Articles published in July, 2010

1. How you respond is a measure of your mettle

   Published on Friday, July 30th, 2010
   He didn’t get it then, and he doesn’t get it now. “Then” was when he fronted up to the affected communities, the media, and politicians over the Gulf oil spill disaster; and “he” is former BP chief Tony Hayward.

   It is almost beyond comprehension that he would say, when exiting the top job, “Life isn’t fair”.

   How could a person with the experience and credentials to lead Britain’s biggest industrial company think such a thing, let alone say it!  It’s apparent he’s been insulated all his life from the world where most of us live…because we all know life’s not always fair. That’s a given; it’s how you respond that is a measure of your mettle. 

   Yes, he did admit making mistakes, and stated that it (managing the disaster) had not been a great PR success (if he was honest he would’ve have admitted it was a disaster).  But patently he learned nothing from the grueling experience of the past 101 days; and he has absolutely no empathy for those who lost their lives on the rig and their grieving families, for people whose lives and dreams have been shattered by the spill, for the havoc wreaked on the environment.

   A primary rule of managing the media is: know what you are going to say. Did he? It’s hard to believe.

   No, life is not fair when a person like Tony Hayward can walk away with a £1 million lump sum, and a pension of £600,000 a year!

   I expect you agree, life’s just not fair.

   Posted in Brand, Crisis Communications, Media landscape, PR Matters

2. Spilling the beans becomes inevitable

   Published on Thursday, July 29th, 2010
   It wasn’t the Australian Leaders’ Debate that sparked a major controversy on Monday morning radio. Nor was it the Leaders’ debate timeslot being moved to give preference to the hotly contested final of Australian Masterchef on Sunday night. No, it was Radio New Zealand’s Morning Report inadvertently disclosing the winner of said cooking show.

   In an apparent slip of the tongue, host Geoff Robinson told listeners the name of the winner, later defending himself by saying it was all over the papers. Yes, the Australian papers. New Zealand viewers  are just two weeks into Aussie Masterchef, so many listeners of Morning Report were incensed.

   However, Robinson makes a good point in today’s global media space. It’s near impossible to keep such ‘news’ a secret and really; shouldn’t the cries of anguish and displeasure be levelled at TVNZ for airing the show so many weeks behind the Aussies?  Why not do what they did for American Idol, playing the finale a mere hours after it aired in America?

   We can expect there will be financial reasons for the delay, but as punters, more than ever before, we expect media connectivity, (including entertainment), to be ‘current’

   Thank you Morning Report, for highlighting the heavy feet of our state broadcaster.

   Posted in Media landscape, PR Matters

3. Should governments have the right to censor Facebook?

   Published on Thursday, July 22nd, 2010
   Major tragedies are usually followed by a host of different reactions and responses. These are frequently played out in public as individuals try to connect with other like-minded people to affirm their own reaction to a situation. Naturally the online world offers many forums in which to do this.

   Most recently, British PM David Cameron came under fire for demanding a Facebook tribute page in memory of gunman Raoul Moat, named “RIP Raoul Moat you legend”, be taken down. The creator claimed the page was not to “condone what he did, as what he did was wrong. [I] Feel sorry for the families, but he was still a human being at the end of the day. He had problems and he didn’t get any help.”

   Despite this explanation, David Cameron condemned the page, categorically stating that he could not understand any sympathy towards this man. The UK government directly contacted Facebook and its creator, Mark Zuckerberg, asking that the page be taken down. 

   Facebook’s initial respone was that it is a “place where people can express their views and discuss things in an open way …as such there were times when people discussed topics others sometimes found distasteful. However, this is not a reason in itself to stop a debate from happening.”  So long as Facebook’s terms and conditions were not violated, the social media giant felt there was no case to answer to.

   Eventually the creator herself backed down, presumably in light of the outrage across the UK, and taking down the page earlier this week. 

   On one level, it seemed to me that David Cameron is possibly naïve in his belief that a government has the right to censor public opinion, and to do so in such a public way potentially has future ramifications. On the other they are representing the interests of their people, and when the brutal actions of one person look as though they are being celebrated, surely they can and should look to shut down that particular discussion.

   But Facebook also has a point. There are any number of distasteful and immoral topics being discussed on the internet and through social media even as you read this. Where is the line to be drawn? What if a corporation’s facebook page had negative messages written on it? Does the fact they have a Facebook page mean they are open to comments and criticism, or should they have the option to decide what is posted on their ‘wall’?

   How do we protect people’s right to free speech while ensuring it doesn’t result in the unreasonable victimisation or stigamitisation of others – be it an individual, brand, or an organisation?

