars to silver ferns, was proposed by web developer Brenda Wallace at an un-conference held February 15.

   Come the following Monday morning the ‘blackout’ news was spreading and the lights went out all over the internet. Web influencer and twitter-er extraordinaire Stephen Fry weighed in and turned his picture black in a bold signal to his 250,000 followers.

   The opposition movement to Section 92A gained momentum, those motivated to lend support or find out more, crashed blog sites. The mainstream media here and internationally suddenly sat up and took notice. Scores of news items, from a range of viewpoints, appeared across all media. There ensued an unprecedented amount of coverage for what is really a dry, complex and niggly piece of legislation.

   Within eight days from conception to completion the ‘blackout’ campaign organisers had made their way to John Key’s office and the law was suspended.

   This campaign showed how an issue can now move at lightening speed, across countries, organisations and traditional groupings.  It is also a reminder to companies how, with the speed of new media, they can have a major issue on their hands before even being aware it exists.  The solution lies in keeping in touch with all critical audiences both on-line and off-line.

   

   Posted in PR Matters