Creative Public Relations for a Digital World

Social-media-fueled brand controversies are more common than ever in the digital age. But even in the current crisis-of-the-hour media environment, it’s natural for major brands to take slights very seriously. Where millions of dollars are spent and fat profit margins are at stake, overreactions are understandable. You can almost sense the confusion, conflicting advice, and panic beneath the surface.

Most businesses will back down in the face of controversy, even when the criticisms are groundless. Remember when Gap backpedaled as brand-watchers criticized its new logo? Admittedly, the new logo was bland and the backlash probably added color to its reputation, but it was a stunning reversal in such a short time.

Sometimes a brand will simply cave. Home center chain Lowe’s pulled its ads when threatened with a boycott over its support of a reality show called “All-American Muslim.” The decision was met with fresh outrage from progressives, so it was a true lose-lose for the chain. But word like “one million moms” have been known to trigger a hasty media planning redesign.

That’s why it was refreshing when Cheerios, assaulted by YouTube trolls over a charming ad featuring an interracial family, was so unfazed in its response to criticism. Not only did it refuse to back down (and why should it?) but the tone of the brand’s response made it clear that the ad would go on.

Of course, it’s easy to stand your ground when confronted with ugliness, but lots of companies would have quietly killed the ad. More importantly, most probably wouldn’t have produced it in the first place. So, cheers to Cheerios for wanting to position its brand as inclusive and up-to-date. And even more for unapologetically disabling nasty comments and seeing the PR gold in letting the commercial’s actors speak for the brand.

By meeting its critics head-on instead of overreacting, Cheerios elevated the spot from a progressive commercial to a statement about brand values. And it reaped bowlfuls of good will in the process. Well done.

Lately there’s been a minor debate about which is more valuable for a career in public relations – education or experience. The conversation could – and will – go on and on.

At first blush, it’s no contest. The advantage goes to experience. A college degree is increasingly required to enter the work force in any professional services job, but it’s not a leg up. It’s the price of entry.

Beyond the basic degree, it’s far more beneficial to gain experience in the field, at least in my book. Public relations in particular is more of an art than a science. Persuasion theory is nifty, but how do you teach media relations? Vet campaign ideas? Learn client counsel and salesmanship?  While it may be tempting to defer facing our job-challenged economy by going to grad school for a Masters degree  in communications or digital studies, chances are it will be costly. Moreover, it takes funds that can theoretically be earned…on the job.

But the education vs. experience discussion isn’t so simple. The wrong kind of work experience can do more harm than good. The flipside of the debate for an untrained person is that without the right environment, mentors, and supervisors, you can develop bad habits. The PR industry probably loses many talented people because they have the bad luck to land in boiler-room-type agencies or stultifying bureaucracies where there’s no learning or inspiration, or worse, questionable or unethical practices. For those without the judgment or means to escape, it’s far better to stay in school and learn the ropes.

Conversely, there’s a vast hole in the education of many otherwise well-prepared communications graduates, and it’s one that they can easily fill during their college years. I’m talking about business and finance. Budget management, company analysis, category research, and making a case for PR’s value to the business bottom line are essential for a good PR practitioner. Yet few enter the workforce equipped with even the skills to read a balance sheet. I know; I was one of those clueless English majors who wished I’d taken accounting, or at least a business course.

The bottom line is that neither education and experience exists in a vacuum. And each requires a proactive approach. If you’re not getting what you need in either environment, you’re shortchanging yourself, but if you take matters into your own hands, you can make up for just about any deficit and enjoy a successful career.

According to PR industry newsletter to The Holmes Report, “PR thinking” will dominate marketing communications in future years. That’s meant to be encouraging news for PR pros.

The basis for the forecast is a new survey of 2000 marketing communications students in four European countries. Seventy percent of this “next generation” of marketers say they believe that a PR mindset will dominate among marketing and ad agencies within the decade. Even more startling, more than 80 percent percent predict the death of specialist shops, like social media or digital.

It’s only one survey, but it’s a comprehensive one, and these are surely marketing’s future leaders.

So what is “PR thinking”? The post defines it as the belief that “word-of-mouth and trust for brands is most important.” I would add that for many of us who work in PR, the essence of PR thinking is about generating and using influence. It’s explicit or implied third-party endorsement, – what most of us learned during our first week on the job.

But beyond the survey, there are many, even more compelling reasons why “PR thinking” will continue to dominate marketing communications. One is Google, which rewards content and social sharing and metrics like follows, comments, and views over black-hat SEO tricks.

Another is the obvious struggle of the traditional ad industry to redefine itself and to move towards word-of-mouth marketing and even brand journalism. But here’s my list of the key ingredients.

Adding value. We’re trained to do this for journalists and bloggers, and to help them, in turn, add value for the end user. Today this means quality content. PR standards still aren’t journalism but they’re getting there.

