Monday Morning Media Minute

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

Yesterday was the fifth anniversary of Hurricane Katrina hitting New Orleans.  But you already knew that — unless you’ve been on vacation and ignoring the news or in a coma.

The anniversary — along with stories examining where New Orleans stands with its recovery — was well covered in the media.  No surprise there.

And Harry Shearer has made great use of the anniversary to publicize a new documentary about Katrina called The Big Uneasy that will be shown tonight in about 200 theaters across the U.S.

Shearer was all over the media last week talking about why he believes the devastation from Katrina was a man-made disaster, not a natural disaster — and why he believes the mistakes that led to that damage are being repeated.  The movie was the hook, but his warning about the future of New Orleans was the message.

Shearer will be on hand in person tonight for a screening in New Orleans, which will give him another round of media visibility for his movie and his message.

Shearer’s publicity campaign is a perfect example of how to use an anniversary to generate news.  He’s gotten far more attention for his message through the media coverage he’s generated over the past week than he’s likely to get from the movie itself.

As far as I can tell, the movie will show one time in one theater in the Denver area.  And that apparently is typical of what’s happening in other cities as well.

Anniversaries of events that made news often make news, too.  If there’s an upcoming anniversary of a news making event that fits your story, is there a way you can turn it into an opportunity to publicize your message?

That’s my’ two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

The New York Times published a must-read article this weekend for anyone involved in crisis communication.

The 5,200-word article — “In Case of Emergency:  What Not Do” — by Peter S. Goodman examines reasons so many companies do a poor job of communicating when they find themselves in the middle of a headline-generating crisis.

But it misses an important point.  You can create big problems for yourself by saying too much or too little.  The trick is knowing when to talk and when to shut up.

“As conventional wisdom has it, the three companies (BP, Toyota and Goldman Sachs) at the center of these fiascos worsened their problems by failing to heed established protocol:  When the story is bad, disclose it immediately — awful parts included — lest you be forced to backtrack and slide into the death spiral of lost credibility,” Goodman writes.

Then he quotes Eric Dezenhall, a Washington-based communications strategist who worked for the Reagan White House, as being “particularly scornful of the classic imperative to ‘get out in front of the story,’ as if swift disclosure provides inoculation against all ugly realities.  When the facts are horrible, he (Dezenhall) argues, the best P.R. fix may simply be to absorb the pounding and get back to business, while eschewing the sort of foolish communications gimmicks that can make things worse.”

Dezenhall points to Tiger Woods to prove his point:  “What was Woods supposed to do?  Call an immediate press conference and rattle through a list of lady friends declaring, ‘Tiffany, yes; Trixy, no; Amber, don’t remember . . .’?  And if Woods had pre-empted with a confession, would this have caused the news media, bloggers, pundits, Hooters waitresses and everyone else to collectively reward him with their silence?  Not a chance.”

So who’s right — “conventional wisdom” or Eric Dezenhall?  They both are.  As I said earlier, the trick is to know when to spill your guts and when to stonewall.

It boils down to one thing:  The impact, or perceived impact, of your crisis on the rest of us.

All of us have a stake in understanding and avoiding, if possible, the health, environmental and financial damage posed by the BP oil spill.  So, withholding information — no matter how damaging — amounts to withholding information the rest of us need to evaluate our own personal risk and what to do about it.

On the other hand, the details of Tiger Woods’ sexual escapades would have made great gossip and titillating reading.  But it wasn’t information we needed to stay out of harm’s way.  So, stonewalling wasn’t just an option for Woods.  It was his best option.

When the public is at risk, it’s important to get ahead of the story and be transparent.  The more people who feel threatened, the more important it is to lay everything on the table for all to see.  If only your reputation is at stake, then you have a lot more leeway to stonewall.  And, often, remaining silent will be your best option.

That’s my’ two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

Tell me a story. Make it about me.

