StevenSilvers.com

Reporters becoming PR people: Why it works. Why it doesn't.

More than a year ago I suggested that unemployed journalists will take many of the jobs that would have gone to publicists and communicators without newsroom experience.

That was an understatement.

In less than ten years, the nation’s news business has lost more than 14,000 jobs – some 25 percent of the entire industry.  And things have yet to hit bottom, especially for newspapers and magazines.

The result, as the Atlantic’s Jeffery Goldberg calls it, is the The Great Journalism Exodus.  Every PR agency, communications department and public affairs office across the country is hearing from swarms of reporters who are either unemployed or looking to get out.  

Goldberg wonders if all these hacks make good flacks, but the volume of job candidates makes this a non-issue.  Sure, many reporters don’t transition from the newsroom because they don’t understand how money is made or harbor a sanctimonious cynicism about the business world.  But just as many are damn good at it.  They write better, learn faster and have better connections.  That’s why they’re getting so many of the good jobs.

What’s important is that this mass hacks-to-flacks migration represents a tectonic shift in the relationship between sponsored message and third-party credibility.  For every public affairs officer and publicist with newsroom experience, there are many times that number of news beats and media outlets that simply no longer exist. 

The changing landscape means the best communications people will be those who are adapt at disciplines far beyond well-written press releases and pitching stories.  They’ll need to know research, integrated marketing, community engagement, public affairs, issues management and yes, blogging and social media.

It’s worth keeping in mind whether you’re hiring a flack or a hack.  Or one in the same.
. . . . . . . . .

What Tiger Woods and other scandals really tell us about crisis management

I disagree with PR and media types who over-analyze the Tiger Woods mess.  There are only a couple of lessons here.  But they’re big ones.

Here’s the first: The threat of discovery doesn’t always stop some people from behaving badly.

Tiger’s massive melt-down isn't the failure of a crisis plan. There wasn’t one. None of the Tiger Inc. image handlers prepared memos outlining what to do if it came out that Mr. Woods enjoyed extramarital affairs like some people collect souvenir snow globes.  Damage control strategies started after the truth.  Not before.

Today’s Internet-driven reality TV culture means we’re following scandals and controversies more thoroughly than ever.  We’ve become very familiar with the so-called “PR angle” of every story.  This has created a tendency to believe that PR is the end result of itself.  We act as if image is a universally valued currency, a commodity to be saved or squandered.  But this confuses how we rationalize destructive behavior by a prominent person or company.

Take for example a recent Harvard Business Review article on responding to scandals.  In it two researchers argue that Chinese dairy distributors who added melamine to milk sold in the U.S. might have acted differently had they anticipated the emotional reaction people would have to media coverage about tainted milk and dead infants.

Unfortunately the world doesn’t work that way.  The reality is that business executives who poison food to increase profits are criminals.  And criminals are psychopaths that by definition don’t care what happens to other people. They’re bad people, not bad public relations planners.

True story.  Many years ago I was in an Austin hotel room watching the local news when suddenly the TV showed a mug shot of the client I was preparing to meet.  The government official at the center of our at-risk youth campaign had been arrested for soliciting a teenage prostitute. 

We had nothing prepared for this.  What we did have, however, was an established appreciation of how things would get much worse if the public thought we were treating the whole thing as just a PR problem to be resolved with spin and posturing.  That got us through it.

In the same way, Tiger’s self-destruction also reminds us of the second lesson: That truly effective crisis planning is having the ability to respond to situations nobody sees coming. 

And that has to include people in charge being caught doing very bad things.

. . . . . . . . . .

Getting caught is the new transparency and other realities of the coming year

Five truths for 2010:

The age of transparency is mostly about getting caught.

Ten years into the new media era, the institutions we love to hate – government, banks, big business, media – aren’t any more willing to tell us what they’d rather keep to themselves. The constant outing of reality TV frauds, tax-supported executive bonuses, front groups and scumbag celebrities is still a function of how Americans use the Internet to inform and entertain themselves.  Not the other way around.

Social media is getting less social.

Over time, millions of people will stop using social media sites because 1) their bosses lock them out during working hours, 2) they tire of all the commercial clutter or 3) they learn how those revenue-hungry companies are sharing their profiles, posts and friends lists.

The Rocky Mountain News is still dead.

For all the outraged hang-wringing and new ventures, media consumers in Denver and many other American cities are still only willing to support one local daily newspaper.  Barely.

