Interpreting Gladwell: Why the revolution will be tweeted

Posted At : October 18, 2010 11:40 AM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: Social Media,Commentary

Malcolm Gladwell’s piece in The New Yorker stirred a reaction.

“Small change – why the revolution will not be tweeted” draws a clear distinction between weak-tie activism and strong-tie activism. The former is aligned with social media, the latter with “critical friends” and hierarchical organizational structures. He cites the American civil rights movement and Al Qaeda (before it became a loosely bound “network”) as two examples of strong-tie activism.

True activism, Gladwell says, embodies critical elements social media can never deliver: a feverish zealousness that’s “high-risk” where people are motivated to “make a real sacrifice.” By comparison, social media is “low-risk” activism where people get involved “by not asking too much of them.”

Gladwell explains, “The evangelists of social media don’t understand this distinction; they seem to believe that a Facebook friend is the same as a real friend and that signing up for a donor registry in Silicon Valley today is activism in the same sense as sitting at a segregated lunch counter in Greensboro in 1960.”

Some critics have cited his misunderstanding of social media. My reaction was different; I think Gladwell gets it. There is a difference between sacrificial activism and easy activism. It’s an important distinction. What I don’t agree with is minimizing the role social media plays in seeding activism. Unstructured, weak-link-ties can eventually inspire personal commitment and real sacrifice. Angus Johnson makes a case for this in his post.

American Cancer Society’s birthday movement, for example, has gone from zero to 100,000+ Facebook friends in a few months. While the vast majority of people may never become “feverish” activists, they are playing an important role in raising money, getting involved and raising consciousness. Yes, fighting cancer is different from fighting intolerance. But, it’s not an either-or scenario; the two can (and do) co-exist in driving movements forward.

Comments (1) |

Print |

Send | | 1295 Views

The power of the ribbon

Posted At : October 7, 2010 1:44 PM | Posted By : Steve McGrath
Related Categories: Commentary

Today's blog is written by Carrie O'Neil, a senior account executive with Beaupre.

We’ve been thinking a lot about the pink ribbon lately. Like everyone else, we’re seeing it everywhere during this Breast Cancer Awareness month – on T-shirts, yogurt containers, umbrellas, golf clubs, even Monday Night Football. With the pink ribbon marketing machine in motion, however, it’s easy to lose sight of what it really means.

An estimated 192,370 women and 1,910 American men were diagnosed with invasive breast cancer in 2009. It’s the second most common form of cancer in women. Suffice it to say, it claims too many lives.

Although the statistics are harrowing and the marketing effective, the pink ribbon is personal to us. It signifies a beloved person who is suddenly absent from our weekly staff meetings, client check-in calls, and smack-talk sessions where she loyally touts her Buffalo Bills. Her son, in his soccer gear, smiles at us from the Beaupre Buddy Board, but he’s growing so fast we’re due for some new snapshots. When she and her husband dropped in last week between physical therapy and chemo, she inspired us all with her trademark good humor. Go figure: she was making it easy for us.

The pink ribbon has a face this year. Stay strong, Darby. We are with you, and look forward to our walk in your name on Oct. 17.

Comments (0) |

Print |

Send | | 2639 Views

6 reasons why social media didn't kill PR

Posted At : September 30, 2010 2:54 PM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: Social Media,PR,Technology,High tech PR,Media Relations,Public Relations,Commentary

There was steady chatter from 2007 through 2009 about the potential death of PR. Social media - the new game in town – might make PR irrelevant. Companies and organizations could now go direct, building their own conversations, communities and visibility.

Specialized social media experts (who were ahead of the curve in the early days) understandably trumpeted this view, leveraging the opportunity to directly or indirectly de-position PR agencies and professionals. Similarly, some journalists said PR’s traditional media relations centricity was a model for extinction.

In March 2009, “Putting the Public Back in Public Relations” by Brian Solis and Deirdre Breakenridge was published, urging PR practitioners to master the art of listening, build meaningful relationships and leverage emerging social media. They educated and informed but also advocated quick, smart reinvention. They said PR practitioners should be brand/cause enthusiasts, “embedded in the communities shaping the future.” It was a needed call to action … and a wake-up for many.

Like many others, I shared my points of view along the way via blogs like Pitching is passé, What PR isn’t and Tired, faded and dead PR words.

