Charlie Lost His Sheen?

It's disheartening, in the year 2009, to still see the abuse of women tolerated. Sure it makes headlines - we just shake our heads then move on to the next story.

Last month it was Good Guy Tiger Woods' emotional abuse of his wife, and this week its Bad Boy Charlie Sheen at it again with the physical stuff.

When CNN correspondent Jo Piazza asked for my PR take on the damage to Sheen's career, I had to say that there really would be little or no repercussion. He's done it before - and if anything the public probably expects it (unlike the Woods expose which took most of us by surprise. I, for one, blogged my heart out over it.)

So. Has Charlie's career lost its sheen? Nope. We actually got what we expected. No charges, no jail time, no endorsement contracts cancelled - carry on Charlie.
Click here to read the CNN piece.

Let's Stuff ROI Rogers

I read an article in Forbes last week about a topic that makes me both cringe and laugh. It's about the nonsensical marketing jargon that has infiltrated our business communications and lexicon, and just how ineffective and ridiculous educated professionals sound when they fall prey to this lingo.

If you've ever sat through a meeting listening to the speaker rattle on about increasing ROI by thinking outside of box in order to take it to the next level - and how we can use our learning to create a synergy that will propel the paradigm shift needed to keep the next generation of thought leaders engaged....oh for goodness sake. Enough with the smoke and mirrors already!

A sound and direct command of language that communicates to an entire audience, not just the “initiated few” is the message that travels the farthest and has the greatest effect. (Not affect.) So cut the BS right now!

As speaking of BS, my agency updated a fun little game be used as entertainment at your next power pow-wow. We call it "Bull**** Bingo!" Click here to download it. Print it out and share it with like-minded colleagues. It's guaranteed to bring smirks and giggles.

A Must Read from Media Post: 10 Things Changing Marketing In 2010

Read Joe Marchese's list of 10 of the hot issues facing marketers in 2010! (Well 9 really, as he's looking for input from readers for #10.)

Yes folks...mobile and social media are here to stay! Also, check out his post from last week on "Why Mobile In 2010."

Happy Holidays to all and cheers to a peaceful, profitable 2010.

This Season's Spectacle: British Airways vs.The Grinch

The Winner?
Great move Branson, what a PR boon! And what a windfall. Not only will Virgin gain the public's favour this season over arch enemy British Airways by booking larger planes to accommodate those stranded BA passengers over the 12 days of Christmas, they'll also make fistfuls of cash as icing on the cake. Deck the halls with cash and jolly indeed!

The Loser?
Poor BA. What a nightmare for both the airline and its customers. As if travel isn’t hard enough work to begin with, but leaving passengers stranded over the holidays when stress levels are already on high, is an all-out PR nightmare for British Airways.

Unite, the union involved in the going-on-strike/Christmas-travel-blackmail-scheme has unleashed this fiasco over an issue that UK courts were already preparing to resolve in February 2010. Why now? Because it wants to show its sharp, nasty teeth.

Of course, unions were created to protect workers, but in taking action like this, how are they acting in the best interest of the employees if, in the process, they make proverbial mincemeat of the brand that provides the jobs? How about thinking about the long term consequences of your actions, Unite?

How about a reality check?

A BA long-haul crew member states “There is nothing that breaks my heart more than us going on strike and affecting thousands, if not millions, of people’s lives. But I am fighting for my future. I don’t understand how I can work for a company for 14 years, and yet I am earning less now than I was five years ago.”
Welcome to the rest of the world, chump. We don’t live in the glory days of 2004 anymore. The years of excess are gone. Welcome to an era of lean, FOR EVERYONE. Worker strikes are the ultimate act of selfishness and greed.

It's especially sad because over the years BA has earned a terrific reputation, and in an industry much maligned throughout this recession. Statistically, if complaints are handled properly, studies show that the majority of loyal airline customers will not defect. This strike, however creates as much an obstacle for BA as it does as an emotional roller-coaster ride for its passengers – making it home for the holidays.

Still, amidst the airline industry’s struggle to survive, BA has continued to invest in marketing and consumer enagement to protect its brand. Earlier this year, the airline developed and launched two social media initiatives to make the brand appear more up to date and exciting and to create a network of bloggers and online communities around the globe. They have been proactive in protecting their brand and this could very well increase the chance that the strike could have the opposite effect that the union and employees were counting on. Of course, they're hoping the public will be vexed with BA, but at a time when everyone is pulling in their belt straps to keep afloat (or in the air!), striking employees who are making peoples’ lives miserable are seen as being ungrateful and greedy buggers - the grinches stealing Christmas. Ironically, consumers will end up hating BA staff, not the airline. Maggie Thatcher’s reign springs to mind.

We all know that businesses are reducing costs in order survive. By trimming operating costs, airlines can keep their fare prices lower; this is a win-win for passengers and the airlines. Striking workers is not.

At the end of day, everyone loves an underdog. If BA's efforts (short of giving in to terrorists, so to speak) are seen as fair and if they are working with disgruntled passengers, managing their communications in a very clear, honest and transparent manner, the toll to BA’s brand mightn’t be so bad after all.

In the meantime, good luck with making it home for the holidays and no holiday wishes for any striking crews. That is just bad news, at any time of year!

Three BIG cheers to Shiv Singh, of Razorfish and blogger behind Going Social Now for seeing the big picture! As smartphones make their way into every pocket (and palm) on the planet, mobile marketing and advertising is perched to offer brands an immense level of inter-connectivity - more than anyone could have imagined!

Social media is absolutely working to the benefit of [mobile] marketing and "using customers to create customers," to quote Singh. Smartphones, however, will have a reach far beyond that of Twitter or Facebook, so get ready.

Of course, there's still a huge learning curve as brands and businesses hone their strategies and messages for this medium. Time is a precious commodity and to keep people engaged and opting in, offers have to be desirable and more importantly, relevant, or people will simply tune out.

Those who still dismiss mobile as a marketing fad, do so at their peril. Mobile is here to stay. Ask anyone (who's anyone.)

Click here to read Mary Ellen Slayter's interview with Shiv Singh.

#Number 49, The Week That Was

First up, Maureen Dowd needs to stop bashing everyone in the administration. Ok, now onto the week that was…

Materialists rejoice, frugalists it’s time to move aside.
You have a mission – to save our economy! Who cares if you’re in debt or your house is in foreclosure. Bah humbug! You have a higher calling folks – the nation’s retailers and industries are counting on you. The era of thrift and a return to values, whatever that means, didn’t last so long, did it? That’s according to the WSJ camp. The folks over at NYT think otherwise…

And while I don’t fancy reliving any scenes from The Gangs of New York, a trip to Manhattan's Lower East Side Tenement Museum offers a lesson on the difference between what we want and what we need - and how good most of us still have it!

