PR Voice

If anybody ever doubted the importance of reputation

The crisis caused by the exposure of the expenses of many MPs threatens more than just the political future of some of those individuals whose claims were highlighted and criticised.

Because if anybody ever doubted the importance of reputation, the current crisis is evidence of just what can happen when reputations are destroyed.

It is worth stating again that whether you are talking about an organisation or an individual, reputation is largely determined by three factors: what you say, what you do, and what others say about you.  I’m afraid that – at different times in this crisis – various MPs and their representatives have failed on all three counts.

And where we stand now, is that the reputational damage is so great – it threatens Parliament itself.  The collapse in voter confidence could very well see even lower voter turn outs in the next round of elections, which in turn could favour minority and extremist parties.

And it is hard to see where all this is currently heading.  Until you go back to those factors that affect reputation and look closely at the first two – what you say and what you do.  Parliament – not one party or another but the institution itself – needs now to be seen to be putting its House in order, it needs, more than ever before, to communicate clearly what it is doing, and some individuals need to either explain, apologise, or stand down – in some cases all three.

The media has played a crucial role in exposing some of the worst excesses; and – when the right actions are being taken – can also play a role in helping to rebuild confidence.  I do worry, however, that the media opinion will likely divide into party political lines and that’s one reason why I feel that the organisation leading change needs to be seen to be Parliament and not necessarily Government.

There is an opportunity for party heads to show leadership, but Parliament needs to unite around a series of changes and measures that have all-party support.  The issues at stake here are, I feel, too big for party point scoring.

Journalists and PRs: can it ever be a marriage?

Last week I debated the various strengths and weaknesses of PR and the media at a splendid event arranged by the CIPR’s Greater London Group in conjunction with the Media Society.  Alongside Jo Tanner, and CIPR Hon Fellow, Peter Luff MP – I did my bit speaking up for our industry against a heavyweight media line-up which included Guardian columnist and former editor of the Daily Mirror, Roy Greenslade, the Independent’s first media editor, Maggie Brown, and the former BBC arts editor, Rosie Millard now of the Sunday Times.

Moderated by former BBC Radio 4 Today programme presenter Sue Macgregor, the event was great knockabout fun in front of an audience of around 100 people.

Cherry Chappell of the Greater London Group was one of the event organisers and she told me that the 50 places for the event allocated to the CIPR were snapped up within 24 hours of the announcement.  Indeed, 70 people applied, so there was even a waiting list.

We were debating the topic: Journalists and PRs: can it ever be a marriage?  It would have been interesting to take a vote on that question at the end of the debate, but instead the vote looked to cover issues of trust surrounding news coverage and that was won fairly clearly by the Media.

My own view on the question of “can it ever be a marriage” is quite simple – it is a marriage and the question is actually what sort of marriage is it?

Having read Flat Earth News by Nick Davies, I am more convinced than ever that the pressure on the media of the 24 hour news cycle, the rise of the constantly updated news web site, and the ever growing influence of social media news sites, is actually affecting news quality adversely.

Meanwhile, our own industry gets larger and its influence on the news cycle also grows.  And while some of you will see this as a good thing, generally speaking I believe the public is better served by a strong, accurate, and independent media.

What’s more, I feel that PR does its best work in that environment and that both organisations and individuals are best served by a strong media and strong tactical PR advice and programmes.  A weak media, that swallows weak PR stories and doesn’t do enough verification and analysis, is not in the best interests of the good PR professional, the media, companies and organisations, or indeed the readers. 

Cherry Chappell summed up the situation well: the debate should actually have been about standards and the need for both parties to keep improving.  But that connects to a bigger issue in media land.

Because as the methods available to consume news continue to evolve, the media world needs to react and change in order to maintain and shore up its business model in the face of falling numbers – both in terms of circulation and advertising. 

Charging for online content is, for example, currently a very hot topic.  But in the UK,  where a news web site as comprehensive as the BBC is available free and funded by the public purse, it is hard to see how any other outlet – beyond specialist sites such as FT.com - could begin to charge a subscription for access to news.

I’m sure therefore that it comes back to content.  Content is king: it is what attracts and keeps the readers and that’s why both we, and the media, need to continue to work on improving the quality of our output.

I’m actually less interested in whether the relationship between the two sides is a marriage – and more interested in seeing that it stays healthy and survives.

A new era

A new era dawned for the CIPR these last few days. We moved out of our home in St James’s Square and into new premises in Russell Square. It is sad to be leaving St James’s, as it proved to be a good home, in particular allowing the Institute to expand its training operations.

 

But our new Russell Square premises give us even more scope to expand our training and qualifications work, while continuing to offer members drop-in and meeting facilities in a central London location. They are currently undergoing some further refurbishment, but I believe the new member facilities will prove very popular when they open shortly. Watch this space for more information.

 

Of course, as my stated objective of this year was to strive to make to “Make Membership Meaningful”, I’m particularly pleased that – as well as the improvements above - today sees the launch of our new online resource kit that provides members with the tools and techniques to demonstrate the value of PR and work more effectively during these challenging times.

 

With the launch of the ‘PR Means Business’ kit (which you can access using your email address as your username and CIPR membership number as your password) and our plans for Russell Square it is very encouraging to see real tangible progress towards my objectives and I’d particularly like to thank the CIPR staff at HQ who have done so much work on my behalf.

