Posts Tagged ‘media’

Let’s not forget about our humble, dedicated local radio listener

Tuesday, October 11th, 2011

The axe is falling on local radio and television. Cuts have been announced at the BBC last week, as a result of the Government freeze in the licence fee until 2016. Local radio is one of the areas that will take a significant hit, its budget will be cut by just over 4%, or £5.3 million.

It means output will probably syndicate with neighbouring stations during the daytime, whilst listeners will have to get used to national programmes in the evenings, going against the very notion of local radio. Local newsrooms will no doubt be trimmed down to operate on a shoestring as fewer and shorter local bulletins will result in less resources making original local news.

But what does this mean for PR and communications? Local radio is a powerful medium for the communication of targeted local information. We can remind the local listener of our messages on the hour, over and over, many times a day, whether they’re at home or on the move.

Ultimately, fewer and shorter local bulletins will mean a bigger struggle to get our messages out there, but we must adapt. Our local listener will soon have less time to hear us even though they seek ever increasing amounts of information specific to them. So that means tailoring our messages and making them more relevant than ever to ensure we make the local cut.

With newspapers embracing the social web, are the days of ‘behind the scenes’ PR over?

Friday, September 16th, 2011

The newspaper is evolving. Rapidly. The age old institution is changing its ways and yes, we PRs must ensure we’re keeping up.

The trend of newspapers building up their online comment and blogging platforms is growing and there are no signs of this slowing down. Just this week the Mail Online launched ’Right Minds’ – it’s very own online blogging space, much like ‘Comment is Free’ from The Guardian site. Not only does Right Minds feature online-only comment from its regular journalists such as Melanie Phillips and Richard Littlejohn, but it provides links to outside bloggers such as Guido Fawkes, Politico and Conservative Home. Readers are urged to join in live debates and vote in polls. Next week, the free London newspaper, City AM, is about to launch its own version called ‘The Forum’, as media don Roy Greenslade reports. So the boundaries between journalism and readers are falling, with greater interaction between the two. This will allow newspapers to know their audiences better and be more accountable for what they write about, which over time could substantially change the nature of newspaper reporting itself.

But what does this mean for PR and communications? The trend of newspapers evolving their basic operation from print to online is full of opportunities. With an initial article becoming the platform of debate, potentially involving a whole pool of specialists and experts, emphasis will shift from the individual journalist and media outlet to the wider discourse on a subject. And in turn, the role of communications will be less and less ‘behind the scenes’ but increasingly public, transparent and open.