Italy’s Sleazminister gets smacked in the face.
I’m wondering why it took so long? In a country rife with corruption, double standards and philandering as an encouraged marital practice, someone finally had enough of Berlusconi's misdeeds and punched his lights out. While I’d never encourage or incite a violent act, Italy’s Primeminister has kept the country in a twilight zone and made it a laughing stock of the Euro zone. Time to find another punching bag perhaps?

A case of Tigeritis
Two weeks on and we’re still writing about Tiger. Poor old Tiger. Sleazy old Tiger. He’s not a superhero: he’s human, like anyone else. The illusion he created has been shattered, and like the most virtuous girl in school who does something very nasty/lascivious on Prom Night, rebuilding the brand might almost be impossible. So why not let him bow out gracefully and get his act together – Act II, Scene I – Tiger Makes a Comeback as Golf School Instructor, or something like that. Leave the poor guy alone. In fact, if the media and the peanut gallery put that much effort into the unfaithful acts of Mark Sanford and Co, they’d probably be no Republicans left to fight the health care bills in Congress. Except Joe, but no one wants him anyway.

Waists may turn to blubber, but what about your brain?
David Rock warns of the neurological effect social media excess can have on our brains. Too much affects the area of the brain that governs impulse control - the same area affected by compulsive eating. Sadly, social media nor junk food provides the nourishment we need to maintain our health, let alone flourish. Despite the incessant flow information that we think we need, the constant interruption caused by social media is creating so many distractions that train the brain to operate at a substandard level. The result? Our brains our turning to mush…We're reading less and what we do read doesn't promote a deeper knowledge - the kind that instigates debate, reflection or critical thought. Yep, “garbage in, garbage out."

Celluloid Rules: When 3D Rocked London
Hollywood thrives in harsh economic times. We count on a flick as an attainable escape from our daily struggles. Right now, the 3D craze is giving consumers reason to turn off the DVD player and go back to the cinema. Ten years in the making and costing a whopping $425m to create, Avatar, the first big-budget live-action release to be shot in 3D opened in London this week - and the rest of the planet is buzzing in anticipation. What's next!? Tim Burton doing a 3D Alice in Wonderland? Oh...he is actually. See you at the movies!

Free is way too expensive

“Quality content is not free. In the future, good journalism will depend on the ability of a news organization to attract customers by providing news and information they are willing to pay for.”

Three cheers for Mr. Hinton, chief exec of Dow Jones. I couldn’t have said it better myself.

It really is time to get our heads around the idea of paying for online news content (the good stuff, that is). Digital content is where it’s at, but just because we aren’t paying for it doesn’t mean it’s free.

All the online news orgs have been trying to support themselves with advertising, but it’s not enough. Giving away good content is not a good business model - freeconomics just won’t work in the long term.

Smaller news organizations fear charging the right price could be their demise, but if they have something unique or of value to offer, why the heck not?

In Brett Arend's MarketWatch commentary this week, he highlights Talking Points Memo (TPM), a liberal online news source that is turning a profit, paying above average salaries and expects to triple in size by 2012. How are they doing it? By catering to a very specific niche market. They employ a focused journalistic staff of 7. They know who their audience is and what they come online looking for.

This demonstrates that the public IS willing to pay for quality content and news, and contradicts the popular thinking of free as a business model.

The current model has to change and there are many reasons why online news could become profitable and could actually raise the quality of the content. The internet eliminates costs like paper and printing and distribution services, and if realistically priced online subscriptions combined with a lean staff of experienced journalists providing great content, then why should news agencies not turn a profit? How could they not?

I’ve been banging this drum for years now. The internet began as a renegade information source, but things have changed. If news services don’t start charging – and realistic subscription fees thank you very much – for genuine journalism, not only will more newsrooms be reduced to tumbleweed rows, but the content we read will simply erode to tabloid fodder provided by people unqualified to deliver content worth reading.

And that’s not news, even if it’s free.

Unpredictions For 2010/Beyond the Press Release

This is part of a series of unpredictions I've written -- this one being closest to my heart, an anti-forecast for the PR industry. In a nutshell, I am optimistic about what 2010 holds for us in PR. I have to be. I believe the industry is well-positioned to take great strides over the coming year. Operating from a frugal mindset, more businesses are definitely favoring the value and effectiveness of PR over high-investment strategies like, um, advertising. And as the recovery takes hold and government continues to incentivize small business creation, I also see a lot of startups turning to PR to help with market development, branding and visibility. This is a good thing.

Most agencies -- size notwithstanding -- have taken a battering this year, being challenged to do a whole lot more with a whole lot less. Going forward, I see the leaders in PR as those who distinguish themselves in this highly competitive environment by going the extra mile for clients. And in an era of doing more with less, this will be as much a survival strategy as a competitive edge in 2010.

But enough of the serious stuff. Click here my unpredictions for 2010, and if any come to fruition, you'll have to blame my crystal ball!

#Number Forty Eight, The Week That Was

And what a fantabulous week it was, full of meaty goodness for the tabloids. Tiger seriously maimed his brand, a preggers lady pops one out on the plane, and the Italians almost lynched young murderess, Amanda Knox. Oh, Afghanistan will be the proud caretaker of 30,000 more US troops and consumers are finally spending a little bit more. Three cheers for consumerism!

Other news you could have used…

Newspapers
German publisher Springer wants to save the newspapers by, wait for it, charging for content. How original$#@*& But while there’s nothing new in that kind of wishful thinking, I wholeheartedly support Springer’s MO – charging for quality content and getting rid of the meta-philosophy of free. I’ve been harping on about this since 2005 – why didn’t anyone listen? Eric Pfanner writes in his article for the New York Times “Publisher Lays Out Plan to Save Newspapers” that Springer wants to create a “one-click marketplace solution” for online content, so that instead of separate pay walls around individual newspaper Web sites, publishers and Internet companies can work together. Can you see this happening, honestly?

And more about newspapers, checkbook bias
Blurring the very distinct lines between editorial content and advertising has been pooh-poohed for a very long time. But a bunch of ad guys in Dallas have decided to take over some newsrooms, because apparently some editors are ready to bend over and take it. think it’s okay to blend sales with editorial. Because of course the sales managers would never, ever get in the way of news coverage. Never. Of course not. We know that papers need to sell ads to stay in business, and I’d be the biggest hypocrite if I said otherwise (see above). But sales execs have absolutely no place in determining editorial coverage or what gets placed on those pages. Once they take over control of “messaging” in news, our trust of media is totally doomed. Millions of people have been up in arms about media bias over the past few months and the WH/MSNBC vs. Fox-Off, and this brings it to a whole new level: checkbook bias. It also smells of a massive ethics conflict just waiting to happen. Sadly, the winner will be the one with the biggest checkbook, not the moral one. I know that newspapers are trying out all types of different new business models, but they should totally trash this one. I work with newsrooms all around the country and if I have to starting ponying up to receive “unbiased” coverage for my clients, the PR agency model is so, so dead.