Journalism, however, isn’t dead.  It’s just changing.

So-called “advocacy” media will flourish as more formerly ad-supported news outlets – or individual journalists and commentators -- become funded by interest groups, politically leaning foundations, single corporations and even government.  Whether you think it’s biased or not will depend on your point of view.

No company will ever hide its identity again.  Har.  Kidding.

Getting nabbed isn’t as certain as, say, driving through a DWI checkpoint with an open bottle of cream de menthe in your lap.  But some well-known brand out there is going to have a major PR problem when it draws the first high-profile enforcement of the Federal Trade Commission’s new transparency in marketing rules.
. . . . . . . . . .

The worst response is no response

Here’s a common crisis communications question: Isn’t it best for a company to stave off reporters until all the facts are known and there’s “good news” to tell?

Rarely.

Stonewalling is usually as effective in holding off media coverage as pushing water uphill with a fork.  Not only do your pants get wet but you look like a idiot.

News is going to happen with you or without you.  It doesn’t matter if don’t have all the facts. 

Executives and lawyers sometimes forget that news isn’t a conclusion.  It’s a consumer product. It gets packaged to last as long on the shelf as possible. One headline follows another as new information is confirmed or disputed, as ramifications and fall-out are analyzed.

Media don’t have to get it all or even get it right. That’s why there’s another newspaper tomorrow. Or another web update in ten minutes.

Your response becomes an aspect of any ongoing crisis or controversy story. Sometimes it becomes the story.

To not participate in negative news is death by a thousand paper cuts.  You force reporters to discover information, opinions and perspectives that will be rushed out, regardless of whatever contentions you have about accuracy or context.  You likely just prolong and make more convoluted the bad publicity you’re trying to avoid.

Does that mean you have answers to every question?  Of course not.  But there’s a huge difference between hiding from the press and making a sincere effort to explain why you can’t answer a specific question, or why it isn’t appropriate for the CEO to be interviewed now.  (But don’t say that “lawyers” won’t let you talk about things you’d otherwise be eager to explain. This will come back to bite you.)

Engaging the news media during an emerging PR crisis or controversy – including to respectfully decline comment – builds a foundation of credibility, even if you screwed up. You are acknowledging the legitimacy of the story and the media’s job. And that might buy you some breathing room to produce facts as quick as you confirm them, or at least be given the opportunity to respond to information and opinion before it’s rushed out there.

Good news or bad news, the rule is the same.  Say only what you know to be true.  But say it. 

. . . . . . . . . .

Bad News Friday usually makes things worse

Even in the always-on Internet era, many companies and government offices still rely on the old trick of waiting until late Friday afternoon to release bad news.

In most cases they're just making things worse come Monday. Here's why:

You stop nothing.  People who care most have news alerts, stock tickers and other Internet tracking gizmos to get your stuff the second it hits the fan. Your stock will still move in after-hours trading guided by speculation and negative expectations.  Media outlets will still run breaking news, except this time you’ll be covered either by reporters who know to dig for whatever you’re trying to hide or by inexperienced weekend reporters who don’t know the situation.

You create a new credibility issue.   Maybe ten people on the planet won’t perceive that you tried to bury bad news on Friday afternoon. You risk creating a whole new PR problem with stakeholders and media for thinking they don’t see you trying to sneak out the back.

You dig a deeper hole.    Friday-night announcements don’t make bad news go away.  They create a 48-hour vacuum for people to assume the worst. Some will interpret your move as a signal that there’s still another shoe to drop. You could be in a worse defensive position on Monday morning as you reopen the doors to angry shareholders, anxious employees and reporters working on follow-up pieces about your company mishandled a crisis.

You still announce on Monday anyway.  Assuming you’re somewhat successful in burying your bad news over the weekend, you’ll have to deal with the response on Monday from people seeing the news for the first time. Now you’re dealing with two sets of responses: the people who are just hearing it, and the people who saw and reacted to it over the weekend.

Bad News Friday isn’t a secret, it’s bad public relations.

. . . . . . . . . .

Associated Press story says media hoaxes work

AP television writer David Bauder expands on the “frightening message” that media hoaxes like Balloon Boy and the fake press conference in which activists reversed the U.S. Chamber’s position on global warming are increasingly successful publicity tools.