When #PR goes wrong: Best public relations gaffes 2011

Thursday, August 11th, 2011
Laughing at others’ mistakes is a sure-fire way to have karma come and kick you in the teeth and end up making a worse mistake yourself. But there are some PR disasters so funny and/or tragic that we can’t help but mention them. For anyone working in public relations, they serve as effective tales of caution. And for the general public, they serve as humorous anecdotes (but also may sadly reinforce some stereotypes about our industry.)
The most memorable PR gaffe of recent months has to be the breaking of the embargo on J K Rowling’s Pottermore project through an accidental email to all UK national news desks. Normally, achieving widespread national newspaper coverage is something to celebrate, but it was red faces all round (and probably a very angry Ms Rowling!). While the email only revealed a rough PR timeline, it was enough to get the coverage so that when the actual website launched a week later it was, to a degree, ‘old news’.
The Pottermore example is an instance of a genuine error. But what happens when a PR practitioner crosses the path of a journalist and causes a nuisance? We all know how much poor practice can get up journalists’ noses and fairly so given the working pressures and deadlines involved. A recurring pet peeve is being repeatedly badgered to see if a story will make it to print, as one particular Evening Standard writer didn’t hesitate to comment on…
Journalists and PR professionals can work well together when there is mutual interest involved and there is quality information on offer. But even if a story is appealing, the tone must be right too, particularly when celebrities or third parties are involved. If the celebrity is made to sound too much like the PR wants them to sound like, rather than a genuine involvement to promote a cause or campaign, criticism may ensue…
When David Beckham was attributed in his quote as saying phrases such as “going forward” and “final piece in the jigsaw”, the people involved made the easy mistake of using inappropriate PR jargon to an audience that doesn’t appreciate it (the media!). It would be all too easy to criticise this and put it down to PR people being all spin and no substance. But the fact is that every industry has its buzzwords and that it is a simple case of talking to people in a way they relate, rather than being complacent with the way we use language, whatever the industry.
The Beckham quote is nothing compared to some of the all-time classic Twitter gaffes though. One error is mixing business with pleasure when tweeting. Getting them mixed up can cause some amusement….
“Whoa the guys at the Red Cross are all going to get drunk!?” Well, no. This was actually a personal tweet sent out mistakenly through the Red Cross twitter feed.
Apparently, the user hadn’t quite got the hang of HootSuite. This didn’t trouble the Red Cross however, as they recovered nicely with a touch of humour…
As this example demonstrates, mistakes do happen but it is the way we recover from them that counts.
While this handful of PR gaffes is comical, it is in no way exhaustive and we’re sure that there are many more comms slip-ups that are worth mentioning. If you’ve got any to add please do let us know. But if you want more in the mean time, take a trip over to the Huffington Post and give their 8 worst Twitter PR fails a look.

What India’s thriving media industry could mean for the West

Friday, August 5th, 2011

Earlier this week Radio 4’s increasingly popular Today Programme investigated the thriving media industry in India. While newspapers in the UK and US are making cuts left, right and centre, India is working hard to satisfy the appetites of increasing numbers of newspaper readers across the country. Whilst one in every five papers in the world is published in India, quality journalism is not the only condition that makes this possible…

Firstly, online competition is weak. Whilst most people in the West now access news online, the number of people accessing the internet in India is comparatively low. Since newspapers are much cheaper in India relative to their cost in the West, they are also more affordable for many people. Finally, literacy is on the increase (again, contrasting to the worryingly low levels of literacy in the UK).

The differing environments between India and the West mean there are few lessons for UK media to learn from this in terms of boosting readership. But international development could mean that in time, the ‘sleeping giants’ of this world will have the strongest and most influential media worldwide. This is because:
  • Newspaper organisations in countries like India have a head start. Years of experience in the West has created a real confidence in publishers who know what their readers want (such as highly regionalised editions, even down to the dialect used) and how to make profits.
  • Digital media will be better understood and more profitable by the time the internet becomes ubiquitous in countries like India and China (or at least will become more accessible for millions more people). So experiments such as the News International paywalls and tailored content for mobile devices will have had time to prove themselves one way or another and the knowledge from this will mean that big online media operations in developing countries will be built on sound understandings of newer, different business models. After all, we are still finding our feet with these new technologies in the West
Whilst it may be a long way off before we see any major impact in the West from the these far flung media , it is a global world and the ripple effect of a drop in the pond somewhere else could be substantial. The ownership of flagship titles is likely to change (we already have a Russian oligarch owning several of the UK’s most influential newspapers) and if media power-houses such as Murdoch’s News International change significantly – or even collapse altogether – the balance of power could be tipped massively in a very short space of time, with ramifications wide and far.

Just how will this end? Some views on possible #phonehacking scandal outcomes…

Wednesday, July 13th, 2011

All these mind boggling revelations can make your head spin. In the last few days the following shockers have been revealed… 

 But what are the experts in the media world predicting for the future of News International?