About the large and airplanes
I know I’ll be accused of being a fatist for the following post, but I’m definitely not. I used to be 65 pounds heavier, so I know what it feels like to be categorized as fat. But these days, when I stroll up to the check-in counter with just 5lbs of extra luggage and get walloped with a $100 surcharge, I take absolutely no issue with that airline charging an additional surcharge or fare for an extremely overweight person. A recent story circulated from FlightGlobal.com onto MSNBC and the Huffington Post with pictures of a man taking up half an aisle, a seat and then some. Airlines charge for extra luggage because it reduces the carrying capacity on the plane. There is a maximum weight (load) that any plane can carry and that’s why there’s a personal allowance. Someone who boards a plane and who’s used up 15 peoples’ personal allowance, not to mention spreading over to the next seat, needs to pay for their “extra share”. The only difference between that person’s extra luggage and mine, is that mine has to be checked. It’s not discriminatory: if you travel with a pet, you pay extra. If you travel with a child, you pay extra. If you travel with an extra 100lb belly, you pay extra. Conversation over, next!

Dead man rocking
At first I laughed and then when I read the story, I cried. A 33 year-old man had be cut out of his recliner after spending 8 months in it. It’s a sorry state when you’ve allowed yourself to get to a point when you cannot move or get up from a chair. 550lbs? No one needs to resign themselves to being that heavy. I feel guilty if I sit on my behind for more than 5 hrs at a stretch (13 is my record, I had a lot of proposals to knock out). And it’s just as sad when your partner watches idly and does nothing to intervene. But what’s really sad is that the healthcare system is simply not there for people like the Webbs. Live in a mobile home in a low-income community and have no health insurance. It’s not a pretty picture to be sure, but it made me cry nonetheless. I’m just wondering if the recliner was a La-Z-Boy?

Porn, porn wherever you are
Love porn? There’s a new app for that. Called MiKandi, Mobile Marketing Watch reports that the world’s first adult-only app store was recently launched for Android devices, but not the iPhone. I wonder what Apple’s afraid of? In the porn-only store, users can search a range of free and paid applications, post reviews and join discussions – all in the privacy of the bus, train or office cubicle. In a long meeting full of boring PowerPoints, MiKandi now comes to the rescue. Mobile phone come out, come out wherever you are.

Putting Tiger’s tangles to rest
Tiger Woods to media: I don't need you bums. Thank you Tiger, we’re all ready to move on the next philanderer now. What’s the chances of it being a women? Anyone?

Here’s to another great week everyone!

Vanessa

Happy Holidays from the Woods

Now that the police have closed their books and we've carved the tender meat off of the Tiger Woods scandal (because the celebrity media food mill will certainly be churning out spicy sausages of gossip for some time), it's time to think about how the great Golfer can begin to revamp his image. He has no shortage of examples to follow, as there's no shortage of famous philanderers trying to walk back a similarly public walk of shame (as it were). But finding the right fidelity-challenged celeb for Tiger to emulate is a difficult task.

The best thing would have been to get out in front of the story immediately, to exert whatever small measure of control over the news cycle he could from the start. Instead, he stonewalled and by doing so let the TMZs and National Enquirers (and restaurant hostesses) fill the public's appetite for idol destruction.

His headscratching and evasive online posts conjured up images of our First Philanderer, but if his image rehab goes as well as former President Clinton's did, he'll be fortunate. Of course, Tiger faces a different set of PR challenges; he's not going to be term-limited out of the PGA tour in two years, and somehow I doubt he'll be doing penance on the senate seat campaign trail anytime soon. Nevertheless, Clinton's later confessions and heartfelt apologies, coupled with an American public weary of the scandal, helped set the stage for his transformation into a well-respected philanthropist, and that should be probably be the first step in Tiger's image recovery.

Trouble with Tiger is that his on-course intensity bleeds into his public persona. He seems like a friendly guy, but not so warm and fuzzy as to invite compassion. He's built a massive brand machine on the precision with which he approaches his sport, and he comes off like that- mechanized with determination of steel. Engineered. So neither a tearful apology nor a Hugh-Grant-esque laughing shrug-off would work, and a flat, almost angry Kanye-style confessional would only further damage his sponsorship obligations.

Nope, what Tiger has to do is be honest and heartfelt. He should try to make amends with his wife and pursue some charitable effort on behalf of at-risk women. And he doesn't have to throw himself to the wolves, but he must accept the responsibilities of his celebrity status and take the healing process public.

Perhaps the best example for Tiger to follow is David Letterman. They hold similar positions in their chosen fields, they both are household names, they both cherish their privacy. Dave was well out in front of his scandal a few months ago, and now it seems to have all but disappeared from the headlines. His show actually enjoyed higher ratings during his confession period. By confronting it head on, with composure and sincerity, he managed to turn what could have been a career-threatening gaffe into at least a not-negative situation.

People cheat. People crash cars. Tiger isn't the first golfer to do it, and he won't be the last. But to heal his considerable brand image, he has to start talking about it, and very soon.

Let the healing begin!

9 unpredictions: What's not going to happen with mobile in 2010

Instead of producing an annual predictions list that many analysts and forecasters will be doing from now through the end of January, I am producing a series of "What's not going to happen in 2010" forecasts.

As the precursor to predictions, I have become weary of the retrospective look back at a year to think about what did not happen. A year riddled with missed targets and dashed expectations. And particularly this year, a year that was almost destined for failure – if we were to believe the 2009 predictions – before it even began.

To be sure, the mobile industry had an interesting 2009.

And true to form, many of the developments that came to characterize this year in mobile went unmentioned by prognosticators in 2008. In an industry so defined by technological advances, perhaps explicit forecasting is outmoded altogether? Now there’s an ironic concept.

But while I am reverse engineering the process of predictions here please remember that, as with any form of prophesying, I could be wrong. So click here to read my “unpredictions" specific to the mobile space for 2010, in the form of headlines I do not think we are not going to see.

Tigers Tangles

I’m a little late to the party on Tiger Woods tangle, but now that the news cycle has moved onto something new, I’d like to dissect what happened from a PR perspective instead of a moral one.

It’s difficult to find anyone who considers this week’s “event” (tabloidapolooza and all) a publicity high for Tiger. The old saw about there being no such thing as bad publicity doesn’t apply to an athlete whose brand image supercedes that of the sport he plays (or even of all sports, his agent might say), so let’s toss that right away.

