Creative Public Relations for a Digital World

Who would have thought it? Newt Gingrich, the temperamental former House Speaker with a checkered personal history, has made a comeback. Again.

Of course, political advantage is notoriously short-lived during primary season, particularly the debate-larded GOP one we’ve seen so far. And the Gingrich rise may say as much about the shallowness of Romney’s support, and his campaign’s missteps, than it does about the former Speaker. But there are some lessons here. The Gingrich campaign has shown real PR smarts in recent weeks, including mastery of the following communications and messaging principles.

Own the story. As a reputed “idea guy,” Gingrich is well schooled in floating new, or newly packaged, concepts that are often colorful and provocative. He’s skilled at elevating the narrative beyond his own issues (e.g. personal baggage) and generating buzz about the future. The latest – space travel and the promise of a moon colony -  is a stretch, but it takes some of the pressure off other, more complicated issues.

Get in front of the bad stuff. Gingrich made a smart move just hours before the CNN debate in South Carolina last week by releasing his tax returns. Though his consulting work for Freddie Mac and his relatively high income are potential liabilities, the timing was brilliant. (And his tax rate is far higher than Romney’s.) The move turned up the heat on Romney to release his own returns, distracting from the news itself and dwarfing the size of the Gingrich assets and income in a flash.

Identify a “safe” enemy. As the world knows, Gingrich’s finest PR moment came just after what could have been a fatal disclosure for his campaign, – the allegation by ex-wife Marianne that he asked her for an “open marriage.” But when CNN’s John King threw out the question for the Speaker’s comment like a slow pitch at the start of a baseball game, Gingrich knocked it out of the park. His tactic was to turn the question into an attack on the media, a favorite whipping boy of the campaign and the party base.

Turn your liabilities into assets. He’s been called thin-skinned, mercurial and grandiose. But last week, Gingrich’s passion, indignation, and outrage really sold his message. When it was focused on the “elite” media, it gave the Speaker a bit of sympathy, and even moral authority. Demonizing the media was far more effective than criticizing his fellow GOP-ers, since it was a uniting force and spoke directly to the voters.

Master your flaws. Where properly focused, as noted, Gingrich’s outrage was very effective. But a little goes a long way, particularly given his reputation for anger. So, he dialed the temperature way down in the subsequent debate this week in Florida. While it made for a far duller session, the “presidential” demeanor thwarted critics hoping for another blow-up, tempering his feisty image.

Where Gingrich has erred, in my opinion, is in sharpening his attacks on Romney after pledging not to go negative. The campaign has already backed down from a nasty anti-Romney ad in Florida, and it will be interesting to see how it walks the line as things heat up down South.

As the queen of “comfort cuisine,” Paula Deen has been a favorite among many members of my family, all of whom live in Georgia or the Carolinas. I’ve admired Paula for her unapologetic taste for indulgence, and for her Southern fried authenticity and down home charm. I’ve never even watched her show, yet I feel I’ve known her for years. I even took her side in her food fight with Anthony Bourdain, though Bourdain was largely in the right.

But Paula’s recent revelation that she was diagnosed with Type 2 diabetes has left a bad taste. And from a PR perspective, I’m not convinced that it’s been well handled.

When I caught her “Today” show interview, I felt a little queasy, and since then I’ve been trying to sort out why. Here’s what it boils down to:

Timing – Paula admits that she was diagnosed three years ago. She says waited until now to reveal her illness, which has been rumored since 2010, because she wanted to “bring something to the table.” I want to believe her, but three years is an awfully long time. For someone who’s hallmark is authenticity, it’s hard to swallow. It doesn’t take a business genius to conclude that Paula and her management were worried about the impact of her illness on her show and brand.

Commerce – Paula also announced that she has signed a spokesperson contract with Novo Nordisk, a producer of the diabetes drug she now takes. There’s nothing wrong with being a paid endorser, but it leaves her open to charges of opportunism. Was she waiting for a fat opportunity to monetize her condition?

Paula and her sons, who are also Novo Nordisk spokespersons, followed Monday’s disclosure with a hasty and vaguely worded announcement that they would donate an unspecified portion of their earnings to the American Diabetes Association. When contacted for comment, the association had no knowledge of the plan. The whole thing looked like an afterthought, because it was. More poor strategy and lack of planning. A donation as a centerpiece of her education program would have softened the blatant commercialsim of her deal and sweetened the message.

