Now the auto company that could once do no wrong has shut down production lines and instructed dealers not to sell some of its most popular models. The New York Times reported that Toyota knew about the acceleration problems two years before it issued the recall. Rep. Henry Waxman, one of Congress’ most persistent consumer watchdogs, announced he will hold hearings to investigate the sudden acceleration problem next month.

10. New levels of ravenous mass media spotlighting. Arguably, 2009 featured an insane level of “we will not let this story go.” Already saturated news stories were repeated - endlessly - way past the point of saturation. From balloon boy to Octomom to Gosselin vs. Gosselin to Amanda Knox, the same B-level stories were relentlessly beaten to death. While this isn’t a new trend, it is an increasingly annoying one.

 

9. Under-reported storytelling. One of the by-products of over-reporting is under-reporting. Too many newsworthy stories either didn’t get covered or were given marginal, brief treatment. These stories included (as TIME magazine summarized in its year-end issue) Nigerian blood for oil, experimenting with children and the Maoist insurgency in India.

 

8. Twitter & Facebook went legit for business. In 2009, Twitter broadened from a consumer-level experience to a pragmatic corporate communications tool. An increasing number of businesses are using it for real-time updates, blatant marketing and thought leadership. Ditto for Facebook. LinkedIn, the social networking tool most associated with business, opened up its API and became more Facebook-like.

 

7. Online media became credible. In a year when print media collapsed, most people finally “got” that online visibility/conversations have gone legit. Meanwhile, the enlightened understand how online and social media is a new paradigm much more impactful than traditional media because of its transparency, authenticity and conversational two-way belief building.

 

6. Blogs ruled but got reeled in. Blogs became the real-time voice of corporations, the best way to communicate and build a human corporate persona. But while they were more widespread, the Federal government cracked down on bloggers in the pocket of vendors, forcing full disclosure for paid-for-booty.

5. Green became greener. While greenwashing didn’t go away in 2009, most corporations understood the mantra of needing to walk the walk, not just talk the talk. They also saw a direct line drawn between sustainability and profitability.

3. Video became an accepted standard in corporate America. The days of writing extensive “case studies” and producing elaborate (and expensive) corporate videos waned in 2009. Thanks to guerilla-style, grassroots video acceptance, corporations increasingly added video to their arsenal of communications thanks to a triumvirate of benefits: believability, immediacy and low-cost. Why write a news release when you can post a three minute video of someone saying it? Would you rather read or watch?  

2. PR was re-invigorated. The words “public relations” may still conjure negative imagery, but in 2009, the PR industry began making progress towards a renewed, positive and relevant position. Driven by social media which fosters conversations vs. pitches, the PR industry made significant strides in shifting from a media-centric one-way communications model to a two-way listening model.

 

1. Social responsibility became embedded. In 2009, “making the world a better place” moved from ‘philanthropy’ to an appreciation for and understanding of how authentic, integrated giving-back strategy and action positively impacts business objectives and the bottom line. There’s no turning back and that’s a very good thing.                            

My daughter Sophie participated in a great program sponsored by SkiNH called “Earn Your Turns.” It’s for 4^th-graders in NH who want to earn free tickets and discounts to NH ski resorts with a slight catch - they have to work for it. There are several homework assignments they can choose to earn the ski rewards – make a poster, write an essay, draw a picture. Sophie chose to conduct a survey of friends and family. Her question: Which ski resort in NH is your favorite?

 

While her survey wasn’t scientific, it did result in a high response rate (64 votes from 100+ possible respondents: approx. 65%) and offers some insight you might find useful as you plan your next survey.

 

1.      Consider your target list. Before you hit send on your online survey, consider how the results might be skewed based on the people you are surveying. In our case, Sophie surveyed friends and family, who all gather each winter at Cranmore Mountain in North Conway, so naturally the winning resort was Cranmore (although it should be voted #1 anyway!). Consider widening your target list to include those who have no familiarity with the questions you are asking so the results are more horizontal and less biased.

2.      Offer an incentive. I think we had such a high hit rate because Sophie offered a prize to a random winner picked from all the survey respondents. In this case, Lindt chocolates were up for grabs, but your incentive could be something meaningful to your target list: free product, free support or an all-expenses paid trip to the next user conference. If all else fails, chocolate does work!

3.      Personalize your “ask.” Sophie explained why she was doing the survey and included a picture of herself snowboarding. Many people commented on the project being such a great idea and the graphic offered a peek at how happy she is on the slopes. Consider adding a picture of your CEO, a graph from your last survey, or a video that’s meaningful to the spirit of the survey to give it more “life.”