The fact is, by maintaining a stubborn strategy of silence, Tiger surrendered complete control over his story to the media, and to those who stand to gain (read: “bar executive”). And that’s just bad PR. Worse still is the involvement of legal counsel in advising on a crisis PR strategy. Last time I checked, lawyers were experts in law, not PR.

It’s not my place to pass judgment on Tiger’s behavior, so I won’t. I am sure that by sticking to his attorney’s advice, Tiger may have avoided even greater consequences for himself and his family. But, and that is a very big but, a global celebrity and sports hero of Tiger’s standing cannot let the TMZs and the National Enquirers mold the stories that will ultimately damage his brand. They already have. Tiger’s position as a brand unto himself demands vigilance and protection, but not silence.

His biggest mistake was attempting to cover up and lie. With bloggers and hacks eeking out a on living celebrity sightings and gossip, this strategy is long dead. What he should have done was fess up, first to the people trying to help him and eventually to the public. People like regret and rehab stories. We seem to relish in others acknowledging their sins and repenting their wicked deeds in a very public and humiliating way. Then we can forgive and move on to the next naughty boy who dipped his quill into an inkwell it didn’t belong.

This is the hand Tiger has dealt for himself. In his line of business, it must be played - at all times, in private matters or otherwise - with an eye towards the public’s perception and mitigating negative PR.

Tiger could have significantly reduced negative coverage simply by being out in front of the story. David Letterman did, and turned bad press on its head. Tiger could have fessed up to Golf Magazine of Golf World instead of allowing some "bar executive" sell her story to US Weekly. But he chose to stay quiet and his silence filled the news vacuum. His cryptic online responses to rumors should have been managed better, not by lawyers but by PR professionals.

In PR, we know that silence is not golden. We also know that once you lose control of the story, the game is lost.

This was one of the few losses Tiger’s ever endured, and most likely his biggest one.

Hey, The Press Release Isn’t Dead… Yet

Back in September '09, I wrote a column for MediaPost called "Think You Know PR? Think Again", which ignited a lot of heated dialogue about the value of press releases in today's increasingly digitally-driven media world. It questioned the effectiveness of the press release as PR currency, and I went so far as stating that the press release is dead.

But apparently, it is not. Yet.

As a follow up to my column, Lindsey Miller of the communication professional's bible - Ragan.com - interviewed me about the usefulness of press releases. My comments appeared in a Ragan Communications/Pollstream survey released last week. Miller's article appears here - http://wp.me/pcO2G-8k

What do you think? Is the press release dead?

A Fool and His Money Are Soon Parted

‘Tis the season to be jolly…. and very stupid, apparently.

At a time when 10% of the American population is unemployed and formerly middleclass kids and families are sleeping in cars and homeless shelters, scrambling for their next meal, there’s are whole new world being created that is the antithesis of our value driven society – it’s a nothing for something world where people are forgoing their daily Starbucks fix for, um, nothing.

Virtual gifts, the gifts that do not keep on giving are popping up everywhere, reports the New York Times. For a couple of bucks, daft people are paying online companies to send their loved ones pixilated images of the gifts they choose to send. Not a real gift, just a picture of it. I’m sure it goes something like this:

Abbey, the gift receiver:
“Really Dick, you shouldn’t have gone to sooooooooooooo much trouble on my birthday. The picture of these beautiful black dahlias are so lifelike, really! And I didn’t know dahlias came in black – what a double surprise. I’ll cherish this jpeg for all eternity.”

Dick, the cheapskate:
“Np sweets. You already have so much ****ing crap all over your apartment, I didn’t want to waste my money, I mean your space on something…. um, superficial. This virtual gift transcends our innate desire to have tangible things to show for our hard-earned money. Down with shallow consumerism. Will you sleep with me now?”

Although little money changes hand per transaction and there is no actual product being delivered, the virtual gift giving business is proving to be a very big deal indeed. Lightspeed Venture Partners’ Jerry Liew has invested $10 million in virtual gift giving. The marginal cost for each transaction is zero, so these companies are reaping unheard of profit margins – 100%. More fool us.

In the US this year – a year of widespread economic failures and foreclosures - it’s estimated that $1 billion dollars will have be spent on sweet nothings – and $5 billion worldwide! $5 billion dollars, come on people! How can we whine about the cost of healthcare and bank bailouts when we’re squandering $1billion dollars on absolutely nothing. There is no stimulus or jobs creation going on here, that is for sure.

One rather sad shopper who plays Pet Society on Facebook with her sons used a credit card to buy $20 worth of the game’s currency. She spent it on a “virtual haunted mirror and a potion that helped their pet, Demon Baby, grow bat wings.” She explained that it was cheaper than taking the kids to Target and buying them actual toys. Can anyone tell me what is so dreadfully wrong with this picture? I promise I won’t buy you a day-pass to Playfish if you do.

Maybe it’s me who is wrong? Perhaps this is a godsend for Christmas shoppers who have weathered a disastrous year and genuinely can’t afford to shop at Macy’s or Penney’s for everyone on their list?

On second thoughts, I don’t buy it. Anyone wanting to send a gift to me this year had better make it real – even if it’s a homemade cookie or a collage of embarrassing photos from school days I’d rather forget. To me, that says you’re not a fool and that you really do care, ticket price notwithstanding.

Better still, save your dollars and send them to someone who could truly use them – like those families that have nowhere to live, instead of the VC groups laughing at you all the way to the bank.

Having Your Cake and Eating It, AIG Style

In an ideal world, we get to have our cake and eat it - every last calorie-laden crumb. But in the real world we live in today where business giants have been allowed to gorge on their proverbial cake (read: taxpayer dollars), there comes a price for having it all. AIG, the great American Insurance GIANT that was not allowed to fail, is up in arms about pay czar Kenneth Feinberg’s strict anti-bonus diet.

Poor AIG leaders. Where else can you lose billions of dollars, stick your hand out for $170+ billion and then retreat quietly back to your boardroom in anticipation of your $3 million year-end bonus.

Threatening to quit after just three months at the helm, AIG’s recently appointed chief executive Robert Benmosche backed down and scurried back to AIG’s Ivory Tower. Coward. The FT reports that around a dozen top level executives and business managers have left AIG in the past few months.

If those “executives and business managers” were in involved with the massive scourge that AIG has left behind for American taxpayers to swallow, I sincerely hope that they're working three jobs at minimum wage or digging holes in our roads right now.

And for those who didn’t know it, having your cake and it eating is a fairy tale. Somebody somewhere has to pay the price for someone’s mistake. AIG seems to be learning that the hard way.

Thanks to Francesco Guerrera of the FT for his excellent reporting on AIG.

What Are Words For?