As we enter Q4 2010, the heatedness of this debate has arguably dissipated. It’s interesting how much progress has been made. Six transformations triggered the shift:

1. History repeated itself – remember when the www tornado caught many off guard in the mid-nineties? The communications industry was flat-footed. Web experts sprung to life - including specialized digital agency properties. For a period of time, specialists ruled – as they typically do in moments of change - to fill the knowledge vacuum.

2. Agencies got religion –What occurred with the Web repeated itself with social media. Facing loss of relevance and revenue, many agencies, firms and communications professionals invested the time to question, listen and learn. They got smarter, broadened service offerings, aligned with experts and integrated across disciplines. Priorities and practices were re-shaped.

3. It went from niche to mainstream – as time passed, organizations and companies also became more comfortable with social media. Ideas and initiatives that didn’t work (or make sense) were discarded; promising approaches were encouraged. As corporate and not-for-profit sectors got smarter, they ramped-up their own internal talent. Today, according to a June 2010 research study conducted by Digital Brand Expressions, 78% of companies are now using social media.

4. Walls broke down –As the PR industry shifted from wide-eyed to eagle-eyed and as clients, companies and not-for-profits became more at ease, the early days of social media panic and pointing largely dissipated. Former adversaries let down their guards and began cooperating. This year, one of the first books on the subject “The New Rules of Marketing & PR” by David Meerman Scott was re-issued as a second edition, illustrating social media’s continuing maturation.

5. Opportunity begat revenue – As social media transformed from emerging to embedded – and as knowledge increased - the revenue followed. An August 2010 Advertising Age article reported how social media is helping the public relations sector not just survive, but thrive.

6. True public relations practices remained strong –the people who sounded the PR death knell were largely equating public relations with media relations. In that narrow zone, they were right. Traditional, one-way publicity is an old model that’s no longer relevant in an age of social-media-driven two-way conversations, communities and grassroots empowerment.

But true public relations practice isn’t publicity. It’s much broader, taking into account every stakeholder (or “public”) with which an organization interacts:

Strategically practiced, PR takes on a wide-ranging role, focused on earning a trusted reputation by acting in the best interests of these publics – not the organization’s own myopic agenda.

Social media is the latest expression of relationship building (a two-way model that’s far more inclusive and participative); other exciting new iterations will follow. Solis and Breakenridge were right, we’re the industry in the best position to “put the public back in public relations” and keep it there by never staying put.

Comments (4) |

Print |

Send | | 3991 Views

The 6 mistakes companies make trying to differentiate

Posted At : September 16, 2010 3:39 PM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: Branding,Strategy,PR,Public Relations,Commentary

There aren’t many B2B companies that wouldn’t be delighted with a more differentiated brand position.

In an era where markets and technologies are zippily becoming commodities, the ability to authentically (and persuasively) spotlight a corporate difference remains a salivating need.

Why is standing out so difficult? Putting aside (major) issues like inferior products or insufficient market demand, most companies repeat the same common mistakes:

They look inward, not outward – Differentiation isn’t about “making up” your company’s difference, it’s finding what objectively, authentically sets it apart. Understand what your customers/consumers want and discover how your product/service fulfills them (or not).
They refuse to focus on one thing – As companies attempt to zero-in on their customer-centric benefits, they compile lists of attributes cutting across multiple vertical industries and product offerings. But they fail to whittle them down to a believable, sustainable advantage. Less is more – standing for one thing creates remembrance.
Their messaging is neutral – Most B2B companies sound remarkably alike. They rely on an impersonal second-person voice; focus mainly on capabilities and product attributes; and share too much detail. What happens? They convey a competent, but neutral, persona.
They aren’t bold - This philosophy of brand neutrality pays homage to the God of Safe. Don’t challenge (Yikes!). Don’t speak colorfully (what if it turns someone off?). Never take risks (lest you offend). Don’t reveal human emotion (we’re a company!) Avoid expressing visually vs. textually (it’s so much work!) Recite facts vs. telling stories (safe!). Always be business-like, never lighthearted (they’ll think we’re not serious!).
They shy away from the competition – This one always surprises me because at the C-level – and in the sales trenches – B2B companies constantly sweat the challenges of competition, winning and losing deals. But instead of acknowledging the existence of competition, most companies shy away, acting like theirs is the only candy in the shop. Facing up to the competition doesn’t mean companies have to name names – they can also successfully communicate differences indirectly.
They don’t prove it – it’s one thing to convey competence; it’s another thing to offer up proof. Getting customers to talk about your company/service in first person language has a profound impact: it makes prospects and customers relate because it’s through their lens, not yours.