Reporters tell stories for a living. Follow their example. Write your news releases like news stories. Good reporters frame their stories before they start writing by asking themselves:

• What’s the news? Don’t bury your news. If a reporter (or editor) doesn’t know why your story’s news by the time s/he’s read the first paragraph or two of your release, it’ll end up in the trash.
• What do readers / viewers want to know? Reporters write for the benefit of their audience, not for your benefit. What does your audience want to know? Tell them in your news release. Then find reporters who write for that audience to turn your story into news.
• So what?  Why should I care? The basic questions of journalism are who, what, where, when and why. Answer them in your news releases.  But there’s an even more important question:  So what?  “What” is about facts.  “So what” is about why those facts matter.  Tell me why your story matters to me and I’ll be interested.

That’s my two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

To be a good storyteller, be a good writer.  And a ruthless editor of your own words.

To be a ruthless editor of your own words, put your ego on the shelf.  Fall in love with your writing and it won’t be as good as it can be.

Over the years, I’ve come up with some editing games to help me improve my first drafts.  Here are a few of them:

• Eliminate widows and orphans: Go through your document and edit any paragraph with a word or two stranded alone on the last line.  Most of the time the words I delete to get rid of the orphans didn’t add anything.  So, my writing becomes tighter.  A more extreme version is to go after the widows — a single line from a paragraph on a page by itself.
• Make your document one page shorter: Your document’s six pages long?  Eliminate words and phrases until you have a five-page document.  If it was easy, repeat the exercise to make it a four-page document.
• Lower the word count: A variation of the “one page shorter” game.  Check the word count of your document and arbitrarily pick a lower number, then eliminate words and phrases until you reach your goal.  If it was easy, pick a lower number and do it again.  Keep trimming until you can’t take anything else out without deleting something important.
• Replace commas with periods: If you use a lot of commas, consider replacing as many of them as you can with periods.  Your document won’t be shorter.  But your sentences will be.  And your writing will be punchier.  No, you won’t be able to eliminate every comma.  And you don’t want to.
• Delete empty words: Replace “in order to” with “to,” for example.  My favorite target:  “that.”  Most of the time taking “that” out of a sentence will make your writing tighter without affecting your meaning.  No, you won’t be able to eliminate all of them.  But declare war on “that” and your writing will be crisper.
• Listen to what you write: Something I learned as a speechwriter.  If it doesn’t sound right there’s a better way to say it.

That’s my’ two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

Hook me at the beginning if you want me to notice your story.  Then keep it interesting if you want me to stick around until you’re done telling it.

Good storytellers know it’s important to grab their audience’s attention right from the start.  That’s why the lead of a news story is so important.  And it’s why you need a strong, attention-getting lead for your news releases and pitch letters as well.

There are many kinds of good leads. Here are a few of my favorites:

• Ask a question. Asking a question intriguing enough that the rest of us will want to know the answer is a good way to get reporters to read your news release to learn your answer.  Not everyone agrees with me on this one.  Some purists believe beginning a story with a question is a no-no.  Why would you ignore such a powerful way to bring me into your story?
  Example: Why are local bird watchers putting down their binoculars and picking up protest signs?
• Start with an anecdote. News is about people and things that affect people. Anecdotes humanize your story. A good anecdote is a great lead for a story about an individual or a group of people.
  Example: Joan Doe has spent the last 43 years helping others. On Tuesday, several dozen of them will be on hand for her final day at work to say thank you and tell her how she changed their lives forever.
• Say something unexpected. We’re hardwired to notice the unexpected — a strange noise that may indicate a problem with your car or a slight movement by a stranger on a dark street.  It’s a survival technique.  Because we’re hardwired to pay attention to the unexpected, a lead that surprises your audience is a great way to get their attention.
  Example:  Giving away money isn’t always easy.
• Use a first-person story. A self-directed version of the anecdotal lead.  Don’t overdo this one. But some feature stories lend themselves to first-person leads.  Just make sure there’s a reason for the rest of us to care.
  Example: The bear stared at me. I stared back. What I did next probably saved my life. And it could save yours.
• Just the facts. Once almost universally used for spot news stories and news releases, and still the most common type of lead for both.  Make sure your facts are interesting or your lead will be boring — and your news release will probably end up in the trash.
  Example: XYZ Company opened a new plant today in Localville, bringing 500 jobs and a $25 million annual payroll to the city.

