A while back we posted some thoughts about the dangers of going "off the record". Recently, President Obama ran into trouble wading through this uncharted territory, which is defined by the question: what, exactly, does "off-the-record" mean. This episode highlights a new question: does technology change those meanings?
The issue came up when the President called hip hop artist Kanye West a "jack-ass," in what Obama thought was an off-the-record conversation. (West, you may recall, stormed the stage and gave a foolish, self-centered speech in his native gibberish at this year’s VMAs, upstaging another artist who had actually won an award.) But the reporter in the interview from ABC Twittered it, and so it got "out there", much to the chagrin of the White House.
(This raises another question: Maybe I’m old school, but who, exactly, sits in the Oval Office fiddling with their Blackberry while conducting an interview with the President of the United States?)
The good news for the president? Well, his language wasn’t "too" salty, and he said something that most folks who cared actually agreed with.
Some of the discussion about "off-the-record" seemed to center around whether or not Twitter is a media outlet that would be covered by an off-the-record agreement. This strikes me as being besides the point, and ABC apparently agreed, apologizing for breaking their agreement with the President. But the real issue is the degree to which technology moved so fast that ABC’s editorial process couldn’t keep up. One more thing for reporters, Presidents and the rest of us in the business to be mindful of.
Also of note: if you listen to the recording, you can hear the President say, "Cut the President some slack," after his comments about West. This sheds light on my view that your ability to enforce an off-the-record agreement often depends, in part, on how much leverage you have. Sometimes you don’t have any leverage. If you’re the president, you would think that you and your press office have a great deal of leverage with covering media. Nevertheless, the president was out there; technology had let the cat was out of the bag and no amount of presidential leverage could get the cat back in. I just wouldn’t want to be that reporter going forward as I tried to cover the White House. ("Excuse me, Mr. Emmanuel would like a word with you.")
This episode highlights how dangerous the "off-the-record" waters can be, and offers an interesting window into how the speed of the new media can nullify old ways of managing the relationship between covering and covered.
Nevertheless, my advice to clients remains the same: be very, very careful out there.
Posted by David Preston
Monday, September 21, 2009
Friday, August 28, 2009
Capturing the News Grazers
Did you read the newspaper today? Or perhaps instead you caught the headlines online, or on your mobile phone. You might have plugged into the daily radio talk show or shared your impressions on Twitter or Facebook and ended the day with a televised newscast. If that sounds familiar you’re what the Pew Research Center for People and the Press calls a news grazer - an integrator who is constantly shopping for news tidbits throughout the day and from a variety of sources. Representing a growing segment of the news audience, Pew notes integrators are more affluent, highly educated and younger than those who consume their news in the traditional manner- i.e. newspapers and nightly television newscasts.
The big loser in this ongoing trend is the newspaper industry that continues to see a decline in readers and struggles to redefine itself into an economically sustainable model.
While the decline of the American newspaper industry has been happening for several years, (as noted in the table above) it is becoming more evident as new generations mature. At the opening fall semester at the Naval War College, (where I’ve taught media relations for the past nine years) I noted for the first time- not one student in the class was a daily newspaper reader. As an aside, this week the Phoenix’s David Scharfenberg has an insightful look at the Providence Journal’s attempts to adapt.
It may come as no surprise that the audience migration to the internet for news has accelerated in recent years. The real questions now is - Where on the internet are news consumers going? Having a web based communication strategy means more than just plunking up a website and hoping your audience finds you.
In fact, standard news organizations are still valuable credible ways to connect information with audiences. The biggest growth in 2008 was at sites offering legacy news. The Project for Excellence in Journalism in its 2009 report notes, “The old norms of traditional journalism continue to have value. Virtually all of the most popular news websites are those associated with traditional news organizations, whose legacy platforms are paying for the news gathering, or are aggregators, which collect content from traditional newsrooms and wire services rather than produce their own.”
The challenge now is for media outlets to figure out how they’ll raise enough revenue to continue paying for quality reporters who generate content both for traditional news sources and new media sources. With diminished reporting staffs, there is added value to well rounded public relations efforts that provide factual, efficiently packaged information that can be disseminated to news grazers on multiple levels. An effective multi-pronged new media strategy includes e-newsletters, traditional news sources, legacy news websites, blogging, and finally creating and maintaining your own interactive and interesting channels of communication.
Posted by Dyana Koelsch
The big loser in this ongoing trend is the newspaper industry that continues to see a decline in readers and struggles to redefine itself into an economically sustainable model.