   Posted in Brand, Media landscape, PR Matters, Social Media

4. There is no silver bullet for changing behaviour, it takes hard work and time…

   Published on Friday, July 16th, 2010
   New data showing that fewer young people are smoking offered some refreshingly good news yesterday.  Thanks to years of hard work by different organisations, each tackling different aspects of the issue, we are seeing some real progress.  

   The value of long term investment in social marketing and education, combined with a range of regulatory changes over many years, has surely been proven.  It also highlights the many challenges inherent in motivating behaviour change.
    
   A consistent increase in price to the point where smoking has become unaffordable is part of the story but isn’t the only factor. We’ve also seen wider cultural and societal shifts along with a better understanding of health protection and promotion.

   Another success factor is the ability to use single-minded messages like smoke-free, quit, stop and cut it out.  Interestingly, some of these messages are negative. This is something often deemed inappropriate but in this case seems to have done the job, showing yet again that we can’t apply a ‘cookie cutter’ approach to these things. The messages also left no room for confusion through use of words like moderation, balance and variety. 

   While this single-minded approach has been a common success factor in addressing some issues there are actually very few situations where a ‘silver bullet’ solution can be found.

   Unintended consequences can arise from taking a single message too far. Adherence to the skin cancer prevention slip, slop slap message has potentially resulted in substandard Vitamin D status for some, which could lead to poor bone health, diabetes and heart disease.

   It is at this point that for me the good news around smoking could take a bad turn. I can once again see this great success story being misrepresented and cited as a blueprint for reducing population obesity levels. Demonising one food or even one food company on the basis of the anti-tobacco lobby’s success would be misleading and show a lack of understanding of consumers as individuals.  

   Such an approach fails to take into account the complex social, cultural, psychological and (let’s not forget) life-giving attributes of food.  You can’t put these things in a patch and stick them on your arm.  Single minded messages might sometimes be useful but their interpretation depends on the perspective of each individual. 

   If we want to shift our energy balance in the right direction we need to focus on burning the excess fat stored in bodies than vilifying individual food products.  It is never going to be a precise process that ‘fixes’ a problem. It has taken anti-smoking groups decades to reach this point and their work continues. Here’s hoping we take the appropriate lessons from this good news.

   Posted in Health, Media landscape, PR Matters

5. The perplexing topic of food pricing

   Published on Thursday, July 15th, 2010
   The past week has shown that grocery foods are a perplexing topic, as media have prominently featured several items and angles relating to food and supermarket pricing.

   Green MP Sue Kedgley led off last week with calls for a government enquiry and a code of practice for fruit and vegetable margins. Not surprisingly she was joined by fruit and vegetable interests giving dire warning of the industry’s demise.

   No sooner had we digested that than we were reminded of the Bill to come before Parliament next week proposing to exempt GST from Healthy Foods.  However, by day’s end we learned the National Party is going to nip that proposal in the bud and the Bill is as good as “dead in the water”. Meanwhile Labour is finalising its proposal to exempt GST from fresh fruit & veg. This and the healthy foods exemptions, we are told, are because of the need to encourage healthy eating and make food more affordable. (Curiously in discussions about Kedgley’s supermarket margins and the proposals for GST exemptions, the cheaper prices offered by dedicated produce stores are largely overlooked! The reality is many consumers are willing to pay more for convenience.)

   Move on one day, and the Department of Statistics trumpets officially that food prices have dropped year-on-year and it’s the biggest such drop in the life of most of us – over 50 years.

   We are funny creatures, on the one hand we (and our media) tut-tut when Kedgley tells us that fruit and veg margins are extortionist, a claim not supported, as far as I have read, by growers who are also produce marketers. On the other, we rejoice at the news of falling grocery prices. I see many papers actually featured decreases in grocery prices as “Good News”.

   For the average Kiwi it is difficult to make sense of all this, and I think it is mainly because of glib use of statistics.  For example, compared with May, lettuce prices for June were up 77%. Yet the June to June year lettuces were down 30%.

   I followed up on startling grocery prices presented to us by one weekend paper, based on data from the Department of Statistics. One popular grocery item was shown to have increased in price, between July 2008 and May 2010, by 43%. On investigation it seems clear that our official statistician compared the pricing of the item when it was promotional (discounted) with the non-promotional pricing. In fact, this product is most frequently purchased at the promotional price.

   While statistics are excellent headline grabbers, they seldom tell a full and honest story and distortion is not uncommon.