That’s my’ two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

If you’re a public relations practitioner who writes news releases, speeches and articles for a living — as I am — there’s a pretty good chance you’ve written a lot of words attributed to someone else.  I certainly have.

And if you’re an executive who delivers a lot of speeches or gets quoted in news releases, there’s a pretty good chance you’ve said or been quoted as saying things written for you by someone else.

I believe that’s a perfectly acceptable practice under most circumstances.  Ghostwritten speeches, articles and news release quotes have become common.  Most of us understand and even expect it.

Nevertheless, there are some important boundaries that need to be respected.

For example, Scott McInnis, who’s a campaigning to become the Republican candidate for governor in Colorado, is in hot water for plagiarizing the words of a Colorado Supreme Court justice in an article about water issues that appeared under his byline.

When that story broke, McInnis tried to portray the incident as a case of a ghostwriter lifting the plagiarized material without his knowledge.  That ploy didn’t work very well.  One reason it didn’t work is that McInnis got paid — rather handsomely — for the article and one of the conditions of his contract was that he would write the material himself — not turn it over to a ghostwriter.

Dan Haley, editorial page editor for the Denver Post, cites another interesting example of questionable bylines.

Haley recounts an incident involving an op-ed article from Weld County Commissioner Sean Conway about a water storage project in northern Colorado.  The Post ran the article with the understanding it was original and exclusive to the Post, Haley says.

But Haley says the Greeley Tribune printed a nearly identical article two days before the Post article appeared.  The Greeley Tribune article appeared under the byline of a different Weld County commissioner.  And essentially the same article showed up and short time later in two other newspapers under the byline of State Rep. B.J. Nikkel.

Who actually wrote the article?  Here’s Haley’s description of what happened:

“I contacted Conway, who told me he wrote the column.  He did his own research and writing, and it took him upwards of eight hours to do it.

“And when he e-mailed it to me on July 5, he was offering an original piece that was exclusive to The Post, which follows our guidelines. He did not get paid.

“Yet he also shared it with other elected leaders, who he had been working with to generate publicity for a rally in support of the water project. He says he invited them to use whatever parts of his column they wanted.

“Basically, they lifted the entire column and presented it as their own.

“Is that plagiarism? It’s murky, given that Conway willingly shared his material. But one expert, speaking on a different matter, told The Post last week that presenting previously published work as your own is plagiarism.

“It definitely misleads readers, which is very concerning. Readers of those other publications were led to believe they were reading the words and thoughts of those authors.”

I encourage you to read Dan Haley’s article if you write words that get attributed to others – or if you’re someone who uses words written by someone else that get attributed to you.

That’s my’ two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

Forget what you learned in writing class:  Cliches are your friend.

So are jingles, slogans, catch phrases, soundbites and any other rhetorical tricks that make what you say stick in the minds of your audience.  They make your message easier to remember.

Jonathan Alter, a senior editor of Newsweek and political analyst for MSNBC, suggested last week that one reason for President Obama’s growing unpopularity with his own progressive political base is that his administration “has not done a good enough job of framing its message in memorable terms.”  I agree.

Obama has a “disdain for soundbites,” Alter claimed during an appearance on MSNBC’s Hardball. “He thinks it’s somehow beneath him in some way to use catch phrases and slogans that linger in the mind.”

“When he went out (in front of TV cameras last week) after he won on financial regulation, what’s the takeaway?,” Alter asked.  “What’s the soundbite, if you will, that comes out of that that people can sink their teeth into?  He’s only said one memorable thing politically this whole year which is they, the Republicans, drove us into the ditch.  Don’t give them back the keys.  That’s a good line.  If he could keep saying that kind of thing and focus it as a choice, he could make some progress.”

I haven’t been keeping score.  So, I can’t say whether Alter’s right about his ditch/keys example being the only memorable political line Obama’s used this year.  Actually, I suspect he’s wrong.  And I suspect some of you have already thought of another example or two.

But, details aside, Alter makes a good point.  There’s some irony in the fact that a man who used his ability to deliver a rousing speech to get elected isn’t very good at soundbites.