While the decline of the American newspaper industry has been happening for several years, (as noted in the table above) it is becoming more evident as new generations mature. At the opening fall semester at the Naval War College, (where I’ve taught media relations for the past nine years) I noted for the first time- not one student in the class was a daily newspaper reader. As an aside, this week the Phoenix’s David Scharfenberg has an insightful look at the Providence Journal’s attempts to adapt.
It may come as no surprise that the audience migration to the internet for news has accelerated in recent years. The real questions now is - Where on the internet are news consumers going? Having a web based communication strategy means more than just plunking up a website and hoping your audience finds you.
In fact, standard news organizations are still valuable credible ways to connect information with audiences. The biggest growth in 2008 was at sites offering legacy news. The Project for Excellence in Journalism in its 2009 report notes, “The old norms of traditional journalism continue to have value. Virtually all of the most popular news websites are those associated with traditional news organizations, whose legacy platforms are paying for the news gathering, or are aggregators, which collect content from traditional newsrooms and wire services rather than produce their own.”
The challenge now is for media outlets to figure out how they’ll raise enough revenue to continue paying for quality reporters who generate content both for traditional news sources and new media sources. With diminished reporting staffs, there is added value to well rounded public relations efforts that provide factual, efficiently packaged information that can be disseminated to news grazers on multiple levels. An effective multi-pronged new media strategy includes e-newsletters, traditional news sources, legacy news websites, blogging, and finally creating and maintaining your own interactive and interesting channels of communication.
Posted by Dyana Koelsch
Friday, August 14, 2009
Crisis Communications, Big Papi Style
Come clean. Do it quickly. Don’t fuel the fire.
The Red Sox’ David Ortiz used all those crisis communications techniques recently in a mostly successful effort to address his alleged failure to pass a 2003 doping test administered by Major League Baseball.
Big Papi’s PR at bat was made even more difficult by this curve ball: He hasn’t been able to see the actual test results, which are under a court seal. This made the “come clean” part of the equation very difficult, since Papi wasn’t completely certain what may have triggered the positive test result. Further, taking the time to find out would have violated Rule #2: Do it quickly. So he balanced the two by finding out what he could in a reasonable amount of time (meaning quickly enough so that it didn’t look like he was ducking allegations and not giving harmful speculation time to gain credence), then offering up the best possible response given the lack of information available to him. He believes he was “careless” with over-the-counter supplements.
There are a number of useful PR lessons that can be gleaned from Papi’s performance:
Posted by David Preston
Click here to Listen to David discuss this topic on WPRO
The Red Sox’ David Ortiz used all those crisis communications techniques recently in a mostly successful effort to address his alleged failure to pass a 2003 doping test administered by Major League Baseball.
Big Papi’s PR at bat was made even more difficult by this curve ball: He hasn’t been able to see the actual test results, which are under a court seal. This made the “come clean” part of the equation very difficult, since Papi wasn’t completely certain what may have triggered the positive test result. Further, taking the time to find out would have violated Rule #2: Do it quickly. So he balanced the two by finding out what he could in a reasonable amount of time (meaning quickly enough so that it didn’t look like he was ducking allegations and not giving harmful speculation time to gain credence), then offering up the best possible response given the lack of information available to him. He believes he was “careless” with over-the-counter supplements.
There are a number of useful PR lessons that can be gleaned from Papi’s performance:
- Stay in control. Always maintain your composure. Even though the release of information that was supposed to be confidential made the “victim card” available, Papi – to his credit -- didn’t play it.
- Be candid and accurate. Get as much information as you can about what you’re up against, and make your points with as much candor and clarity as you can. Then, don’t push your luck. Don’t speculate, don’t protest (see: “victim card,” above) and of course, never lie. Just stay focused and say what you know to be true.
- When it’s over, stop talking. After you’ve presented your side of things clearly and succinctly, there is no reason to keep fueling the conversation. Leave the spotlight as soon as you can. Too often, those accused of scandals or corruption get carried away defending themselves (we’re talking about you, Roger Clemens), and it often only serves to raise suspicion or create vulnerabilities that didn’t exist. Once you’ve said your piece, fade from public view with as much dignity and grace as you can muster.
Posted by David Preston
Click here to Listen to David discuss this topic on WPRO
Tuesday, July 14, 2009
The PR Lessons of Jon & Kate
The celebrity machine runs on public displays of humiliation.
The world has been mourning the death of Michael Jackson – an undoubtedly huge talent, but one whose signature move was a crotch-grab, and whose relationship with children leaves lingering suspicion in some minds. And shades of Eliot Spitzer, the governorship of South Carolina’s Mark Sanford teeters in the wake of outright lying regarding his whereabouts and the publication of lovelorn e-mails to his Argentinean mistress in the national press.
So why are fans everywhere riveted as the growing rift between TLC super parents Jon and Kate blasts across tabloids and TVs around the country?