  • The News of the World will be swiftly replaced by The Sun on Sunday . This is pretty likely given that the internet domain name has just been snapped up
  • Rupert Murdoch will sell News International entirely. At worst this could mean the closure of more of Britain’s most well established newspapers, although at the very least would involve significant tremors affecting the structure and make-up of these titles. While The Times, Sunday Times and The Sun do not make News Corp a great deal of money compared to their other ventures worldwide, selling them off seems unlikely not least because it would be hugely out of character for Rupert Murdoch
  • James Murdoch will resign from News International. In today’s Prime Minister’s Questions, David Cameron has already strongly stated that if executives are found to have broken the law, they should not be allowed to run media companies. This could mean Rebekah Brooks goes too, but this is the last thing Rupert Murdoch wants. As Reuters’ Felix Salmon writes, News Corp wants her on the inside, working for them, rather than on the outside, turning witness against them
  • Several police officials will be removed from post or demoted at least. Cameron has been clear that he is watching the police response to the inquiry closely, saying today that at the home affairs committee last week they gave a “mixed” performance 

 Whatever happens, the ramifications are big for the UK media industry (fewer scoops? Tamer papers?), the shape and feel of newspapers (changing newspaper titles and editorial teams and agendas) and for News Corp specifically (at the time of writing they have just pulled out of taking over BSkyB. What comes next?)

 The answers won’t all be coming soon, but things are moving so quickly that even bigger announcements could be made at any time…

Media training tip #687: Sometimes it’s okay to go silent in an interview

Thursday, June 9th, 2011

This is not the latest trendy interview technique. Nor is it something that anyone running media training should encourage would-be interviewees to take up. After all, not acknowledging the question asked is a cardinal sin, isn’t it? It makes you look guilty of something, as if the reason you don’t want to talk about it is that you actually have something to hide. But this week the rules were thrown out of the window and a refusal to answer questions was actually a good thing.

Graham Linehan, the comedy writer most known for Father Ted and the IT Crowd, had been asked to appear on the Radio 4 Today Programme to speak about his adaptation of classic movie The Ladykillers on the stage. Since he was asked to go on the show to talk about the play, he was somewhat put out when presenter Justin Webb began attacking his decision to transfer the film to the theatre and went completely silent. After the event, he blogged: “What a treat it was to be able to complain directly to Today’s pompous John Humphries’ stand-in about the squabbling that passes for debate on that program [sic]… What the host didn’t realise is that because I’m not a politician, like the fellow I saw in the green room preparing his lines with an aide, I didn’t have to be held hostage to their artificial reductive, harmful format.”

The Today Programme apologised. So it’s tempting to think Linehan won (although he’d probably take you to task for thinking along such simplistic lines, perhaps quite rightly). However, we do not recommend giving the cold shoulder in interviews. Just look at how bad US Governor Jan Brewer looked when she refused to address questions from the media about her ill-founded claims about crime in the state…

What happens online stays online? How newspapers follow the social media agenda more than ever before

Friday, May 13th, 2011

This press man has just realised that all his journalist buddies have moved on from pencil scrawls on notepads to Twitter feeds on iPads. While his buddies all secretly miss the matching suit and hat combo, they have moved on and our guy has been left behind.

Indeed, 70% of journalists now use social networks to assist reporting compared to 41% the year before (no statistic on hats was available at the time of writing however). This sea change, cited in Appature’s tidy little ‘Twitter in Healthcare’ infogram, is not too surprising, but besides journalists using Twitter to keep up to date with the big breaking news stories, what else does social media offer journalists and where is it all heading?

Super-injunctions are a good place to start – they show just how more ‘free’ online information is when compared to professional media organisations. The Times boldly attacked injunctions by printing the story they intended to write with blacked out text where the information regarding the celebrity involved would be.

None of this has stopped online reporting, largely through Twitter and other social media channels, outing those who have paid for their privacy through these expensive court orders. If you want to find out whodunit just have a look online @InjunctionSuper.

This is a very literal example of how the relationship between traditional media and online has reversed. Rather than big media organisations setting the news agenda on which online discourse focuses, they now report largely on a story that breaks online.

Even in the most old fashioned of editorial conferences and newsrooms, there is a growing understanding that these online interactions have changed. And the social networks they are increasingly exploring and experimenting with are keen to help.

