Altyrian View

As many of you know, I am in Vegas this week speaking at the Social Media for Communications conference presented by Ragan Communications and PRSA.

It’s been a fantastic conference thus far, but the highlight has been the keynote by David Pogue. He’s the personal-technology columnist for the New York Times and is the latest person to read this blog. 

“How do you know that, John?”

Well, David uses Google Alerts to follow the conversations that mention his name. If you are in public relations and you aren’t using Google Alerts, you need to check it out. Every day (or once a week or all the time), Google sends you an email if your name / company name comes up in a new post. 

So, instead of being old school and sending an email, I thought that I would post for all to see a note to David: 

David, fantastic keynote yesterday! Loved hearing the iPhone song - the video was great, but hearing it in person was a real treat.  

My question is this: since I’m sure you have told countless audiences that you use Google Alerts, has anyone ever pitched you by blog post? I can see advantages (only a moron would give a bad pitch for the world to see) and disadvantages (tons of alerts every day). Again, thanks for the presentation yesterday! 

If you live in a state that doesn’t have an early primary vote for party presidential candidate, you haven’t seen any of the ads yet. No HIllary or Obama ads. No Huckabee or Rudy. Indeed nearly every opinion we have of the candidates is based on word of mouth or media reports. For us, the media is playing a much more important role in your decision for president.

And what’s getting press these days? Unless you haven’t turned on a TV or opened a newspaper, you’ve heard about Oprah’s speech for Obama. Nearly 30,000 people came out to hear Oprah. Obama was there too. This morning I heard a commentary questioning whether Oprah would translate into votes. Ummm yeah.

Everyone reading these words has heard a speech delivered by someone with whom they have disagreed. Regardless of how strongly you disagree, if the speaker is strong enough, you are impressed, and in some cases, you begin to see his or her point of view. I think that simply getting people to listen is a big step for any of the politicians running. Today, Obama has Oprah to help facilitate that listening.

At the end of the day, advertisements will shape your opinion of the presidential candidates, but isn’t it exciting that PR is playing such a vital role at this point in the game?

Google has put its foot down. According to the Bad Pitch Blog, Google has advised Business Wire that media release headlines that are longer than 22 words will be ignored by the search engine’s spiders.

Here’s a tip: Headlines longer than 22 words will be ignored by editors too.

Back in the day, I would write what I like to call “management headlines.” These are headlines that management wants, and they are the exact opposite of what the editors want. Mark Mathis’s book Feeding the Media Beast has some great ideas about headlines. In a nutshell, headlines are never published so they should be used to get the editor to read the first sentence of your release. Of course, they must pertain to the subject, but they can be off-beat, funny, thought-provoking – anything to get the editor to read your lead. Be creative!

I’ve found that using more creative headlines than a regurgitation of my lead has gotten my clients more coverage. Sure some of those headlines were hard to sell to management, but at the end of the day, it’s the coverage that they want.

Chris Anderson, editor in chief of Wired magazine and author of the must-read The Long Tail, is sick and tired of lazy, stupid PR people. (We’re with you, Chris!) And now, he’s going to do something about it. (Yeah!)

From his blog post:

I only want two kinds of email: those from people I know, and those from people who have taken the time to find out what I’m interested in and composed a note meant to appeal to that (I love those emails; indeed, that’s why my email address is public).

(Sing it, brother!)

So if you sent Chris a note that didn’t match his two criteria for email, he’s going to list your email address on his blog. (*record player screeching*) Yup. Every single one from the last 30 days. These aren’t email addresses from mom-and-pop PR agencies either. Edelman, Weber Shandwick and Ogilvy made the list. So did some big companies like Philips and Qualcomm. The email addresses are all there for anyone to see.

While I agree that every pitch and release should be targeted, while I agree that some PR people use the shotgun approach because they are lazy, while I agree that we need to learn what editors want instead of blindly sending them loads of crap, I must disagree with how Chris has handled this situation. It is a mistake.

First, the “Long Tail” of the media. There are many, many tech magazines out there. Many of them are very small and have few readers. It is impossible to read them and assess them all before sending out a release. While I do not prefer the shotgun approach, you sometimes have news that you want to send to all technology pubs. This doesn’t happen often, and the news has to be really important (in other words, it has to be “news”). So, should we just send the news to those that we know? Fine. We’ve just knocked out probably 2/3 of the tech pubs out there. I guess they lose.