 

But that’s not all - since I last wrote, the opening phases of the Chartered Practitioner scheme closed and I am particularly pleased to be one of the 80 people that have made it this far in the its inaugural year.

 

The creation of Chartered Practitioners will represent a real landmark for the industry in the UK and I sincerely hope that, over time, purchasers of PR talent – whether recruiters or clients – will come to regard Chartered status for an individual as important as they do in other professions, notably accountancy.  These are exciting times.

 

Later this week, I get my first experience of being at the Communications Directors Forum on board the Oriana. I’m speaking on my chosen subject of why a well-rounded PR programme makes for a good investment even during a recessionary economic climate.  Along with the CIPR recruitment guru, Steve Miller, I also hope to sign a few members up to the Institute.

 

And speaking of flying the flag for PR, later this month, I’m joining a Flacks and Hack debate at the Foreign Correspondents Club. 

 

I’m looking forward to both events, and I’ll let you know how things go.

The Great Communicator

Has there ever been a more natural communicator on the world stage than Barack Obama?   I’m not really looking for an answer, I’m just mesmerised by the man’s easy charm, his comfort levels when faced with difficult questions – or questions designed to embarrass – and his ability to make even the most controversial political position seem just simply like good common sense.  It is an immense gift.

Ronald Reagan earned the media title of “the great communicator”, but to me Obama gives an object lesson in how to handle the media, and any political inquisitors, that is second to none.

There was a marvellous moment in the hour-long Brown and Obama press conference on the eve of the G20 summit.  As a side point, I only saw it by watching a re-run of it via the red button of Sky News around 10pm that night, fully expecting to watch just the first few minutes and then move on to the Sport.   Instead, I watched the whole hour.

What I most enjoyed, came after the opening exchanges and the detailed questions from the US and UK heavy hitters, when our man from The Sun was called for his question.  It was designed to embarrass and asked Obama what he thought about Brown blaming the US for the problems facing the world economy, for the French blaming the UK and the USA, what he thought of London, and also if he had any tips for England’s football team in their world cup qualifier that night.

In a classic example of how to deal with this situation, Obama started with the football question, and drew some easy laughs by saying how hopeless he had been in predicting the winners in the basketball play-offs.  He moved on to speak warmly of London and its people.  He completely disarmed the situation, and by the time he turned his attention to the loaded political questions his answers were measured, the potential banana skin had been avoided and the media pack were eating out of the palm of his hand.  It was a masterclass.

Meanwhile, the G20 summit has been a challenge for those of us dealing with clients hoping to get some national media attention.  There has only been one story in town.

In my own consultancy, we did manage to link a technology story to the Summit and get some good space in The Guardian, and also a very strong piece on Reuters which has helped to spread our viewpoint worldwide, so the Summit worked out pretty well for us in news terms.

So, all in all, it’s been a busy couple of weeks in my day job, so apologies that this blog took a back seat for a while.  I shall try to redevelop the regular habit.

Fritter ye not

Twitter is certainly managing to stay in the media spotlight and its usage and awareness is growing all the time.

And, of course, as use grows, so does abuse.  So following on from Astroturfing, which is the creation of fake grass roots support, we now have the practice of "frittering" - creating a fraudulent Twitter account.

Writing in this week's PR Week, Richard Stokoe, head of news at the Local Government Association explained how a Twitter account had been created in the name of that organisation's CEO. The account carried the CEO's picture, was being regularly updated with snippets of news, and had attracted some 500 followers.  Except it is not being written by the CEO, any of his staff, or indeed any of the comms team of the organisation. Which creates something of a problem.

At the time of writing, Twitter had not responded by taking down the site and the anonymous poster was still busy creating followers and building a false profile of the organisation.

Reputationally, this has serious implications.  Twitter always presented the opportunity for this sort of thing, and probably needs to work on its verification system, but this development should be raising red flags within the organisation and requires urgent action.

In its early days Twitter attracted a number of people pretending to be celebrities - sometimes openly and usually with the objective of merely having some fun.

Jonathan Ross, a well-known and genuine user of Twitter, set himself up as the No 1 Twitter detective. He checked out celebrity listings and revealed to his followers whether they were fake or genuine. 

But while most of these false celebrity postings could be classified under "harmless fun", passing yourself off as representing the thoughts of a company - maybe even a listed company - certainly takes us into new territory.  Possibly even actionable territory.

Twitter has already reached "bandwagon" status, and looks set to continue growing exponentially.  But if the owners want to look after their own reputation, and protect whatever the planned revenue model is, then they need to act swiftly to prevent the wheels from coming off.

I can’t let the week pass without saying thank you to the Committee members of the new CIPR Regional Group on the Channel Islands.  Past President Lis Lewis-Jones and I visited Guernsey and Jersey last week and were met with a very warm and hospitable welcome on both islands.  With an excellent briefing from the region’s press officer, Steve Falla, I did a series of media briefings and was able to sound halfway intelligent about the Channels Islands as a well-regulated offshore financial centre and also to address criticism of spending on PR by the States Government.  Jason Mackenzie, the chairman, and the rest of the team put on two excellent events – one on each island - for both members and non-members where Lis spoke on the value of membership and I spoke on the value of PR and our plans for the year.  We think we came away with at least half-a-dozen new members, maybe more.   Thanks from both of us for the time and trouble you put into the events to make them both worthwhile and enjoyable.