From my column on Marketing Daily's "Beyond The Press Release" 11/11/09

What are words for, when no one listens anymore?" Do you remember that song? It came out during the same era of "Video killed the radio star." Okay, so I'm a child of the late 70s/early '80s, that prehistoric time when TVs had no remotes, when a huge VCR (remember the Betamax?) sat in the Hi-Fi center along with ABBA and Dr. Hook LPs, and a computer was something on which you played Atari Tennis or Pac-man.

Back then, we all learned to write in the same cursive script. At my school, we used a fountain pen with blue-ink cartridges that leaked all over your fingers, a constant reminder of the toils of the written word: Grammar was sacrosanct and there were no distractions in the classroom with iPhones, texts or IMing, only boys and passed notes. Back then, we didn't mess around with language to create new "isms" to suit a campaign or a whole new line of marketing buzzwords that would eventually be so passé, they became offensive.

It was a simple time, I admit, but we communicated with clarity. Real words, devoid of BS and convoluted meanings. We didn't have to create a paradigm shift to evangelize the next generation of social media influencers who would start deploying SMM platforms to strategically position thought leaders to take it to the next level. We didn't need to apply a holistic approach to Web 2.0 enhancements that would enable enablers to join the conversation and engage their audience by retweeting and Digging. We didn't even need to realign ourselves with a new media landscape to garner attention, augment a comprehensive results-oriented process that would deliver stellar ROI and increased awareness on a sentiment index to measure positive feelings out there in the blogosphere.

Nope, back then we didn't have to worry about using forward-thinking, innovative, disruptive technological advancements to deliver increased brand affinity and build synergistic partnerships that would transcend the status quo and bring about a sea change in performance-driven, cutting-edge, high-impact, integrated solutions with location-aware abilities to deliver best-in-class results. And we never once worried about the power of integrating scalable platforms to stimulate online conversations led by social media disciples who were eternally cautious practitioners of pre-populating devices and dashboards to solidify infrastructural advancements that would engender loyalty and strategic alliances.

We didn't even have to think outside the box to break through the clutter.

Know what I mean?

What I actually mean is that we're losing the meaning of our words. From the sublime to the ridiculous, truly. Our parlance is being reduced to symbols, acronyms and a series of hyphenated verbs-come-adjectives, as more people forget the communications basics: Say what you mean with clarity, brevity and intelligence. Instead, we've worked ourselves into a frenzied mash-up and indeed breakdown of "impressive" words.

Dumb, Dumber and Dumbest?

At the heart of every sales pitch, press release or marketing campaign is a message, one that is supposed to communicate an inherent and useful value for a product or service. For many, this act of communicating now requires oral gimmickry or just plain stupidness. Shame on us. It's taken thousands of years to create such a complex linguistic machine, and less than 30 to kill it.

It's not just English, or Americanese, however. The Real Academia Española is also facing challenges as the Spanish language adapts itself to absorb global language trends and cultural changes.

I agree that verbose writing is just as much of a turnoff in any language, but in our quest to sound more clevererer, bang out more messages faster, tweet and Facebook ourselves to oblivion, and send out communiqué littered with grandiose-sounding words, we've both devalued our language and the meaning of the words we use. And become a lot more brainless in the process. When we've reduced any number of words to WTF, OMG and LMFAO, which have entered a multi-generational lexicon and are creeping into regular business correspondence, what's left?

Anyone got a new word for that? Perhaps you'll find one in a game I recently updated called B#$%S^$T Bingo.

Feel free to send me your suggestions, too.

Don’t Mess With My Vegemite, Mate!

The NYT recently ran a story about a campaign by the Kraft Corporation in Australia, looking for a name to brand their new Vegemite/creamcheese concoction. As I’m an Aussie, I have a special affinity for Vegemite - the rest of you think it’s vile, I know.

But Kraft’s marketing department went where angels fear to tread. They messed with our sacred Vegemite, STRUTH! They combined the Aussies’ rich gooey staple with cream cheese and sent it out with a no-name label inviting the Australian public to create a name for this very, um, unique spread.

The initial winner? Vegemite iSnack 2.0, which was met by public outrage. Vegemite-lovers from Hobart to Woop Woop voiced their indignation, and went straight to social media as their squawk box. They twittered, and blogged, and created websites dedicated to re-naming the spread. In the land of down-under, like AFL (Australian Football League) and Swan Draught (beer), Vegemite is something you don’t screw with.

One person suggested that the 27-year-old designer who’d submitted the winning name be smeared with Vegemite and forced to run naked through the streets of Sydney “as retribution for his cultural crime.” Others called the name “uStupid 1.0” and “un-Australian.”

Nuff said. Four days later and Kraft caved in. A new vote was cast and a new name settled upon - Cheesybite.

To be fair, Kraft’s research showed that Aussies wanted a more spreadable version of their beloved Vegemite and the product per se has met with great success. Kraft’s failing was not in the product extension, it was its deafness and inability to act appropriately – it had not chosen the winner by popular vote.

The moral to this story? Don’t underestimate the power of social media. It’s become an enabler for voicing our passion and displeasure en masse. iSnack 2.0 (which is a dreadful name, besides) proved that consumers will use social media (and whatever tools they have at their disposal) to spread their messages like bushfires.

By the way, Vegemite sales have not slowed since the introduction of Cheesybite. Aussies know which side of the bread is buttered.

A Purpose Driven Life? Only If It’s Free….

Hoping to capitalize on the success of pastor Rick Warren’s A Purpose Driven Life, in January Reader’s Digest Association (RDA) launched a quarterly print publication to complement Warren’s Purpose Driven Connection. For an annual fee of just $29.95, the project offered a shebang of goodies - DVDs, study group guides and access to its website – all necessary in the quest of finding purpose!

10 months in, and RDA turned off the life support. In spite of A Purpose Driven Life’s rapid online audience growth, it seems that not enough purpose-seekeers were willing to pay for a subscription.

Is it because, like the Wiccans, Christians believe that spiritual knowledge is universal and already belongs to everyone? Or maybe they thought they should get a rebate on their 10% tithe? Perhaps they felt bad about the environment and wanted to save some trees? Or just plain skint?

I believe it’s because Christians - along with the rest of us - have grown so accustomed getting whatever information we want for FREE that consciously or not, we resent having to pay for it.

Is that fair? Absolutely not. In any other transaction or business process, NOBODY GIVES ME ANYTHING FOR FREE. NOBODY. Somebody, somewhere has to pay for the content that we voraciously consume by the megabytes, the research and journalism to accumulate the information, the cost of creating and updating and editing, SEO, advertising, brand building..... and the list goes on!

Quality content is created and presented by professionals – real people whose livelihood depends on real income from their work.

If the public, regardless of their faith or purpose does not support the development of intelligent and informed content, then where is it going to come from?