So Chris and the other big guys don’t care (to be fair, they shouldn’t). Everyone doing PR in the tech sector should have read an issue of Wired (heck, we have a subscription). But will there now be a chilling effect? I don’t know Chris so anything I send has to be “what (he’s) interested in” and contains a “note meant to appeal to that.” No problem.

Ok. We’ve all sent a pitch for some really hot news. You research the pubs you wanna target. You send your emails. You get some hits. Chris isn’t one of them. You spent tons of time reading things he’s written, and you thought you had a great story for him. For some reason, it didn’t grab him. I’ve done my job, but for some reason unknown to me, I’m on a list of “lazy PR people.” I’m thinking twice before I send that email.

I’m not worried about being on the list and getting tons of spam. I have a spam filter, and – as someone so astutely put it in the comments on Chris’ blog – if you send out a release on a wire service, your email is already published for the spam bots. What worries me is my email – my name – being associated with “lazy PR people.”

Those of us who have been in the industry and worked very hard to build a reputation of working with editors to bring them quality information, would have a real problem putting that rep on the line. “But John, you put that rep on the line every time you pitch.” Indeed I do. However, I’m not generally looking for public ridicule if an editor disagrees with my assessment. Bottom line, unless I *know* that Chris is going to use my story, I’m not sending that email. I’ll let his competition get the scoop.

I like to think that we (PR people and editors) have a symbiotic relationship. PR people definitely need them, and editors need us. Chris has his approach for dealing with getting too much junk, and that’s his choice. Unfortunately, that’s not a relationship that I’m comfortable with.

I’ve emailed Chris (yes, I thought long and hard about sending him an email) to invite him to be on Altyrian View to discuss the situation. I think that all of you would be interested in hearing both sides of the story. I hope he’ll agree. I’ll keep you informed.

Hat tip to Shel Holtz, who tipped his hat to CC Chapman, who tipped his hat to Jeremy Pepper.

I’m sure you heard that Apple dropped the price of the iPhone from $599 to $399. Of course you did. People who wanted an iPhone were thrilled that they waited while those of us that waited in line in the searing heat for 6 hours were a little upset that we paid an average of $20 per day for the privilege to own one. As a matter of fact, early iPhone adopters were so upset and vocal about it that Steve Jobs issued an open letter saying that current iPhone owners would get a $100 Apple store credit. Or so it would seem.

Apple planned it all along.

In public relations the best way to get press is through controversy. In this case, Apple created a big one. Every iPhone owner with a blog voiced discontent because they “overpaid.” News organizations ran stories about the price change because of the discontent. It’s probable that the new pricing wouldn’t have been reported at all without the controversy. And who did the controversy hurt? iPhone owners already had the phone. Eighty-eight percent are happy with their purchase so it’s unlikely that they would (or even could) return the device. Apple was in a no-lose position. No matter how upset iPhone owners were, there was nothing that they could do about it in the short term except complain very vocally. Of course, their noise let other non-owners know about the new pricing.

So, on day two Jobs gives iPhone users a $100 credit. I think that most iPhone users are happy with the rebate. Again, blog posts and news reports. Instead of a one day story, now we have day two of the story. Apple’s core is happy (pun), and new customers have the impression that Apple looks after its customers. This has easily been the most publicized price reduction in history. Apple wins.

Now, if you don’t have an iPhone yet, it’s probably time to get one…

Just read an interesting article on Bulldog’s Daily Dog by David Meerman Scott, author of “The New Rules of Marketing & PR.” David gives us a few pointers in blogger relations:

Invite an influential blogger or two onto your board of advisors.
Provide smart bloggers with trial or pre-release versions of your product or service.
Ask a blogger to provide a quote for your next press release.
Organize a meeting for bloggers in your industry to meet with your CEO or other executives to discuss industry issues.
When a blogger is helpful to you, provide them with the recognition they crave.
Link to influential blogs in your space in your online media room.
Take a blogger to lunch.

Good points, but I really wanted to address a comment posted by a reader:

Correct me if I’m wrong, but substitute the word “journalist” or “editor” for “blogger” in these bullets of advice, and don’t you get (with one notable exception) something that strongly resembles plain ol’ PR?

That is absolutely right, but the tone of those meetings / invitations / lunches is completely different. BLOGGERS ARE NOT JOURNALISTS. Bloggers have a power that GOOD journalists hide: their opinion. This is what makes a blogger different from a journalist. Every blogger wants to be a thought leader, an industry expert, a public figure in their industry. A good journalist reports the news, not his or her opinions. A good journalists remains objective and follows good journalism practices (confirming sources, etc.). We all hope bloggers follow the same integrity standards, but they do not have to.

