Dethroning King Content: Why Context Should Be Just as Important

“Content is King.”

It’s a phrase PR professionals, marketing gurus, journalists and editors hear every day.

Coined by Bill Gates in 1996 as part of his Internet worldview, it’s worth noting that even back in the 28.8k days of dial-up modems, “content is king” was not all the Microsoft Chairman stressed. Equally important was the context of the material published.

“To be successful online, a magazine, [for instance] can’t just take what it has in print and move it to the electronic realm,” Gates wrote. “There isn’t enough depth or interactivity in print content to overcome the drawbacks of the online medium.” 

Nearly two decades after Gates wrote those words and their meaning still resonates. Not only is context important between print and online, all the digital mediums such as email, social, mobile and so on require different methods of user engagement.

In other words, one size does not fit all.

One of the most obvious rules of thumb: lengthy copy should be presented on lengthy screens, tablet-sized or greater. Smartphones, even those with 6-inch screens are too small for maximum user enjoyment. Even the definition of “long copy” is relative to the medium. Chances are that anything over 500 words in mobile format pushes the limit.

But it’s more than that.

Ideally, PR teams should be large enough to include channel-specific content writers. Or at the very least, content writers should have the freedom to discuss with in-house or outsourced social media experts how their content could best be adapted to fit channel needs. Repackaging a 3,000-word whitepaper into 120, 140-character tweets might “get the job done” in the strictest sense, but it may miss the mark in terms of user engagement.

Successful tweets are not article or presentation bullet points. They’re conversation starters; unique insights or observations that spark genuine debate and feedback.

Maybe “dethroning King Content” is a little harsh. After all, establishing proper context would be impossible without the raw materials of content already laid out. But how those knowledge building blocks are assembled and presented to the right audience on the right channel is critical if PR executives (and any communications professionals) are to use the web and its many channels to their fullest extent.

“Shane” on You: A Perfect Example of Why the Media Continues its “Flack Attack”

There was I, excited to read another PR professional’s musings on why journalists give us a hard time when it comes to pitches, follow-up emails, do not call times and other various gripes. I was eager for the advice.

Instead I found myself agreeing with the so-called “other side” of  the communications industry. Written by Andy Shane, a PR professional whose resume and personal webpage feels a little light, his recent CommPRO.biz article violated several critical rules if our (PR) industry and our clients are to be taken seriously.

So move aside Andy Shane, here are mine:

Rule #1

Get to the point – fast. At nearly 800 words, Shane’s article does a lot of rambling, repeats a few points concerning the need for “compelling narrative” and offers little concrete advice or action steps. 

Rule #2

Limit clichés, use correct grammar and don’t make ‘Writing 101’ errors. This last point really bugs me and it’s a rule we all learned in…well…grammar school.

Shane writes: “We are using the media – and the inherit third party credibility – as a way of telling our story to our real audience.”

Correction, I think you meant “inherent,” as in “innate” or “inseparable element,” according to dictionary.com.

He goes on to write: “As pitches are being flushed out, consider.”

Strike two. Pitches are fleshed out, not flushed out – unless they’re really terrible.

I’d like to tell you mistakes like these are rare. But even as a PR professional, there’s no way to spin this. Mistakes like this do crop up all the time. Whatever value Shane’s article originally possessed is instantly cancelled out.

Great pitches are more than compelling narrative. They’re also about crisp, clean writing, free of embarrassingly sophomoric mistakes. Journalists like to say, “Let the copy sing.” Very often our industry’s jargon habit interferes with what could be a lovely client voice.

So “shane” on you, Andy. I know we can do a lot better in putting the “flack attack” to rest.

The Dangers of Only Looking Ahead

As an outdoors runner, I learned very quickly that it’s dangerous to only look ahead.  In the hour or so of my daily pavement bashing, I try to solve the world’s problems, plan out my day and tackle a few challenges looming at the office – all in my head.  In this state it’s easy to lose myself and only see what’s right in front of me. Doing that prevents me from seeing what’s coming up behind – or from the left or right. 

Simply put, if I don’t look around while I’m running, I could be dead.

Sadly, this form of myopia is something I’m seeing more and more. Today’s drivers, in their rush to get to work -or wherever else they’re going - no longer look around at a STOP sign. They might look one way or another. But rarely do they scan the entire road. Instead, motorists are distracted, on the phone and not paying attention. If it wasn’t for me paying attention to their driving, it’s very likely I’d be dead.

But you know, it’s not just on the roads that this is happening. I’m seeing the same tunnel vision in our PR profession where, if something isn’t obvious or right in front of someone’s nose, they don’t bother to look around for either a solution or come up with an answer by themselves. Fueled by a society where we’re plugged into dozens of alerts, multiple screens and a barrage of information being pushed and spoon fed to us every second, we’ve stopped seeing the big picture. We’re cherry picking our news, biting on teeny snippets of information that inform all our knowledge and only looking at what’s directly in front of us.

For more on Multitasking, social media, and distraction, check out  Journalist's Resource.