Comments (3) |

Print |

Send | | 1710 Views

5 steps to instant celebrity like JetBlue's Steven Slater

Posted At : August 18, 2010 1:42 PM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: Commentary

It’s amazing how social media changed the power game between employees and employers. Case in point: Steven Slater, the JetBlue flight attendant who freaked out on the job.

Let’s recap.

As an employee of a major airline, he lost his cool, made a public, obscenity-laden comment to a cabin full of people, grabbed a couple beers, activated the emergency exit, slid down and ran away on the tarmac. Then he was arrested at a beachfront home in the Rockaways.

Most of us may remember a time when this kind of behavior would have triggered personal humiliation, psychological distress and a “Man, I just screwed myself” inability to ever land a new job.

Not anymore.

Now, thanks to ordinary people having a compounding butterfly-effect voice, characters like Slater are transformed from bad guys to heroes … instantly. One week after Slater’s meltdown, Hollywood publicity man Howard Bragman announced he’s representing him to “sort out the scores of offers that have come through in the past week from media, producers, brands and other interested parties.”

If you want to become a celebrity like Steven Slater, listen up and follow these five perhaps not too tongue- in-cheek rules of the new world media:

Take your frustration public - If you’re fed up and can’t take it anymore, don’t sulk, don’t get depressed … don’t kidnap or shoot. Instead shout to the rafters and make your voice heard using social media. Slater tweeted, Slater Facebooked. Give birth to your own community.
Don’t be afraid to tell it like it is - Be colorful, be bold. Authenticity rules! Slater said, “To the f---ing a-hole who told me to f—k off, it’s been a good 28 years. I’ve had it. That’s it.” Indirectness sucks!
Tie into a grassroots theme - People latched onto Slater because he personified what many feel every day in the workplace: loss of control and power. By losing his cool, he actually restored his reputation and gained new levels of power he never had. Become a modern day folk hero.
Go for the extra flair - Slater could have just grabbed the microphone, shouted his message and waited for the armed guards. But no, he added special touches that helped shape a more memorable persona. He grabbed two beers and maneuvered his own exit, sliding down an inflatable ramp. Do it in style!
Become one with the peacock - After the initial dust settles, don’t let second thoughts enter your head and never regret the action you took. After the incident, Slater didn’t look fed up, angry or berserk, he looked, well, mildly freaky, but content. So flash your colors and embrace your inner peacock!

Comments (1) |

Print |

Send | | 2061 Views

Rules to tweet by

Posted At : August 13, 2010 2:42 PM | Posted By : Steve Hodgdon
Related Categories: Social Media,Commentary

One of the best and worst things about social media is that anyone can make up the rules, i.e. the conventions, protocols and etiquette by which we collectively conduct ourselves. For instance, someone once made up a rule that PR people shouldn’t blog on behalf of clients. Like sheep, we all nodded and went along for a while murmuring slogans like “Must be authentic.” Someone else finally questioned “Why?” Debate ensued, logic prevailed, and blogging services (with the proper disclosure) have become a standard PR offering these days.

Social media norms tend to be self-regulating. We now all agree that censoring blog comments is bad (except for trolls and incendiary words). Writing in upper-case sentences = SHOUTING = impolite. And our Farmville-playing Facebook friends got the hint and stopped annoying us with their barnyard updates.

Twitter, on the other hand, remains largely un-self-regulated. Despite the wealth of tools available for filtering and finding good information, Twitter’s poor noise-to-signal ratio remains the #1 obstacle to adoption cited by our clients. So in the spirit of self-regulation, I want to direct you to Mathew Inman’s witty 10 things you need to stop tweeting about from the popular The Oatmeal site, even though it may suck 80% of the oxygen out of the Twittersphere if the rules are embraced.

Link

Comments (0) |

Print |

Send | | 1255 Views

A million miles in 288 pages; how to get unstuck by living better stories

Posted At : August 3, 2010 1:59 PM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: Commentary,Writing

We hear so much about “storytelling” these days, especially in the context of PR, communications and branding.