   Posted in Economy, PR Matters

6. Lying as part of your strategy

   Published on Friday, July 9th, 2010
   Will we believe anything they say from now on? Possibly not. I’m talking about the Sea Shepherd organisation announcement publicly severing its relationship with the incarcerated Pete Bethune.

   No sooner had Bethune received what was widely regarded as a light two-year suspended sentence from the Japanese courts, than Sea Shepherd tells us that its statements about casting Bethune adrift were a “strategy”. Rather than being dumped, Bethune is coming home to a hero’s welcome and big party.

   The strategy was to tell a big fat lie. This from an organisation which from the Southern Ocean tells us nothing the Japanese whalers are saying is true.

   Sea Shepherd was out to fool the Japanese, and probably did.

   I have to question whether this was a good strategy.  Certainly it is not one I would be comfortable with, as I’m not sure I will ever believe what this organisation says again.

   What about the next Kiwi who finds him or herself in front of the Japanese court that has been humiliated by Sea Shepherd and Bethune.  They insist that good ole Pete knew nothing of this. Really?

   Posted in Brand, Crisis Communications, Media landscape, PR Matters

7. Are PR professionals worth the money?

   Published on Thursday, July 8th, 2010
   Naturally as the GM of a major PR consultancy my response is yes. The range of PR services available in New Zealand are as wide and varied as the needs of the individuals and organisations who procure these services. Anyone who spends money on PR rightly expects a meaningful communication outcome. I was therefore intrigued to find out more about a DIY PR programme and service which claimed to be a ‘threat’ to PR.

   Presumably the claim, made in a media statement that PR consultancies are under threat, was designed to get attention, as was the statement suggesting that companies currently pay exorbitant amounts of money to generate publicity.  For what is apparently a much lower fee, organisations can learn how to do it themselves and save money in the process.  ‘All it takes’ is an understanding of the publicity process and you can ‘do your own’ PR.

   An interesting proposition, and let me make it clear,  I am not criticising the premise of people doing their own PR, nor deriding the author of this media statement who might  offer a good service for the right people. 

   There are a good number of people who drive their own publicity and others who, if they had the knowledge and inclination, could also do so. But there are some who should not and plenty more who, while willing and possibly able, will simply never get around to it.  

   The DIY advocate focuses on the common misconception that PR is simply about generating publicity via the media. Today, PR is about building strong relationships with publics; effective, authentic and mutually beneficial relationships. Thus the term: PUBLIC RELATIONS.
    
   One of the key benefits brought to a company by an external agency is the third eye and an independent perspective. We are experts in the PR business while the client is the expert in their business. 

   Sound PR, focused on building relationships, is most certainly worth the investment and will contribute to long-term success. 

   Even positive publicity does not necessarily build great relationships or add value to your business. It can, but simply looking to generate publicity for the sake of column inches is not always good PR.   

   Whether you DIY, or engage experts – internally or externally – at the forefront of your mind should be an understanding of the needs of all target audiences. Great PR people will develop strategies that ensure a company addresses all audiences, and will help develop a programme that is genuinely mutually beneficial to all.

   Posted in Brand, PR Matters

8. Straddling the high wire … and surviving

   Published on Friday, July 2nd, 2010
   Less than two years ago as we led into the November 2008 election, the preservation of our fight against the evils of climate change, in the form of the emissions trading scheme, was sacrosanct.

   Only ACT railed against it, National promised to be pragmatic while Labour told us the ‘end is nigh’ if we dared to scupper it.

   We’re now into day two of a watered down ETS, and based on the furore in the media the end is certainly nigh – in terms of the impact it is predicted to have on our disposal income.

   Media would have us believe the only people in NZ that now support an ETS is a National Party that has lost touch with the electorate.

   Across the Tasman, one of the reasons put forward for the dramatic rolling of Kevin Rudd as Australian PM is that he did not follow through on his commitment to introduce an ETS!

   It would appear that while we want to see ours gone, Australians are keen to have one imposed on them.

   Perhaps our Government is paying more attention to the words of the Acting British High Commissioner, who in an address in Wellington last month was pretty blunt when he talked about Europe’s position on climate change.

   Buried in the text was the warning ‘…don’t underestimate how important climate change and low carbon issues are to us. It is at the heart of what we believe and central to our governments’ policies. It is driving our business and is a massive issue for many of our citizens. We are prepared to judge ourselves and others by how we respond to the challenge’.

   For a diplomat that is pretty strong language. Perhaps he has been even blunter in his private discussions with our trade emissaries about the impact not doing our bit could have on our future food trade with Europe?

   Being successful in politics has always included the ability to balance yourself strategically on the high wire. This Government is mastering the art fast.

   Posted in Politics