The official Twitter Media blog highlights how TV stations are increasingly using Twitter to poll sentiment about a news story while they broadcast, for example by comparing the number of people adding #GoRoyals or #NoRoyals to their tweets. Newspapers are also printing some of their favourite tweets, such as my beloved local South London Press producing a column with the most amusing and thought provoking messages from local people (although they’re not quite as good as some of their headlines…)

This is all well and good but there still seems to be some significant reluctance by some organisations to get on board the social media rollercoaster as the infogram below shows, from Will Sturgeon’s Media Blog. While Sky News and the BBC have policies in place for their journalists to use Twitter on an individual basis, most newspapers are doing little to speak directly with their audiences in this way. So does this mean they are even more likely to be following the agenda set by online outlets and channels?

At the end of the day, it is individual journalists that are taking the lead with online journalism and this is where anyone working in media relations should focus their efforts. Big organisations are not often well equipped to implement major institutional and cultural change – and this includes media organisations’ social media practices. The most immediate thing happening now is that journalists are using Twitter off their own back to get good stories in the paper. So if you want to get a newspaper’s attention about something, getting to know what conversations these guys are having is not a bad place to start.

Are news outlets competing with Twitter to break stories?

Monday, May 9th, 2011

In case you haven’t heard, Osama Bin Laden is dead. But who was the first to break it? Was it Sky News, the BBC or one of News Corporation’s many media channels? Nope, it was in fact Sohaib Athar (or known in the virtual social world as @ReallyVirtual) who first tweeted about a helicopter hovering over the compound at 1am.

 

In fact, according to a poll by social media news blog Mashable of over 20,000 people, around 30% of participants heard about Bin Laden’s death via Twitter, including myself. In addition to this, Osama Bin Laden’s death was one of the most tweeted events in history, sparking a record 12.4 million tweets per hour. These are absolutely astounding figures for a resource that wasn’t available to us a decade ago. It begs the question whether social media is fast becoming the primary source for breaking news and where this leaves other traditional media.  Is there still some value in reading about the latest news stories in the following morning’s papers?

Although Twitter provides a forum for real-time updates and gives people the opportunity to analyse and post personal opinions on subject matters there is of course a huge difference between stories you can read from a well thought-out article compared with a micro-blog. For starters, one mustn’t forget that journalists need to verify the authenticity of their stories (well, most of the time anyway) and images before they can publish their news. As much as I believe in the rise of citizen journalism and Twitter as a news source, I don’t fail to recognise the work and thorough research that goes into a five page spread about the latest breaking story. Secondly, not only are the stories more credible but you also can’t always believe what you read on Twitter as shown by the recent viral hoax which claimed that Jackie Chan was dead, when in fact he was in very good health!

And the same applies to breaking health news. Back in 2009, during the swine flu outbreak, ‘swine flu’ and ‘Mexico’ were the most tweeted topics during the first few days of the outbreak. Twitter was also used by the US Centre for Disease Control and Prevention to transmit the latest official advice and direct concerned citizens to helpful information. This also helped address the immense amount of incorrect information being posted on the social service at the time.

Essentially, I would say there isn’t a competition between the social versus traditional route of hearing about the latest news.  Twitter might be a faster, more viral medium for breaking worldwide news such as Bin Laden’s death but traditional media provides thorough insights and credible content, which is better researched and backed-up than 140 characters can provide. There’s not much of a competition in my eyes, they’re just different!

How UK Parliament is combating voter apathy with social media

Monday, April 18th, 2011

Social media is infiltrating every aspect of our lives these days, but it is also having a significant effect on the world of politics here in the UK. Guido Fawkes, Westminster’s resident gossip-mongering blogger, recently demonstrated the point:

“One Tory MP opened a CV at the start of an interview for a new researcher this week and spotted that the candidate claimed to be a ‘social media expert’. ‘So what would you bring to the job?’ he quipped, ‘…in fewer than 140 characters…’ The flummoxed young lady didn’t get the job.”