Storytelling. This is a newer trend, but jargon-stuffed press releases and commercial messages are giving way to real stories, complete with conflict, drama, and emotion.

Influence. It’s not what we say, it’s how we influence others’ own content, sharing, and behavior.  This is the heart and soul of PR and very different from the paid media mentality. It is how the PR investment should be measured.

Trust. There is no influence without trust. The gap between what consumers believe when companies talk about themselves (8%) and when those they know talk about the company (80%) is huge.

Relevance. No amount of influence matters if the message isn’t relevant.

Of course, key marketing communications values like relevance aren’t proprietary to those trained in public relations. And that’s the point. The “new” marketing isn’t limited to PR, or social media, or WOM marketing, or any of those.

Maybe “PR thinking” really means forgetting about channels or disciplines or labels. For the digital age, that’s just good marketing.

#BrandAdvocateFail – I can only assume the lawyers are to blame? lnkd.in/W_FxYe

— Sarah Larcker (@slarcker) May 22, 2013

Was Shakespeare right after all?

When legal strategy contradicts PR or communications strategy, PR usually loses. Typically, it’s in high-stakes liability suits or congressional investigations where avoiding stiff legal or financial penalties is considered more important than brand or personal reputation.

But the Nutella PR mess shows that legal protocol can gum up the works even in far more trivial situations. Which is nuts. It’s enough to evoke the famous Shakespeare quote about lawyers, which, though widely misinterpreted, remains the classic complaint of many for whom legal procedure is an obstacle, including PR pros.

For those on a media starvation diet, the heartburn started when Sara Rosso, an engaged Nutella enthusiast the likes of which most brands can only dream of, launched a campaign to celebrate World Nutella Day. Rosso created a Facebook page that has attracted a community of 40,000.

Instead of thanking their #1 fan, Nutella sent her a cease-and-desist letter. Naturally, the letter prompted a backlash against the brand and its heavy-handed tactics.

To its credit, Ferrero SpA, which owns Nutella, realized its error and retracted the cease-and-desist. It explains the unfortunate letter as “routine procedure in defense of trademarks, activated following improper use of the Nutella trademark within the fan page.”

Well, whatever. The sticky situation just reinforces the importance of bringing together the  communications and legal functions when it comes to brand impact and social media. Why can’t we all just get along? Or at least be present at the table?

Nutella fans are still miffed, so the brand has some more sweet-talking to do to win back their affections. But as Shakespeare also said, “All’s well that ends well.”

A favorite former client calls PR “the cheapest form of advertising.” Not really. But his comment shows that, even among sophisticated marketers, misconceptions about PR and what we do for clients are still prevalent.

These are the top seven myths that persist about public relations, and a perspective on each.

1. PR is advertising lite. Not so. The two are so distinct that they shouldn’t be compared, and neither is a surrogate for the other. As one pro once put it, the comparison is a little like arguing which is more important to football, offense or defense. Ideally they work in concert.

2. PR is cheap. It’s true that a modest PR program’s cost is probably peanuts compared to a heavy paid media schedule, but it’s still significant. Budgets vary widely. The key is to match the need with the right PR resource and approach.

3. PR is publicity. Sure, media coverage is often an end result of a PR program, but a well-crafted plan starts with a strong strategy. To generate earned media, there’s plenty of foundation to be laid. Overall brand positioning, relationship-building, messaging, etc. – all are critical to a successful outcome. And when the publicity breaks, it’s just the beginning. We still trade a measure of control for credibility.

4. PR is about getting the word out. True, but many marketers don’t realize it’s a two-way street. A successful public relations program is designed to tell a brand or business story, but the PR team should also serve as a source of feedback and intelligence on what customers and influencers are saying and thinking. If you’re not using your PR function that way, you’re not maximizing your investment.

5. PR drives sales. When a prospect says they’re counting on the PR spend to replace other marketing tools and activities, it’s a red flag. Despite exceptions, PR isn’t the most reliable way to achieve demand generation. What it does best is build brand visibility and enhance reputation over time. When it comes to sales, it will often fall short, particularly because frequency is nearly impossible to achieve with publicity alone.

6. PR = press releases. The news stream is important, and well-written releases are essential, but they’re a commodity. Press releases don’t add up to a strategic PR program, and the impact of any one release is likely to be minimal. If you’re paying for news releases, you’re wasting your money.

7. PR isn’t measurable. Actually, it is. But this one’s tricky, for two reasons. One is that the old metrics that gauge volume and outputs, like impressions and ad equivalency, are outdated and inadequate. Again, the comparison to advertising doesn’t truly measure what PR does well.

The second challenge is that the research needed to demonstrate the value of PR’s outcomes can be nearly as costly as the program itself. The good news here is that as social media adoption grows, things like sentiment, message delivery, impact, and action are now trackable.