And more importantly, will it even be worth reading?

Unlikely.

4 essential tactics for wooing mommy and daddy bloggers

The opinion-shaping group is powerful—and idiosyncratic

Mommy bloggers, despite their unfortunate moniker (it makes them sound frumpy), have become a fixture in the marketing and PR landscape.

It’s only natural that we seek endorsements and testimonials from them. Mommy (and daddy) bloggers are a natural outcropping of the blogging phenomenon, and smart marketers have been looking for ways to capitalize on this digital voice, as they do with every group that gains consumer-influencing power.

The downside to the phenomenon of these blogs, however, is that the ethical guidelines that apply to mommy and daddy bloggers, and the products they review, have been incredibly slow to coalesce. It’s become a free-for-all: The FTC’s recent ruling, which requires bloggers of all stripes to disclose whether the products they review were provided free, has brought to the fore many examples of what not to do. But given that mommy and daddy bloggers aren’t going anywhere soon, what are the best ways for marketers to pursue these coveted endorsements?

For my 4 essential tactics, click here.

There Will Be No Renaissance Without 21st Century Education

I read an op en in the NYT by Susan Engel, Director of the Program in Teaching at Williams College. In her article, Teach Your Teachers Well she cited academia's "turning its nose up at education" as one of the core issues that keeps the field from attracting and sustaining the brightest minds to teach in our public school systems. Hence the dumbing down of our youth - and our international status as laughing stock when the topic of education comes up. I happen to agree.

This isn't the only issue to be dealt with, but it's a good start.

Engel says we need hybrid teacher programs that demand a high GPA in order to participate and that teachers should undergo an extensive application program. This would, invariably, weed out the ones signing up for the long summer hols and highlight those individuals with a passion not only for teaching, but for learning. I teach, therefore I learn should become the motto.

Engel also recommends that teachers be taught in-depth about the development of children at specific ages and how to relate to them. She recommends mentoring programs under masterful educators and that the students, like psychology students, should be taped and critqued on their in-classroom performance.

Another of her brilliant ideas was to hire teachers in groups (of 7 or more), so when they are placed in a new school environment they’ll be surrounded by an (incoming) support group – new teachers - not left to fend for themselves or be ostracized by seniority or under-performing teachers threatened by fresh meat. This in turn would raise the bar, and set a much higher standard for all – newcomers and old.

Of course, there are other issues that hamper the process and keep our education system malfunctioning – overcrowded classrooms, unmonitored teaching practices, curriculums that don’t engage students or address urban issues, lack of innovative (or even new) technology for students to learn on, diminished arts and music programs, and dysfunctional or apathetic parents and teachers. You get the picture.

But Engel's ideas map out a beautiful plan of action that could easily tackle several of these seemingly inherent problems.

America needs a Renaissance, desperately. And for that, the country needs passionate, educated and competent teachers to create a generation of vibrant, educated and fully-functioning people – ready to re-enter the global workforce and compete, competitively.

"The student is only as good as his teacher " . We can do better, a lot better.

You, Me and the FTC

In response to a new mandate on bloggers imposed by the FTC, MediaPost’s Max Kalhoff wrote in his Online Spin column,” I don't like government meddling in my personal speech….I look to the court of public opinion and trusted communities as a more viable arbiter of truth, deception and reputation -- not ambiguous government guidelines.”

He’s not alone.

There’s a lot of uproar about the FTC tracking the blogosphere and the transparency of the blogger/content provider relationship. Why? Because the FTC’s new rules state that any blogger who offers an endorsement in their postings must disclose any payments received for the acknowledgement. Failure to do so could lead to a penalty of up to $11,000.

Hhhmmm. That’s quite a dilemma, for bloggers and for the companies who’ve been courting an increasingly powerful “new media” channel. We’ve all been trying to monetize the internet since its inception, and now that bloggers have seemingly found a way, the FTC steps in to re-write the rules.

So while the bloggers and bloggees are sweating it out, I see a positive angle emerging here – for journalism. That, versus the gazillion content producers who offer varying qualities of data on any topic imaginable. This mandate will separate the hobby bloggers from the serious writers who offer value - an informed opinion.

Delineating these lines could actually save us countless hours of research, seeking out real information that we can trust and use in our lives, and our work. Life is too short to follow up on every advocacy piece to ensure its accuracy and bias. Some form of regulation to define a “gift” from a company seeking positive spin and PR from an unbiased consumer review is something from which we will all benefit. And being in the PR profession, I am confronted by this “dilemma” on a daily basis. I don’t pay journalists to review - or criticize - my clients’ services or products, so why should I pay bloggers?

Having a set of standards will help bring credibility back to traditional journalism, and accountability for bloggers. There simply needs to be.

Living in a pocket

A new survey by Synovate reveals that 82% of Americans never leave home without their cell phones. Once upon a time, it was the American Express card. But it’s not just us in North America – half of Russian mobile users would rather lose their wallets than their phones, and 32% of people across the world surveyed said that they “couldn’t live without it.” By the end of 2010, 70% of all people will own one. Carriers everywhere rejoice!

Seems not so long ago we were carting around “mobile” devices the size of bricks – I used to own one.

But we’re no longer using our mobile phones solely for conversations and texts. These have become pocket-sized assistants, and are the thread that keeps our business and personal lives sewn together. Banking, dining, shopping, research, etc. I’ve written lengthy articles and submitted to editors from mine. So there’s no denying the importance of mobile in our daily lives, and the growing impact that mobile is having on the way businesses communicate and connect with their audiences.

Marketing research firm The Kelsey Group expects an increase in the mobile advertising market from $160 million in 2008, to $3.1 billion in 2013. That’s a HUGE increase. And in the next few years, millions of us (who haven’t already) will be opting for smartphones over PC’s – for both cost and convenience.

Smartphones have already forged ahead into the social media arena. According to USA today, about 65 million of Facebook's 300 million members are mobile users – that’s more than triple the amount of just eight months ago.

These numbers more than suggest that mobile marketing has moved far beyond the experimental stage – this is fantastic news for marketers in just about every industry. The limitations to mobile’s use and capabilities are really only limited by our inability to imagine the future.

Mobile is giving businesses and brands the ability to live in their customers’ pocket. What’s so bad about that? To me, this is an exciting moment. Despite the very challenging environment we’re in, mobile - like social media – is proving that it’s a powerful communication tool that is here to stay.

The Boy Who Twittered Wolf

Last week, I read a blog which mentioned a website - http://www.hsbcreviews.com/ - created solely to whine and gripe about HSBC Bank. 95% of the comments were complaints and most likely a reflection of the quality (or lack thereof) of HSBC’s customer service. Feeling the love for HSBC? Clearly, the blog’s creator and community are not, and have gone to considerable lengths to share their dissatisfaction with the rest of us. Cheers!