The best way to reach out to bloggers is to approach them as they desire to be viewed: as thought leaders, industry experts, public figures, etc. Frankly, you aren’t looking for a blog post from a blogger, you are looking for an opinion (usually a favorable one). I’m not advocating doing anything that violates public relations ethics standards, but I am saying that putting bloggers in the “journalism” box is lazy. They have to be approached differently. Put simply, with journalists, you tell your story; with bloggers, you ask what they think about it.

It was a presidential gaffe nearly averted. As a matter of fact, no one would have even noticed had it not been for an “off the record” comment made by Credit Ford Motor Co. CEO Alan Mulally. I relay this story from the Detroit News not to make a political statement (even if there is one) but to illustrate a point that we need to remember every single day. Kids, this is a great reminder that nothing is off the record.

While showing off a plug-in hybrid car to the president, Mulally noticed that someone had left the electrical cord at the fuel tank and not where the electricity is plugged in.

“I just thought, ‘Oh my goodness!’ So, I started walking faster, and the President walked faster and he got to the cord before I did. I violated all the protocols. I touched the President. I grabbed his arm and I moved him up to the front,” Mulally said. “I wanted the president to make sure he plugged into the electricity, not into the hydrogen. This is all off the record, right?”

I read an interesting post at PR Studies about the press release. It got me thinking about why I think media types hate press releases.

I think the problem with the press release is three fold:
- Everyone *thinks* they can write them
- People have forgotten who the audience is
- It isn’t news

Point number 1: Press releases *look* so easy to write that everyone thinks that they can throw a few words on a piece of paper and send it to the media. This often results in tons of junk that the reporter has to wade through to get to the *real* media releases. Often these “written by myself” press releases are too long, lack focus, aren’t written to be published or produced, have pathetic grammar, aren’t really news, etc. No wonder media hates press releases – so many of them are junk.

Point number 2: Too often releases are ads with “For Immediate Release” written at the top. They are focused on sales and not on providing news. Again, it’s a wonder that any release ever gets read by the media.

Point number 3: That one’s pretty self-explanitory.

Doug Fisher at Common Sense Journalism got his hands on a memo from the executive editor and the managing editor of the Washington Post talking about story length. Below is the rough overview of article length. Check out the post for the full memo.

• A small event, or an incremental development worth noting can be a digest item. The digests are important for readers.
• A day story, significant enough to write for our readers but based on one event or development – 6 to 15 inches. We frequently end up with 12-inch holes in the paper. Let’s use them to the best advantage.
• A single event with multiple layers or levels of information, 18 to 24 inches.
• A more complex news feature of ambition and altitude–25-35 inches.
• Major enterprise, involving in-depth reporting or narrative story telling–40 to 50 inches.
• Extraordinary long-form narrative or investigation, magazine-type stories–60 to 80 inches or, rarely, more.

If those are the “rules” for length in newspaper articles at the Washington Post, should we not try to follow those same rules when we send releases to them? I find it increasingly annoying when I review a release that is much, much too long for the subject. We should make our press releases as long as the news requires.

Yesterday, I read a post on the Making News blog where David Henderson posted an entire release from Apple. This is the whole thing:

Cisco and Apple(R) today announced that they have resolved their dispute involving the “iPhone” trademark. Under the agreement, both companies are
free to use the “iPhone” trademark on their products throughout the world. Both companies acknowledge the trademark ownership rights that have been
granted, and each side will dismiss any pending actions regarding the trademark. In addition, Cisco and Apple will explore opportunities for
interoperability in the areas of security, and consumer and enterprise communications. Other terms of the agreement are confidential.

Wow. No boilerplate. No quote. Nothing but the news. Can we get away with sending out releases like that for our clients? Will our clients accept releases that are that short or do they feel like they need more from their public relations agency?

If you hadn’t heard of a video news release (VNR) before 2004, you certainly heard about it then. The government issued some VNRs that were aired by the networks without revealing the source of the report. It became a big deal then, and the FCC is making VNRs fight for their lives again. Yesterday, I read that the FCC has announced that it is going to fine 42 stations for not disclosing that news reports came from VNRs. It seems that the FCC regulates all video that is paid placement – it should; those are called ads even if they are in a news show. If the video is distributed freely (as most VNRs are), the FCC mandates attribution if the content is political or controversial. One could make an argument that that includes 99% of all VNRs. Hence, the FCC has all but killed the VNR.

PRSA issued a press release a few months ago telling us their stance on VNRs and their regulation. Makes sense to me, but clearly not to the FCC.
(more…)