The danger of doing this is that we’re missing out on everything else. In the PR profession, not having a complete picture of what’s happening ‘all around’ a client’s business or their industry puts us at a significant disadvantage. We’re not able to make intelligent decisions because we simply don’t know what else is going on that could impact their business or our campaign.

So the next time you come to a STOP sign, don’t just look ahead. Take a moment to look all around.  Yes, it could add another 5 seconds to your commute, but you might see something you didn’t know was there. You could learn something new or revisit something you had forgotten, like what to do at traffic signs.

For more on traffic signs, especially for those friendly Florida drivers, refresh your memory here.

Or you could be encouraged by someone, like I was, to write about your experience.  We live in a distracted world that will only become more distracting. As PR professionals, our ability to have both a razor-sharp focus and see everything around us – not just what’s in front – will be the differentiator between great communicators and mediocre ones who stop short of true inspiration.

Reimagining the mobile-enabled PR agency of the future

“Publically traded diversified energy company.”

Try texting that while juggling other tasks. It is how New Jersey’s largest utility company, Public Service Enterprise Group (PSEG), describes itself.

Basically it means PSEG subsidiaries – there are four with names too long to write: control power generation, distribution, line maintenance and infrastructure investment. In non-jargon speech, it means they are almost a monopoly, overseeing nearly all aspects of the energy universe.

But PSEG’s success got me thinking. How can public relations agencies corner their own communication market, becoming “diversified communication companies” along the way?

Energy to change

PR agencies can do that by broadening their offerings and by becoming true information access, distribution and generation conglomerates. What will be their “power lines” – their message distribution medium?

Mobile.

Two recent articles speak to this need but tackle it from different perspectives.

Earlier this spring, The New York Times advertising columnist Stuart Elliott reported on the rebranding of PR powerhouse Fleishman-Hillard turned “FleishmanHillard” and highlighted how the brand is becoming “an integrated marketing communications agency.”

What does this mean? Hint: it sounds a lot like “diversified energy company,” just dressed up differently. It means expanding the agency’s focus largely from traditional earned media to include paid media (advertising), owned media (think branded content and blogs) and increased capabilities to use social media as a critical storytelling medium.

Each of these examples rely – or should rely – heavily on a communication company’s mobile presence and that of their clients. 

Read the rest of the article on Mobile Marketer.

Raising the Bar on the Perception of Mobile Reception

My, my, how high maintenance we’ve all become.

Not long ago, many of our tech-savvy selves (myself included), were awestruck by the power of our devices. First, we couldn’t imagine a world without word processing programs. Then “Google it,” became a grammatically correct sentence. Now our smartphones and tablets allow us to shop, stream live radio, teleconference with friends and colleagues and manage multiple virtual currencies – all while we’re busy working and juggling other tasks.

But if a recent survey is any indication, our collective sense of technological awe is giving way to entitlement. Just like we don’t applaud every time an electric light bulb brightens with the flick of a switch, consumers are beginning to expect that their smartphone’s mobile service be just as reliable.

According to a Vasona Networks survey, 64% of respondents felt that “good performance all the time” was a reasonable mobile phone network expectation. A slim 36% were more forgiving and agreed that performance hiccups and dead zones were par for the technological course.

I wasn’t a survey respondent, but you can count me in the minority.

My reaction to the data is twofold. Firstly, it’s possible our overly linked, synched and wired world has done more to speed up our culture than caffeine. A bit of humility never hurt. And statistics like this underscore how little non-experts appreciate the complexity of our wireless world – not to mention some scientific basics.

Like any form of radio transmission, cell phone towers work by line of sight. So the hillier or more mountainous the terrain, the more difficult reception becomes. Likewise, walls, physical structures, and other electronic noise (TVs, desktop computers, microwaves, etc.), also wreak havoc on reception quality and mobile download speeds.

These are challenges that will never be fully resolved and it’s perfectly OK. Do we blame terrestrial radio when we drive our cars (and their antennas) out of reception range? No. The same rules apply.

What isn’t OK, though, are the many poorly designed mobile web pages and apps whose clumsiness prevents them from maximizing 3G and 4G speeds. Sometimes it comes down to a matter of “reception perception.” Mobile web pages might be downloading swiftly, but if the user experience is lacking, simple processes, (like trying to purchase something on a smartphone or tablet) become cumbersome.

To the aggravated 64%, if you must be of the persnickety persuasion, make certain your frustration is directed to the appropriate source. Focus less on cell phone service providers and more on how websites are designed, how apps are developed and the utility of these. 

As PR professionals it’s our job to help our clients maximize how they promote their mobile presence. Actual download speeds won’t be affected. But the time it takes for consumers to realize on-the-go enjoyment, will undoubtedly accelerate.  Perhaps the next time you visit a mobile web site or interact with an app that’s undergone radical improvement you will applaud and not feel so entitled.   

I’m just saying…. 

Beaming Mobile Messages To Your Brain

A couple of months ago some commuter trains in Germany made global headlines: a rail operator’s passengers were treated to a “marketing wonder” of windows beaming advertising messages directly into the brains of said passengers who’d happened to place their weary heads on the glass.