Blogs like HSBC reviews and social media in general have become a modern day soapbox, giving a voice to anyone and everyone with a gripe to air. That’s a great thing, isn’t it? Isn’t it? But then I ask myself, how much attention should we pay to the online rants of the companies vilified? I’ve read some absolutely diabolical posts on Yelp talking about companies with whom I’ve had great experiences. And then again, I’ve had horrid experiences with a number of airlines that my friends have raved about.

Who is right, and who is wrong in the social media equation? And who do we listen to do make an informed decision, really?

Right now, there are a gazillion or more negative content producers using social media to churn out their messages of dissatisfaction. Can’t get satisfaction from customer service reps? Sure, go post some comments. But the unfortunate result to this will be like the boy who cried wolf: using social media as the forum to post scathing comments (already in the millions) will eventually lead to this having no credibility at all.

It’s in our human nature to seek out a scapegoat, but the boy who cried wolf came to a rather tragic ending over a similar practice.

Social media is in relative infancy. As it grows up, we need to find a balance over how much weight we give personal experiences and opinions, and what we choose to do with that information. In time, businesses too will learn to use this data in the most efficient and effective way, to adjust and correct their misdoings and misdeeds.

But until then, our experience with social media is on an upward learning curve. Let’s not abuse it before reaches its peak.

Great Expectations - we all have them!

The following excerpt is taken from an article that appears in MediaPost's Marketing Daily on October 19, 2009

According to the Random House dictionary, we've been having expectations since around 1540, give or take a few years.

The noun, ex•pec•ta•tion [ek-spek-tey-shuhn], has a number of meanings -- but I'm most partial to the following, especially when used in reference to the start of a new agency/client relationship:

Often, expectations. a prospect of future good or profit: to have great expectations.

Ahhhh...

Being responsible for new business retention, I can spend several months courting and cajoling a prospective client. During that time, I'll have to prove to the CEO and CMO that my agency is capable of representing Brand X, that we truly get their message and value proposition, and can launch impactful PR campaigns that produce great outcomes -- not just "outputs" -- on ever-shrinking budgets. We'll have to jump through countless hoops and hold conference calls until the contract is signed, and then we're expected to be off and pitching posthaste!

Except there's one important thing missing from the above. An outline of expectations. Not from the client, but from us.

I've actually given it a name: "Statement of Expectations". It sounds rather arrogant at first, but it's become absolutely necessary when taking on new clients in our age of "great expectations."

Why? Because clients expect a great many things from our agencies -- PR, ad, creative, we're all in the same boat -- but in many cases they can't or don't communicate precisely what their expectations and needs are. And left to chance, in an economic climate that's so highly strung, the smallest mistake or misunderstanding can become the impetus for losing a client.

So rather than taking that chance, why not spell it out for our clients beforehand? If we did that more often, perhaps we'd have more fulfilling agency/client relationships -- more clients for longer, as well as staff who felt more respected and appreciated, and overall, a stronger agency brand.

Sounds pretty good to me.

So next time you're about to jump into bed with a new client, ask yourself if you're ready to wake up next to them every day. On second thought, don't. But you should be asking a great many things....

Like what? Read the entire article at MediaPost

Paul Krugman thinks we’re uneducated. I happen to agree.

An article appeared in the NYT today that really raised my ire. Not because I disagreed with it, but because every word rang true.

Paul Krugman’s piece, The Uneducated American, hit the nail on the head on every count - leaving behind a very bent and rusty nail indeed.

In a nutshell: “... The rise of American education was, overwhelmingly, the rise of public education — and for the past 30 years our political scene has been dominated by the view that any and all government spending is a waste of taxpayer dollars. Education, as one of the largest components of public spending, has inevitably suffered.

Until now, the results of educational neglect have been gradual — a slow-motion erosion of America’s relative position. But things are about to get much worse, as the economic crisis — its effects exacerbated by the penny-wise, pound-foolish behavior that passes for “fiscal responsibility” in Washington — deals a severe blow to education across the board.”

The cost of education is prohibiting many of the finer young thinkers in our culture from obtaining a degree, being forced back into the full-time workforce before they are able to complete their education - and still end up in debt, liable for daunting school loans as they begin their path into the adult world.

“According to the Bureau of Labor Statistics, the United States economy lost 273,000 jobs last month. Of those lost jobs, 29,000 were in state and local education, bringing the total losses in that category over the past five months to 143,000.”

This - at a time when we claim to be dedicating to change? We’re losing educators by the thousands? A sagging economy is no excuse to stop teaching our children. They are our future people!

Krugman’s recommendation to alleviate the problem is that congress should offer aid to the state governments, and: “Beyond that, we need to wake up and realize that one of the keys to our nation’s historic success is now a wasting asset. Education made America great; neglect of education can reverse the process.”

Thank heavens for organizations like the Kauffman Foundation and NFTE (The Network for Teaching Entrepreneurship) who are devoted to educating kids who otherwise would “be left behind”. While NFTE teaches important business and entrepreneurship skills, it also encourages continued education and believes that every child should be given the opportunity to fulfill his or her potential.

Life should be about choices – not just alternatives, compromises or settling for less than we have.

Education provides a solid pathway to being able to make choices in life – not having them made for us.

Isn’t that the change we are looking for?

We have seen annus horribilis ad finem. Now what?

Originally published in Mobile Markter, October 5 2009

A couple of weeks ago I had a great email exchange with someone I met online. Not that kind of online exchange, but in response to one of my opinion pieces.

Ten months later, Dave (who is also a contributor to Mobile Marketer) and I still have not met in person, but we have developed a lovely rapport – exchanging ideas on everything from how to fix the world, to writing a book on self-sufficiency to what is wrong with our industry (he is a marketer too). A lot, we have agreed.

Let us start with resounding cop-out of the past annus horribilis – the recession.

It seems that anyone and everyone is, has or was using this as an excuse for their company's ills – poor sales, fewer customers, loss of clarity. Take your pick.

To be sure, as an agency owner I have been affected too, but the truth of the matter is that marketing has imploded at the very time when “disruptive technology,” “forced innovation” and “reinvention” have become the catchphrases of the day.

Isn’t this cyclical? We grow, we learn, we stumble, we rise, we fail and then we start over, but with new visions and ideas about doing what we were doing in a far better and stronger way than before.

Creative destruction, right?

Click here to finish reading the entire post in Mobile Marketer

Storytelling Is An Art, Especially In PR

If a picture paints a thousand words, then how much is a tweet worth? Ten words, a dozen?