In Donald Miller’s A Million Miles in a Thousand Years, the essence of “story” is central.

Miller is trying to get to a new place on a personal level, but he’s stuck. His breakthrough happens when he attends a famous 36-hour seminar called “Story,” taught by Robert McKee.

He learns that story “is a character who wants something and overcomes conflict to get it.”

While living better stories is the essence of character transformation, the conflict part is key. Without FUD (fear, uncertainty and doubt), memorable stories don’t unfold and personal progress is stymied.

For the first third of the read, it felt like a book about Miller’s personal journey. But then something happens, and it unexpectedly transforms into a story about me – my journey. I suspect the same thing may happen to you.

Instead of allowing life to unfold upon us in a haphazard way, Miller helps us discover (unassumingly and humorously, through the lens of his own experiences) how we can grab hold of our lives by shaping memorable scenes. These pivotal, scary, sometimes risky self-created life events blast us through personal roadblocks and psychologically get us to the new outcomes we desperately seek.

Miller learns that while planning is important, the magic isn’t in passively pondering – but in doing. “We have to show it,” Miller says. “A character is what he does.”

Miller discovered that once you experience a memorable scene, you get hooked and want more.

“You’ll get a taste for one story and then want another, and then another, and the stories will build until you’re living a kind of epic of risk and reward, and the whole thing will be molding you into the actual character whose roles you’ve been playing. And once you live a good story, you get a taste for a kind of meaning in life, and you can’t go back to being normal; you can’t go back to meaningless scenes stitched together by the forgettable thread of wasted time.”

A Million Miles in a Thousand Years invites us to live better stories. The cool part is we learn how to do it without the typical “10-step” sort of dogma. It’s a beguiling combination that nudges itself within your soul.

Thanks, Chris Brogan, for turning me onto it.

Comments (0) |

Print |

Send | | 2270 Views

Apple's sour grapes bruises a stellar brand

Posted At : July 19, 2010 3:23 PM | Posted By : Mike McGrail
Related Categories: Crisis Management,PR,Social Media,Media Relations,Public Relations,Commentary,News

Even the ultra-cool sometimes just don’t get it.

After a few haughty responses earlier in the week to complaints about its iPhone 4 dropping calls, Apple made a smart move and offered free cases iPhone 4 consumers. The cases will prevent the “death grip” problem that cause the phone’s reception to fade and sometimes drop calls if held a certain way.

But Apple CEO Steve Jobs apparently just couldn’t just hand out the cases and live to fight another day. Standing on a dais in front of an image that said “Antennagate,” he had to show a video illustrating problems with competing phones like the Blackberry. Then he insisted there’s nothing really wrong with the iPhone 4 – that the situation is a media creation.

“We're not feeling right now that we have a giant problem we need to fix,” Jobs said during a press conference at Apple’s Cupertino, Calif. headquarters. “This has been blown so out of proportion that it’s incredible. I know it’s fun to have a story, but it’s less fun when you're on the other end of it.”

Has Jobs grown too accustomed to the rainbows and unicorns he usually gets from the media? I have to wonder if his PR people warned him he’d look like a whiner if he complained about the press because that’s how he came off – defensive. The media did not, as Jobs intimated, create this problem. Apple’s arrogant response to customer complaints did. When customers got the high hat from Apple, they started complaining publicly through social media and the news media picked up on the story.

When are executives going to learn a little humility and contrition go a long way in situations like this? You’d think that coming so soon on the heels of Toyota’s and BP’s PR Armageddons that Apple, normally a PR-savvy company, would have had a response as slick as its products. Considering the vast reservoirs of customer good will it has to draw on, Apple could have snuffed this out before it became a problem. It might have had to eat a little crow by admitting its hot-shot phone had a flaw, but at least it wouldn’t be getting bludgeoned in the press at the same time.

Comments (0) |

Print |

Send | | 1665 Views

Dirty little secret revealed: Sean Penn was right; the media did drop the ball on Haiti

Posted At : July 13, 2010 3:08 PM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: Commentary

It’s been six months since the 7.0 earthquake struck Haiti, killing more than 230,000 people and leaving 1.5 million homeless. There are still few jobs to be had and no permanent shelter. Only two percent of promised reconstruction aid has been released. And according to a report issued this week by the US Center for Strategic and International Studies, only nine percent of pledges by governments (about $50 million) has actually been delivered.