Because all those other people – the Britneys, MJs, and Spitzers of the world – are not “normal” people. They are performers and politicians who have sought the spotlight. And while Jon & Kate did agree to let TLC camera crews document their lives for “Jon & Kate Plus 8,” they perhaps didn’t know exactly what kind of attention they were inviting, or just how much drama was in store. After all, the show’s producers have an incentive (ratings) to make this couple’s life look as salacious and dramatic as possible.
Some say there is no such thing as bad press, which may be true when you’re selling a product or growing a brand. But when the quality and privacy of eight kids’ lives is at stake, and a marriage is strained to the breaking point, that aphorism is not entirely true.
Somebody should have warned these two that when you’re a celebrity, there’s no such thing as a private moment, or a “pass” when it comes to even a momentary lapse in judgment. Even the small failings are grist for the national mill – or threaten a marriage.
The Jon and Kate debacle also highlights one of the first key pieces of advice we give at New Harbor Group to clients who find themselves in hot water: Stop talking - until you figure out what, if anything, needs to be said. (See here how Disney skillfully used silence to end a “crisis.”)
Don’t go running off to People (Jon) and US Weekly (Kate) to tell your respective versions of the home-wrecking scandal that is bringing you down. Don’t book a dozen interviews that will only dig you deeper into the hole you’re trying to climb out of. You might be tempted to tell the world your side of things, but don’t. It doesn’t work, and it just never ends. Gov. Sanford felt the need to announce publically that his mistress was his “soul mate.” Maybe it felt cathartic for him to hold a public therapy session, but the public only shook its head and wondered whether he was really equipped to be governor.
Likewise with Jon & Kate. Their now sad, desperate search for a media outlet that will tell the truth as they see it, will continue to be in vain. The only truth tabloids and entertainment television care about is that scandals sell ads.
The public is not on your side. The public is on the side of entertainment. And when you’re talking about the lives and futures of eight innocent kids who did NOT sign up for the spotlight, that is just not enough. Even Michael Jackson – who hid his kids from the media – knew that.
Posted by David Preston
The world has been mourning the death of Michael Jackson – an undoubtedly huge talent, but one whose signature move was a crotch-grab, and whose relationship with children leaves lingering suspicion in some minds. And shades of Eliot Spitzer, the governorship of South Carolina’s Mark Sanford teeters in the wake of outright lying regarding his whereabouts and the publication of lovelorn e-mails to his Argentinean mistress in the national press.
So why are fans everywhere riveted as the growing rift between TLC super parents Jon and Kate blasts across tabloids and TVs around the country?
Because all those other people – the Britneys, MJs, and Spitzers of the world – are not “normal” people. They are performers and politicians who have sought the spotlight. And while Jon & Kate did agree to let TLC camera crews document their lives for “Jon & Kate Plus 8,” they perhaps didn’t know exactly what kind of attention they were inviting, or just how much drama was in store. After all, the show’s producers have an incentive (ratings) to make this couple’s life look as salacious and dramatic as possible.
Some say there is no such thing as bad press, which may be true when you’re selling a product or growing a brand. But when the quality and privacy of eight kids’ lives is at stake, and a marriage is strained to the breaking point, that aphorism is not entirely true.
Somebody should have warned these two that when you’re a celebrity, there’s no such thing as a private moment, or a “pass” when it comes to even a momentary lapse in judgment. Even the small failings are grist for the national mill – or threaten a marriage.
The Jon and Kate debacle also highlights one of the first key pieces of advice we give at New Harbor Group to clients who find themselves in hot water: Stop talking - until you figure out what, if anything, needs to be said. (See here how Disney skillfully used silence to end a “crisis.”)
Don’t go running off to People (Jon) and US Weekly (Kate) to tell your respective versions of the home-wrecking scandal that is bringing you down. Don’t book a dozen interviews that will only dig you deeper into the hole you’re trying to climb out of. You might be tempted to tell the world your side of things, but don’t. It doesn’t work, and it just never ends. Gov. Sanford felt the need to announce publically that his mistress was his “soul mate.” Maybe it felt cathartic for him to hold a public therapy session, but the public only shook its head and wondered whether he was really equipped to be governor.
Likewise with Jon & Kate. Their now sad, desperate search for a media outlet that will tell the truth as they see it, will continue to be in vain. The only truth tabloids and entertainment television care about is that scandals sell ads.
The public is not on your side. The public is on the side of entertainment. And when you’re talking about the lives and futures of eight innocent kids who did NOT sign up for the spotlight, that is just not enough. Even Michael Jackson – who hid his kids from the media – knew that.
Posted by David Preston
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)