When embracing Twitter, have you struggled to write something profound or worthwhile within the confines of 140 characters? I have. Don't get me wrong, tweet speak has its place in our digital world, but with every process that strips away the need to construct coherent and meaningful prose, not just blurts with links, we will in turn think less about what and how we write. It's already happening.

Good stories don't need to be packaged in special kits or on glossy paper to be effective. They just need to tell and ultimately sell our clients' stories very well – especially in PR.

Stories have been around for thousands of years, influencing people and their decisions. My goal is for my stories to have that kind of power, whether I’m writing for myself or about my clients.

There's an article in today's MediaPost(disclosure - written by me)“Storytelling Is An Art” , that discusses this topic.

Do you think the art of storytelling is waning? How important is it to you?

WSJ and NBC…don’t they have bigger fish to fry?

This blog is by intention strictly nonpartisan. There is a place for politics, and it’s not here. My focus today isn’t national politics – it’s the politics of the media covering it.

I read a piece in the Washington Wire last week and felt compelled to comment.

The Wall Street Journal and NBC News conducted a recent poll on Obama Exposure. At least this topic is some relief from the endless rounds of opinions and polls on the healthcare debate – right? We all know that BHO is loved and hated, passionately. He makes for a good headline and avid viewing. Media in this country have been feeding on that passion and his media blitz even before the get go. Both Fox News and MSNBC have absolutely thrived post-election, and there’s no sign of letting up. So don’t you find it ironic that two news organizations created a poll which served to reinforce the very core of the problem?

Do you see that, or is it just me?

Even White House spokesman Robert Gibbs, wasn’t lost on the irony about Obama’s media exposure - “We’re sifting through your questions of overexposure in between your interview request invitations,” he told reporters.

But surely there are more important topics the media could be addressing? Like how many Americans are looking forward to not having their homes foreclosed upon? Or is Wal-Mart is the best symbol of corporate America today? Really? (Yes, according to Vanity Fair, 60 Minutes and CBS News). Or what can be done to help California climb its way out of the enormous debt-hole - or wait, wait…what about how many Americans are feeling positive about the next quarter? (I made that one up).

Can’t we be prodded to feel good, positive and productive for a change? Cant the media be asking questions that would add a bit more meaning and value to our experience (and perhaps a more accurate glimpse into our current psyche), than whether or not the President has been over-exposed in the media? (In fairness, he IS the president at a time of national crisis. It’s probably not a bad idea to pay attention to what’s going on.)

I just think the media could use its influence in a way that better benefits the public - its constituency.

What do you think?

Media Blitz - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/09/18/its-show-blitz-obama-tapes-today-for-sunday-talk-shows/

Obama Exposure Poll - http://blogs.wsj.com/washwire/2009/09/22/wsjnbc-news-poll-on-obama-exposure-too-much-too-little-or-just-right/

Blurring the lines of Journalism

(My opinion piece appeared in Ragan on September 24, 2009)

A big UUUM moment – looks like I’ve caused a furor over an opinion piece that appeared in Ragan.com today about the blurring lines of journalism. The central focus of my opinion piece was David Pogue, tech columnist for the New York Times, and some recent comments he made about him not being a journalist. Apparently, I took his statement out of context and applied it incorrectly.

Notwithstanding, I read Pogue’s posts religiously and I value his comments – as do thousand/millions of others. He knows what he’s talking about. That’s why he’s an expert and that’s why tech companies will continue to court him and fawn over him – as they do other influential columnists, technology-focused or otherwise.

Do I think any less of him? No.

Will I stop reading or respecting what he says? No.

Am I trying to make enemies? Absolultely not.

Can I voice my opinion? Yes.

Here’s a link to the entire post on Ragan.com, "Times' David Pogue blurs journalism lines"

Say NO To More Recession Talk!

(The original article appeared in MediaPost on July 15, 2009)

Argh! Just when we thought things were looking up, the Department of Labor spoils it with the latest unemployment figures. I'm sure many companies upped their cutbacks again, rather than upping their PR budgets this past week.

So, really, this isn't a recession anymore -- it's a global gut-check. And there aren't any Lucky Dip bags filled with taxpayer money waiting for us at the end of the recession rainbow. Businesses everywhere have been paralyzed over which course of action to take. Be bold, be innovators? Or bring out the hatchet to those bloated costs and inefficient operations driven by years of faux-plenty? It's been a wake-up call for all.

Inevitably, in such a challenging (and changing) environment, many businesses have trended toward batten-the-hatches, slash-the-budget tactics. But in these actions, they may have failed to see that strategic positioning and public relations could actually help their companies gain market share, increase sales, and experience organic growth.

You may think I'm biased, but when we look at recent history, we see such opportunities have indeed arisen out of uncertainty.

Click here to read the whole article, Say No To More Recession Talk

8 Reasons Why Marketers Should Ramp Up Their Visibility Strategy

(My original article appeared in Mobile Marketer on August 18, 2009)

Are we in the throes of a recession hangover yet? Yes and no, depending on who you listen to.

Recession or not, however, businesses and consumers remain wary and cautious about spending. The road to recovery is likely to be slower than we thought. But as I wrote in my column in Mobile Marketer today, this is precisely the time when businesses and marketers should be ramping up their visibility and getting back on their customers radars.

Why now?

Because history has proved time and again that the bold survive. Knee-deep in the discount dustbins is not a strategic position, nor is being invisible to your customers. Companies that survive and grow are marketing from a position of strength, not a defensive crouch.

A conservative approach, prudent as it may seem after almost a year of negative GDP, is actually counterproductive.

It is shortsighted to view this recession, or any recession, as anything less than an opportunity for future growth. It is impossible to engage with your audience if your brand has gone into hiding, waiting for the markets to rebound.

And it is very hard to make a comeback without being visible or without customers.

Click here to read the article in Mobile Marketer 8 reasons why marketers should ramp up their visibility strategy.

The Tale Of PR And Social Media

(This article appeared in MediaPost on July 28, 2009)

Like any disruptive innovation, social media has come at a time when everything in our lives – online and offline – has changed so dramatically. We could almost document the rise of social media over the past 18 months of turbulence in the US and abroad. So it’s no coincidence that social media will become the marketing be-all as we kick off a new decade: social media will be to 2010 what email was to 2000.

We’re starting this journey and mapping out a new course, making it up as we go along, friending each other – PR and Social Media – until we get it right. There are many lessons to be learned and like anything new, there are bound to be mistakes. Practice, after all, makes perfect. Companies big or small are not immune to public ridicule in having “tweeted” out of line or handled a social media crisis poorly. Corporate Tweeting now comes with a 25-page “how to” manual. PR companies, digital marketers and corporate Tweeters – we are bound to mess up along way. The point is that most of us simply don’t know until we try.

To read my entire article in MediaPost’s Marketing Daily,"A Tale Of PR And Social Media", please click here