Called bone conduction and already used in military applications and hearing aids, early reviews of this new type of use have been mixed. Not surprisingly, the ad agency BBDO who produced the ad campaign for Sky Deutschland called it a success. Of course they would. But many responses from a Mashable article read more like: “Is this for real? Just stay out of my head. This kind of invention must be BANNED.”

I agree to a point. It is disturbing how technology this pervasive can be abused. Don’t we have enough bombardment of ads already across multiple screens and devices?

But less than two months later, there’s growing (indirect) evidence of a perceptual shift. A new Harris Interactive poll found that consumer interest in mobile advertising offers has increased sharply since 2009. Nearly half, (45%) of mobile phone owners said they were at least somewhat interested in receiving mobile alerts about new products, sales and/or promotions from preferred brands, compared with 26% of respondents who felt similarly in 2009. And of those more recent supporters, 78% said they found location-based advertising particularly useful.

Does this mean brain beaming advertising glass has silenced its detractors? Um, no. But in light of this new data, it’s not that hard to envision a future where location-aware smartphones (or wearable gadgets) will work together with personalized advertising delivered on glass in trains, buses, planes and on walls in airports, incentivizing even more purchases and “brand/brain engagement.” That includes physical purchases as well as in-app buys. In other words, “mobile” advertising doesn’t always require a mobile phone. And as smartphone adoption rates rise, consumers will grow increasingly comfortable with seeing advertisements everywhere they look.

Is there a safeguard against the world becoming one giant digital billboard?  Permission-based advertising – a point the Harris study was quick to address. Consumers must have the ability to opt out of these types of marketer outreach.

Replacing my marketing hat with that of a PR professional’s for a moment, talking glass and mobile advertising appreciation also underscores another need.

PR agencies must make mobile the connective communications tissue of their client engagement and media messaging. Considering mobile devices’ reduced screen sizes, that means thinking smaller; telling client stories in bite-sized nuggets. It also means stepping up the ways in which we promote the importance of mobile messaging and mobile advertisements to clients from the start of our relationships.

“Smart” glass may have yet to hit its stride. But Harris Interactive data confirms that mobile really is everywhere and the pushback from round-the-clock advertising is eroding faster than many communication professionals originally thought. 

Will Publiomnicomis Take Over AdLand and the Media Universe?

It’s been a couple of weeks since we last posted on the ThinkInk blog, not because we’ve had nothing to say but because we’ve been crazy busy.  Summer is usually a time when a lot of businesses wind down, but it’s been the opposite around here.

New people, new clients and lots of new ideas...stay tuned for more on that but, in the meantime, we have a lot to say about last weekend’s announcement of the Omnicom-Publicis merger.

You know corporate news is serious when two things happen: the story breaks sometime between 5pm on Friday and 7am on Monday (slowing down media response and giving in-house spin doctors time to go into information-management mode) OR if said news is lampooned by comedians.

In the case of advertising agencies Omnicom Group, based in Manhattan, and Publicis Groupe SA, based in Paris, both have occurred. Last Sunday, in a lovely photo-op embrace, the agencies’ head chiefs announced the intended merger, valued at $35 billion. Meanwhile, a July 29 headline in The Onion read: “Merger of Advertising Giants Brings Together Largest Collection Of People With No Discernible Skills.”

Gibe aside, a merger of this magnitude is no laughing matter. If approved, it will have a profound impact on the advertising industry – and far beyond. Whether the fallout is “good” or “bad,” however, is up for debate.

Camp A: Spooked

On one side is the “spooked” camp, with words like “monopoly,” ”behemoth,” and “stifled competition” on the tips of its members’ tongues. Considering that the new company (will it be called Publiomnicomis?!) will have spent a combined $3.31 billion in media placements during 2012 accounting for nearly half of the world’s top 10 media agencies’ efforts, it’s more than a fair concern and one that I appreciate.

Camp B: Rosy-Eyed

Then there’s the other camp, those who see opportunity – an opportunity for smaller firms to capture new business as some disgruntled clients flee, industry pricing/digital ad value and KPI standardization, as well as increased resources to acquire, manipulate and act on big data. The latter point will help adland better compete against Silicon Valley natives like Google, Facebook, Salesforce and Adobe, among many others.

Camp C: Vanessa

My camp falls somewhere in the middle. If the proposed mega-company survives the scrutiny of both US and French regulators, the bigger question becomes “what type of precedent does Publicis Omnicom’s soon-to-be-existence establish?” Just as the airline, automobile, entertainment and pharmaceutical industries have endured mergers and acquisitions for decades, what will the advertising landscape look like in five or ten years? Will there be room for corporate and creative independence or will the specialized firms of today, like ThinkInk, be relics of a bygone era?

I really don’t know. Some 46 countries must ultimately give their blessing and the final merger may not be complete until early 2014. So there is lots of time for positing and pontification.

But don’t let your head and screen be your own echo chambers. Share your views with the ThinkInk community: do you think the advertising world will embrace this new corporate marriage or will it leave executives across the media landscape po’d and just plain scared?