4.      Say thank you. For each person that responded Sophie sent a personal thank you response along with a reminder about the incentive. “Thank you! If you are lucky, you will get chocolate.” This was appreciated by the respondents, but also opened further one-on-one dialogue. While this can’t be done with thousands of survey participants, consider responding personally to the top 10-15, particularly if they are key customers. Thank them for participating and perhaps get a dialogue going on different issues, or to get some specific anecdotes or data.

5.      Conclude your survey. People who participate in surveys typically do not hear about the results. If they take the time to help you, they should be informed of the outcome. When Sophie’s survey was officially “closed” (we had an end date and time), she sent everyone on the list – even those that didn’t participate – another thank you announcing the winning resort as well as the winner of the chocolate. For privacy reasons, you may not be able to reveal that much information, but closing the loop will let people know you brought the survey to a conclusion and give them another opportunity to engage in further communication with you.

 

In the end, have fun with it. Sophie was so proud of her results she couldn’t wait to share them with her teacher and is anticipating the arrival of her Earn Your Turns rewards.

 

What real-life survey lessons have you learned?

I don’t know if Tiger Woods cheated on Elin with Rachel Uchitel, is a reckless operator, was having an argument, was in a hurry to get out of his house around 2 a.m. or just wanted a new SUV.

 

And I really don’t care.

 

What bugs me in what I thought was an era of growing transparency for all brands (companies, organizations, governments, people) is a still remarkably frequent hesitancy to come clean publicly.

 

At the time of this writing, Tiger still hasn’t spoken with law enforcement authorities, choosing instead to post a statement on his Web site saying, “This is a private matter and I want to keep it that way.”

 

When you’re a billion dollar brand, this course gets a little dicey.

 

Tiger isn’t the first case of failing to come clean fast in 2009; we’ve seen this many times this year.

 

South Carolina Governor Mark Sanford has denied doing anything wrong for months. He disappeared for days this summer, reappearing to finally admit to an extramarital affair with his Argentinian “soul mate.” Facing 37 ethics charges related to campaign money and airline travel, Sanford still isn’t coming clean.

 

Balloon boy’s Dad, Richard Heene cried crocodile tears, set up a box for reporter questions and told the world his son’s disappearance was “absolutely no hoax.” There were lots of statements and press interviews before the kid climbed down from his attic perch above his garage in Fort Collins, CO and spilled the beans by saying “you had said that we did this for a show.”

 

Apple got pressure when it continued to not disclose what was going on with Steve Jobs’ “hormonal imbalance” weight loss issue, the prevalent angle before his liver transplant disclosure in June. People were upset because boards of public companies need to comply with disclosure laws protecting shareholders when CEO illnesses keep them away from work.

 

It happened again last month when Lazard Ltd.’s CEO Bruce Wasserstein was hospitalized for heart problems. A lot of people were upset because they felt there wasn’t enough transparency around the prominent investment banker’s eight week absence and health disclosure in 2006.

 

I agree with social media guru Chris Brogan. In his new book, Trust Agents, he said, “Those who are active on the Web now realize that they need to embrace this new transparency, that all things will now eventually be known. Companies can no longer hide behind a veneer of a shiny branding campaign, because customers are one Google search away from the truth. Further, they join activist groups to stay informed about new practices, so they are often one step ahead of the people trying to profit from them. Companies must acknowledge that they are as naked on the Web as individuals are."

Let’s transparently toast to a more transparent 2010. 

 

Goldman Sachs received over $1billion from taxpayer bailouts and was the biggest recipient of taxpayer moolah in AIG’s bailout. Yes, they repaid their $10 billion loan with interest, but people in the know are predicting they might pay out as much as $16 billion in bonuses this year.

 

Next in line is Citigroup. They got $45 billion in TARP money plus another $300 billion in FDIC guarantees. All this on top of three previous government bailouts according to Slate.

Now comes the H1N1 debacle.

 

Goldman Sachs received 200 doses and Citgroup got 1,200. The New York City Department of Health figured this distribution strategy somehow made sense despite the fact the vaccine continues to be in very short supply. Many high-risk groups – little kids, young people, health care workers, pregnant women, etc. – haven’t been vaccinated. Lots of clinics and hospitals still don’t have their hands on it. People around the country wait in long lines to get it.

 

But Goldman Sachs took it. They received as much vaccine as was allotted to Lenox Hill Hospital in New York. Citigroup took it too, receiving five times more than Goldman Sachs.