With the likely introduction of new rules allowing iPads and other small media devices inside the Chamber at Westminster following a positive report by the procedures committee, the role of social media within the sphere of politics is likely to expand. At this moment, Tweetminster shows that 266 MPs within Parliament are active on Twitter, engaging with each other and their constituents on all manner of subjects – a positive step towards the sort of open interaction that is essential to restoring confidence after the erosion of trust brought about by the expenses scandal.

But this kind of interaction and use of these resources has been present for many years for political correspondents. Dedicated tweeters, such as the BBC’s Laura Kuenssberg, constantly update to bring the latest developments beyond Westminster. The interaction across cyberspace now not only helps the dissemination of political news but has also become a crucial tool for breaking stories. Last year William Hague was forced to confront rumours about his relationship with an aide during the lead up to the General Election when they had been circulating around the internet. A story that was relatively under the radar for much of the population became a topic of national interest.

It is clear therefore that the onset of social media interaction has provided a platform for information to spread quickly about happenings in Westminster, whether they are official or frivolous. Perhaps more importantly, this revolution is providing opportunities to enhance engagement in politics, an issue often cited with reference to the apparent general apathy of the voting public.

Over the past 50 years membership of political parties has been on a steep downwards curve and turnout at General Elections, although picking up since 2001, is still well below 20th century levels. This issue is never more potent than with the youngest demographic of potential voters, a group that happen to be the widest users of social networking sites. We’ve seen in the Middle East recently the power such resources have in allowing dissenting voices to come together and exercise democracy. Within a matter of years the electorate may be casting their ballots on Facebook for a General Election. One tweet may not say much, but the system as a whole will revolutionise democracy as we know it.

How social media is changing the celebrity media landscape

Tuesday, April 12th, 2011

There is no denying that we all enjoy a voyeuristic ogle at the latest A list (and B list) celebrities – I for one lap up every word about what they eat, wear and where they holiday. But Marketing Magazine has argued that perhaps our love affair with celebrities and reality TV stars is fading with several of the key celebrity weekly media titles announcing a decline in readers over the last year. Magazines such as Heat, Now and OK! have all reported year-on-year falls in circulation and though they may not be experiencing catastrophic decreases at present, there is a fear it is the start of a trend that is set to continue. But this change is not necessarily the result of our lack of interest in celebrities – it may be more to do with a change in the way in which we are consuming celebrity media…

Celebrity websites can update on the latest gossip far quicker than any magazine that might be a week or more behind – and let’s be honest, seven days is a long time in celebrity land. And with more celebrities connecting with their fans via Twitter it is easier for us to keep up to date with their every move directly, giving us a sense of being closer to this previously ‘untouchable’ world. A further consideration is the matter of truth and untruth involved in celebrity media. Magazines specialising in rumour and gossip may be seen as less credible because Twitter and more recently www.icorrect.com makes it easy for celebrities to correct allegations quickly and easily. As a result, celebrity print media is having to broaden its offering in an attempt to keep up with the celebrity news content by giving readers more unseen and exclusive images and in-depth features.

Though it is evident that there is change afoot with the circulations of these magazines, they still reach out to a massive audience of between 300,000 – 400,000 readers each month so they remain an important player in the consumer media landscape particularly when it comes to celebrity led awareness campaigns.

Celebrity endorsement is still valuable, but as we become increasingly more savvy (and potentially more cynical) about the workings of the celebrity media machine, it becomes even more important for them to be the ‘right fit’ and aligned with your brand or campaign message to ensure their support is believable and not just another example of celebrity fickleness. Additionally, if this is achieved, consumers will be more likely to engage with the message which for disease awareness campaigns is critical.

As for the celebrity magazine industry and their woes about falling circulation figures – maybe the Royal Wedding will help to lift their spirits as it will provide limitless content about a very special celebrity couple that will surely give their sales a welcome boost!