He’s not alone.  One of the hardest challenges of my job is getting clients to deliver their message clearly enough to be heard, understood and remembered.  Soundbites, catch phrases, slogans — and cliches — will make your message more memorable.

I encourage you to use them.

That’s my two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

Sometimes the best response to a story you don’t like is no response.

The problem with responding to a negative story — even if you feel it’s wrong — is that your response may keep a bad story alive longer than it would live on its own.

Attacking a negative story that’s clearly true?  That’s just drawing more attention to the story while picking a fight you can’t win.  That’s a losing strategy.

Sharron Angle, the Tea Party-backed Republican running against Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid of Nevada, has threatened to sue Reid for posting an old version of her campaign website that includes some of her more controversial opinions on Social Security, health care and other topics.  Angle’s campaign had replaced the old version with one designed to be less controversial.

She’s not challenging the authenticity of the posting by Reid’s campaign.  Instead, she’s accusing Reid of copyright and intellectual property violations.

The result has been a lot of media coverage of the controversy in Nevada and elsewhere, negating the Angle campaign’s effort to tame down her website.

I’m not a lawyer, but my guess is Reid will win the legal fight if the issue ever gets to court.  Even if he doesn’t win in court, every round of any legal battle will simply draw more attention to the very information Angle scrubbed from her website in the first place.  So, it doesn’t matter whether she wins in court.  She’s picked a fight that’s fueling a story she wants to go away.

Here’s my question for you next time you find yourself tempted to respond to a story you don’t like:  Will your response really make your point?  Or will you just keep a bad story alive for another news cycle?

That’s my two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

Reporters talk to people and write stories about what they say.  What part of that isn’t clear?

You’d think a four-star general in charge of a war would get that — and understand the potential consequences of telling a reporter things that can get you fired.

So, what were Gen. McChrystal and his staff — including his PR adviser — thinking?  Apparently they weren’t.  Forget the insubordination.  The general and his PR adviser deserved to be fired for simple stupidity.

Interestingly enough, McChrystal and his staff aren’t alone.  People who should know better frequently tell reporters things they shouldn’t.

Some advice that’s too late for McChrystal but I hope useful to some of you:

• Never talk to a reporter without knowing what your objective is.  Getting Rolling Stone to do a profile of you — no matter how positive — isn’t a clear enough objective.  What do you want to happen as a result of the story the reporter writes?  That’s your objective.  If your objective is simply to feed your ego, you’re playing with fire.
• Always have a clear message and stick to it.  Your message should support your objective.  It should be clear enough and interesting enough that the reporter will get it, remember it and use it — and the rest of us will also get it and remember it.  That means you need to be able to say it 15 seconds or less.  Otherwise, it’s not clear enough yet.
• Media training, by someone who knows what they’re doing, is essential for anyone who talks to reporters.  Talking to reporters without media training is like skydiving without lessons.  You’ll get through it, but the outcome may not be pretty.

That’s my two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?

By Jerry Brown, APR
www.pr-impact.com

I love oxymorons.  My current favorite:  Facebook privacy.

If you follow these things at all, you know Facebook recently changed its privacy policies.  And they kicked up quite a ruckus doing it.

I know almost nothing about the details of what they did, why they did it — or what changes they made because of the ruckus.  I don’t know much about it because, frankly, I don’t care what their privacy policy is.  I assume anything I post on Facebook, Twitter or anywhere else on the Internet is public — no matter how hard I try to lock it up and call it private.

For many years, I’ve been one of those public relations practitioners who advises clients to treat all documents, including emails, as potentially public no matter how “secret” they are.  That doesn’t mean you won’t ever put secret information in your documents or in your emails.  Confidential information frequently ends up on paper or a hard drive.

But, confidential or not, it’s a good idea to avoid putting things in writing or pictures that would be embarrassing or incriminating if they ended up in the Wall Street Journal, USA Today, your local newspaper (if you still have one) — or in the hands of an employer or potential employer.

I certainly encourage everyone who’s interested to use Facebook and the other social media.  And have fun doing it.  But if you’re posting potentially embarrassing information you think is private or confidential, you’re asking for trouble.  Facebook privacy is an oxymoron.

That’s my two cents’ worth.  What’s yours?