Clarity – But, what is the message? That medication lets you ignore diet and exercise guidelines? That you can cut back and still enjoy life? Beyond her headline talking point, “Diabetes is not a death sentence,” there’s no call-to-action. With respect, it seems half-baked.

Commitment – Paula’s been opaque about any personal diet and lifestyle changes since the diagnosis. Perhaps she doesn’t want to offend food industry advertisers, but her reticence is confusing. I don’t think she can be a credible role model if she doesn’t talk about adapting to her illness beyond “moderation.” She’s a tremendous brand with the power to inspire millions, but that equity may be at risk, or at least underleveraged.

Brand identity – Brand experts have weighed in on any conversion to lighter fare, calling it risky. I think the risk can be managed, especially since any change is driven by an authentic, real-life event, – her health condition. There’s plenty of opportunity to adapt. (How about a side-by-side comparison, full-fat vs. substitutions?) The plan is to anoint son Bobby as the healthy-eating advocate of the family, but it remains to be seen if he can ride Mama’s apron strings to success.

Paula says her show’s focus won’t change, and beyond giving up sweet tea, she’s vague about personal lifestyle changes. Problem is, she isn’t serving up enough to be as credible and convincing as she needs to be. She seems to want to have her cake, and eat it, too. But as we’ve seen, that can only go on for so long without consequences.

Mark Cuban’s “12 Rules for Start-Ups” has the PR industry in a lather. In addition to offering tips like never buy branded polo shirts (#10), and know how your business will make money (#4), Cuban has a strong opinion about PR. Rule #11 on his list states, “Never hire a PR firm.” He goes on to describe PR professionals in unflattering terms.

Cuban has since clarified his position on using PR consultants after much online commentary. But basically, his premise seems to be that journalists and bloggers would much rather hear from a company founder directly, rather than through an intermediary.

Fair enough. But calling Mark Cuban a spokesman for start-ups is a bit like describing Kim Kardashian as Kris Humphries’ ex-wife. It may be beside the point at this stage in his life and career.

But Cuban is right about at least one thing, which is that a PR program for a start-up is often very different from one on behalf of a legacy business. There are different rules. Here’s my take on the most effective way to approach PR strategy and media relations for an emerging business.

Prioritize your needs. If fundraising is the overriding goal, your startup may be better off dedicating the first year to networking in venture circles, with more highly specialized help.

Bulletproof your business. Sure, many early-stage companies will grow and evolve, but your business offering needs to be as complete as as possible, and the messaging must be fully coherent before you approach media.

Focus. Similarly, spend your time on the media and influencers who can support business goals. Many startups hire a PR firm or consultant to expand product distribution, for example, which may necessitate a laserlike concentration of trade or niche media and blogs.

Assess the founder’s strengths. Be ruthless. Mark Cuban may be a magnificent communicator, but that’s not true of all founders. Media training can only go so far. Some of the most passionate entrepreneurs I’ve known have been mediocre, or worse, when it comes to evangelizing with journalists. And, remember, the founder is not the brand.

Look at the ROI for time spent. One of the most brilliant CEOs I ever worked with told me that he could do a better job on industry PR than anyone on his staff or at my firm. And he may have been right; he had grown up in the business, knew all the key players and was a true visionary. But, apart from a few carefully cultivated media and analyst relationships, he never did wade very deeply into the PR program. Why? Because he had another job, of course. And a little of a charismatic CEO can go a long way.

Be realistic. PR is best looked at at a long-term tool for building a business or a brand. For every “snowball effect” publicity hit, there are a hundred slow-and-steady programs that create visibility and reputation over time.

Is any industry more challenging than retail? Not only is the business tough, but your employees are your brand. And those employees are notoriously transient and often underpaid, overworked, and just plain bored.

And sometimes they do things that are just plain stupid. It takes only one misstep, powered by social media, to create a full-blown crisis. (Remember the rogue Domino’s video? The FedEx “special delivery”?) And what happens when the business is franchised? Fragmented communications only makes things worse.

The latest case in point is Papa John’s Pizza. When Minhee Cho, a 24-year-old Korean-American New Yorker, ordered a pizza at an uptown franchise, her experience was topped by an insulting ethnic reference on her customer receipt.