Sean Penn has been a vocal activist for Haiti since the quake, remaining in the country with his daughter to help over the past six months. He brought up an interesting point yesterday in speaking with Harry Smith of CBS News’ Early Show: "I think that the media has played an enormous part in the failures that are still going on today and the recovery here and the relief operations."

Smith then said: "People would be curious why you went in the first place. And then, why you stayed. What's the best answer for that?" Penn answered: "...if they're wondering that, then that would be an indictment of the American and the international press that came here in the immediate aftermath of this devastating earthquake."

Penn elaborated: "The United States sent its military, that did an extraordinary job in immediate relief....And then when they went on with other deployments, when the amputations en masse stopped, the media left."

I ran a Factiva search to prove or disprove Penn’s theory. If you’re not familiar with Factiva, it’s an advanced search tool from Dow Jones that enables you to analyze media coverage. Factiva’s database includes more than 28,000+ leading media sources from 157 countries in 23 languages, including regional and industry publications, Web and blog content.

Using Google, I found the two most popular (and relevant) search topics:

1. Haiti earthquake

2. Haiti news

Using these key words, Factiva revealed the following levels of media coverage over the six-month period:

While Factiva isn’t a be-all-end-all and doesn’t include every publication or blog in the world, it’s comprehensive.

This data suggests Sean Penn may be onto something.

Comments (0) |

Print |

Send | | 1798 Views

7 reasons why "pitch" & "pitching" need to go bye-bye

Posted At : July 13, 2010 9:19 AM | Posted By : Andy Beaupre
Related Categories: PR,Media Relations,Commentary

“Pitch” and “pitching” aren’t going away … but they should. They’re so frequently used in agencies, corporations, not-for-profits and organizations they appear current, reasonable and viable. But they’re not. They should be retired immediately.

Historic usage, prevalence and pithiness shouldn’t supersede relevance or appropriateness. If it did, words like: colored, going steady, secretary, sissy, stewardess and mental would still be in wide circulation today.

Here are seven reasons why we should drop the pitch:

1. It's a dated form of PR – media relations used to be one-way. We’d craft our “pitches” and try to sell them to busy reporters. Please Walt Mossberg, notice me, listen to what I have to say, and I hope (and pray) you write something. Those days are increasingly over. The world of top-down media dominance has been replaced with a never ending grassroots conversation that’s lively, engaging, empowering and direct to consumer/customer.

2. It de-positions the PR industry – most of us have worked hard adapting to - and adopting – many historic communications transformations. We’re not there yet… (may never be), but we’re in a better place. We’re taking the PR industry to a new position where authenticity and transparency shape our practice – not hype and selling. I don’t know about you, but I don’t want to go back.

3. It damages our reputation – pitch and pitching sound old-school – pre-social media, pre-community – and they are. When we say these words, they immediately date us, forcing astute listeners to categorize us as “hit and clip,” “press kit” era PR dinosaurs.

4. It’s one-way – pitching epitomizes the old-world model of one way communications. Shut up and listen, I've got something to say. I'm the pitcher, here's the pitch … I'll wait and see if you catch what I've got to say … or not. Yes, the great “pitchers” of the past weren’t this crass … they’d initiate a conversation. But lots of people continue to push out their packaged ideas via Twitter, e-mail, Facebook, etc., never inviting or urging a conversation.

5. It’s arrogant – I don’t like it when a car salesman makes assumptions about me when we’ve never met. I don’t like it when a telemarketer reaches me at home to sell me something I’m not interested in. I don’t like it when people try to convince me to support an idea I’m not familiar with or don’t believe in. Pitching has all these attributes, and more.

6. It’s a turn-off – this approach helped give PR a negative reputation, a perception often shaped by aggressive, fake, single-minded people trying to get their way vs. earning respect and building rapport.

7. It doesn’t work – instead of pitching, let’s enter a two-way conversation, tell a story, listen, learn, invest time and treat people the way we like to be treated. We may not always get where we want to go, but we’ll build genuine relationships that have more lasting value.

Comments (0) |

Print |

Send | | 1464 Views

More Entries