 

True public relations practice is supposed to be focused on doing the right thing for society, right, not just one company’s employees? This week’s H1N1 action (and inaction) not only raises reputational management issues, but ethical ones as well.

On the heels of a still-lasting nasty taste in the public’s mouth, it seems these two firms may have been better served – reputationally and ethically – by being bigger picture ponderers, transparent and giving it back.

These vaccine distribution blunders may also create a negative ripple effect for the Obama administration. Arguably, a large segment of the American public may instinctively leap to a “who’s ultimately in charge here?” connection.

Morgan Stanley presumably learned a lesson from its financial brethren and did the right thing when it turned over its entire supply of 1,000 doses to local hospitals. Good for them, but especially for all the people who need it most.

It’s a textbook Bad PR, Good PR lesson for our time.

Lots of companies – especially those in B2B – still talk about (or request) PR services that increasingly strike me as tired, fading or dead.

 

Press tours & press briefings – yes, there are still industries where the press tour is alive and well (entertainment!) but most reporters, editors and bloggers don’t have time to meet in person anymore. I always felt bad for them during the height of this practice when an endless stream of PR people with clients in tow stacked-up to get their turn updating glassy-eyed reporters.

 

Hits & clips – counting clips (printed editorial coverage) and putting undue weight on offline publicity to measure PR success should have died two decades ago. Ask Katie Paine, one of the leaders in communications measurement. She says “hit” stands for How Idiots Track Success.

Press kits, brochures & collateral – in this era of sustainability and green, it’s hard to believe companies are still printing, but some are. Remember the days when major trade show/conference press rooms would be filled with press kits? This practice has largely stopped; it’s a digital world, let’s stop killing trees.

 

Press releases – the function of the news release has shifted so dramatically that in most instances they’re written and issued to primarily serve other stakeholders (customers, investors, prospects, etc.), not the press. The term “press release” is still (marginally) more prevalent than “news release,” (139 million vs. 104 million per Google) but call ‘em by the latter. It’s a more accurate, current and legitimate term.

 

Pitch – this term bugs me more than any other tired/fading/dead PR word because it epitomizes the old-world model of one-way communications. We have two-way conversations, we listen, we seek-out opinions, we build relationships and we tell stories. We shouldn’t “pitch.”

 

Users – this term has been around in the world of tech for decades; “users” referring to people who “use” products. For bizarro reasons I could never fathom, they aren’t called customers or consumers. Time to bury this one.

 

Big bang announcements – there was a time when PR practitioners would communicate with reporters well in advance of actual news being issued. Two or three months before the news broke, corporate spokespersons would inform industry analysts and “long lead time” magazines. Then they’d pre-brief the bi-weeklies, then the weeklies, then the dailies. This is a breathless concept. Blogs break news before most offline news outlets are even aware of it. Other social media (Twitter especially) inform in true real time.

 

Publicity – I’ve never liked this word in the context of defining public relations practice. Are we trying to build trusted reputations and create belief? Or, are we simply trying to get attention (Balloon Boy!)? True public relations is not publicity.

 

Embargos & lead time – PR practitioners used to negotiate up-front agreements with reporters not to run pre-fed news stories until the official date/time of the announcement. Hardly anyone wants to be tied to this practice; it’s still around but is fading fast.

 

Here’s what you need to know to effectively persuade:

 
“Corporate Communications and/or Legal (on the customer side) shuts us down every time.”
 
 “Our customers consider their use of our product a proprietary advantage and don’t want to talk about it publicly.”
 
“We have a handful of customers and zero leverage at this stage getting them to be references.”
 
“They like us, but can’t endorse us.”
 
“Only a finite group are referenceable and they’ve been leveraged heavily by many different groups within our company, especially sales. PR isn’t often at the top of the list.”
  
While there certainly are instances where a given customer can’t be a reference, case closed, there are many proven techniques to engage others:  
 
Think micro, not macro – The highest impact customer references are strategically targeted and proactively nurtured. They’re not random “dialing for dollars” occurrences. Analyze your customer base to target particular customers who provide a ‘great fit’ advantage for you, and them. Sort your customers by reference objective. Then go after them individually in a thoughtful way.
 
Leverage C-Level execs – Don’t approach critical potential customer references with junior people. Instead, elevate this outreach to the highest levels of your company. Engage your CEO, Chairman, Board members, CMO and strategic members of your PR firm to explore referenceability. Leverage any personal relationships that exist. This shifts conversational impact to a much higher – and more successful - level.