At least, we think it’s AP television writer David Bauder.
. . . . . . . . .

How breaking news becomes grist for the pop culture mill in only three days

The Balloon Boy hubbub proves a rule that companies in crisis should keep in mind: News is entertainment at the  speed of the Internet.

Here’s how it happens:

The incident goes live. In this case, Balloon Boy’s parents called the TV stations.

The incident becomes breaking news. A herd mentality takes over competing media outlets. Nobody wants to miss the shot that everybody else has. Time elapsed: About half an hour.

Breaking news becomes a national story. Local coverage feeds into national outlets, and everything feeds into the Internet. Live event coverage goes viral. News links and commentary fly around email, Facebook and Twitter. People at work see headlines on the little TVs in the elevators. Time elapsed: About an hour.

The story becomes a controversy. News reports contradict earlier reports, creating scandal. Questions, rumors and speculation become a constant din interspersed with breaking news updates of even the most minuscule facts. Talking heads on cable and radio blame liberals or conservatives for allowing things like this to happen. Internet coverage and chatter multiplies a thousand-fold. Time elapsed: Three to four hours.

The controversy becomes pop culture. The people who started it get interviewed on Larry King. Leno and Letterman make jokes that night. Saturday Night Live refers to it in a promo for this week’s show. Three times the number of media outlets show up the next day, and so do dozens of other people from all over. Some bring alcohol, others bring hand-made posters. Internet coverage and chatter multiplies several thousand-fold. Supermarket tabloids do cover stories. Time elapsed: One to two days.

Pop culture becomes the story. Media coverage and Internet chatter is the same as follows a popular reality TV show. People take sides with and against victims, villains and heroes. Everyone becomes a celebrity. Journalists – many of them ticked off for being played -- investigate school transcripts, arrest records and anonymous tips. Web sites pop up.  Talk shows devote whole hours. Authorities launch formal investigations. Politicians express concern. Somebody announces a book.

Media critics blame the news media. News media blame consumers. Consumers find Balloon Boy Halloween costumes on the Internet.

Total time elapsed: About 72 hours, give or take.

(Photo: The New York Post reported that an online gaming company in San Francisco put “Balloon Boy Game” on the Internet in only about six hours after the news story went national.)
. . . . . . . . . .

• The Harvard Crimson:  Sailing away with Balloon Boy
• American Chronicle  |  The "Balloon Boy" and the White House:  Good lessons for not mixing "news" and entertainment
• Philadelphia Inquirer  |  Mr. and Mrs. Balloon Boy did it because we will watch
• Washington Post  |  Balloon Boy, media stunts, dream up your own
  

Bloomberg makes big jump into consumer media with acquisition of BusinessWeek

The enduring but ailing BusinessWeek has been sold to Bloomberg LP in a cash deal that depending on who’s talking will either beef up the magazine or result in mass layoffs.

Bloomberg executives say they plan on substantially increasing the number of editorial pages in the magazine, which despite its prominence in the consumer business media market lost more than $40 million last year. 

Up to now, privately held Bloomberg has made most of its $6.3 billion in annual revenues from leasing data terminals to investment firms and corporate customers.
. . . . . . . . . .

Former Rocky finance editor to leave the country

Former Rocky Mountain News finance editor, reporter and columnist David Milstead will be leaving Denver to join the Globe and Mail, Canada’s Toronto-based national newspaper. 

The Rocky Mountain News was shut down in February, just shy of its 150th birthday, leaving the Denver Post as the city’s only remaining major daily.

Good luck, David.
. . . . . . . . . .

Industry expert asks if Toyota's image is getting a free ride

Auto industry veteran Frank Sherosky asks if Toyota’s stellar reputation for quality is more a result of good image management than what really happens on the road.

CBS News reported that a former Toyota lawyer has filed a federal racketeering suit against the company for “ruthlessly” conspiring to hide evidence about hundreds of roll-over accidents in which the roof caved in.  The potentially damming case was filed in late July but took more than two months to make the news.

“In that respect,” Sherosky writes in the Detroit Auto Examiner, “it's hard not to at least question the media for bias. Does Toyota own a free-pass card in the press, when American companies like GM, Ford and Chrysler get slammed all the time?”

Toyota denies the allegations and says its former in-house counsel violated attorney-client privilege with his lawsuit and in the consulting work he did after leaving his job with a $3.7 million severance package.

. . . . . . . . . . .