(Now, I once worked in a restaurant and often noted details about customers to match orders with faces. But my comments were limited to “red sweater” or “baseball cap.” Not even a “bald guy” escaped my pen.)

As it happens, Cho is a social-media-savvy communications manager for ProPublica. After she posted a photo of the damning receipt on Twitter, it swiftly became the crisis du jour, serving up a reputational mess for the chain.

To its credit, Papa Johns was quick to respond. It sacked the offending employee, posted an apology on its Facebook page, and responded individually to Twitter complaints. But just as things might have cooled, employees from the actual store were quoted about the incident. Their take was different from corporate’s.

One manager at the franchise complained that the brouhaha was “disruptive” to their business. Another defended the fired employee to Gothamist, explaining, “It’s a busy place, and it was a way to identify her and her order. We’ll write…’the guy in the green shirt.’”

Hmmm. How is “green shirt” like “lady chinky eyes”? Yet, even the franchise operations partner seemed to agree that the offense was minor, explaining that decorum and professionalism in minimum-wage jobs are hard to come by.

Problem is, he’s right. Just last month, Chick-Fil-A was roasted in the media when a California employee handed receipts to two Asian customers which identified them as “Ching” and “Chong.” And a notation on a Pizza Hut receipt given to an African-American customer sparked a lawsuit. The offensive receipt reports are such that Gawker has invited its readers to send copies of horrible receipts or stories of “casual racism” at QSRs.

So, this may be just a slice of an ugly trend. And it’s a reminder to all retail companies that they are ultimately responsible for employee behavior, and that they must own the damage control measures for any breach of service, quality, or worse. Anyone can hire a bad apple. But when you can’t control your own brand communications well enough to issue a coherent, timely response to a problem, it’s a huge obstacle to brand reputation management.

Papa John’s needs to go one better than the apology. They, and their competitors, should institute mandatory cultural awareness training for all staff, insist that headquarters clear all media interviews, and impose harsh penalties on franchisees who don’t follow the rules. Anything less is a reputational threat and a recipe for bad PR.

When Microsoft announced that the 2012 Consumer Electronics Show would be its last, the news unleashed a spate of predictions about the largest technology conference on earth. Is CES in decline? Could the show that attracts 130,000 attendees, including most of the biggest names in tech, actually disappear? (Anyone else remember COMDEX?)

Columnists like Troy Wolverton makes the case that CES has peaked. Changes in the formerly seasonal product launch cycle, the importance of operating systems over hardware design, the fact that Apple long ago chose to sit out CES – all could point to a gradual downshift for the Vegas extravaganza, he claims.

Others point out that many of the gadgets unveiled in Las Vegas aren’t destined for success. And it’s true that blockbuster products shown at CES are often PR statements – examples of engineering prowess or trial balloon items designed to build buzz or elicit feedback. Many never will be “productized,” to use a verb that once made me cringe, but that, after countless CES’s, now rolls off my tongue as fluently as “OLED” or “Bellagio.”

Then there’s the annual Vegas pilgrimage itself, with its cruel post-holiday timing, long travel lines, and even longer hours for attendees. It’s truly the trip you love to hate. And, yes, I do remember COMDEX, the once-indomitable computer expo that faded away in 2004 after a few years of decline.

But, still. The show that used to be a haggle-fest for manufacturers and retailers over fourth-quarter wares is much more than just a gear-and-gadget gala. It’s about connections, both the human and the unwired kind. Networks and networking. In addition to the manufacturer-retail connection, it’s a hot spot for VCs looking for investments, resellers, engineers, importers, and job-switchers. There’s simply nowhere else on earth where you can make or renew as many contacts, take as many meetings, or broker as much business in the business that is technology.

And, unlike COMDEX, whose decline started when it limited media attendance, CES is about PR. As noted, where there’s cool stuff, there will be media. And there’s always cool stuff here. For many exhibitors, a big booth and impressive product line-up is a show of strength versus competitors. It’s bragging rights among frenemies who may even share offshore manufacturing facilities. A kind of muscle-flexing for geeks. Sure, there are companies, like Apple, and now, Microsoft, that are powerful enough to generate PR independent of the show, but they’re in the minority.

Ultimately, Microsoft’s retreat from Vegas may say more about the changing relevance of its own products and the twilight of the PC era than anything else. But whatever the case, I’m betting on CES for many, many years to come.