Chapter nine of David Meerman Scott’s book, The New Rules of Marketing and PR, talks about making content-rich Web sites to distribute the most useful information to buyers.
There are all kinds of awards for writers of books, newspaper articles, magazine articles, etc. There are awards for “codies” who make the best looking and most appealing Web sites. Unfortunately, there are no awards or recognition for great online writing.
I think once companies and online writers begin to gain recognition for great content, overall
Web content will significantly increase. I believe that the form and function of a Web site are extremely important attributes of a good site because if people don’t understand it, they won’t use it. The true art, as Scott points out, is a delicate balance of function and content. Hopefully more companies will begin to bridge the gap between these two attributes.
Chapter 10 of David Meerman Scott’s book, The New Rules of Marketing and PR, is titled “You are what you publish.” In it, he talks about after you have established your company’s buyer personas, you need to consider what you want your buyers to believe about your company.
I think this concept is a little risky and is what gives PR people a bad name. Obviously, no one is going to write, “This product is just OK.” But it makes me wonder if maybe companies should spend less time writing what they want their consumers to “believe” and just present the facts and let the public decide what to believe for itself.
If you truly do have the best customer service, by all means, write that. But writing about how wonderful your customer service is, when really, customers have to wait on the phone for 45 minutes before talking to someone who barely speaks english, all you’re going to do is make people weary of your whole organization.
Recently, Auburn University’s Marketing Communications director, Deedie Dowdle visited the AUPRCA to speak to us about her job. What I found really interesting was that she was the communications/PR director at White Water Amusement Park during the whole E-coli crisis (If you are from the south, you know what I’m talking about).
I thought she gave some really great advice about how to deal with crises, but the most important thing that I got out of it was, “what you do in the first 24 hours will determine the outcome of the crisis.”
Even if all you’re saying is, “We don’t have any information for you right now, but we are working as hard as we can and you will know as soon as we know something,” it is better than saying nothing at all. Mrs. Dowdle and her team were very open with the press from the very beginning and as a result, the press was very fair and actually took their side.
I think a lot of companies, in a situation like this, feel like they need to take a day or two to regroup and figure out a plan of attack, but the public interprets this as being shady. Silence isn’t golden, it’s guilty.
Chapter 10 of David Meerman Scott’s book, The New Rules of Marketing and PR, goes into detail about buyer personas. He stresses profiling publics in order to present them with the most relevant, needed information possible. I started thinking about how social networking might help further this thought process.
If you want to find out anything about my personality — what i like and dislike, the type of people I associate with, etc — you will find it on my Facebook profile. What if a company had its very own social network nestled right in with its Web site? Users could create a profile detailing their affiliation with the company, as well as their ideas, concerns, etc. for the company.
Consumers could communicate with employees. Media could communicate with investors. The possibilities are endless. I think this would present a great opportunity for the company to deliver the desired content to the desired users as well as get some feedback on their day-to-day operations.
I took a class this summer titled Foundations of Rhetoric and Social Influence. In it, we discussed a theory by Marshall McLuhan in which the fundamental premise was that the medium is the message.
The meaning and/or experience in a communication transaction is more dependent upon the medium than the content.
The example that my teacher gave was that if a guy proposed in person on one knee, the girl is likely to say yes. However, he could say the exact same words over the phone, but the answer will likely be no.
I started thinking about how this theory relates to public relations, particularly in relation to social media. Because it is so new, I think social media lacks a lot of credibility. Many people, especially traditionalists, don’t understand it. I am a huge advocate of using social media in public relations practices, but I think we should first focus on making those outlets more credible so that the messages we place in them are better received.
For example, I had a terrible perception of blogging before reading David Meerman Scott’s book, The New Rules of Marketing and PR. I always thought about blogs as just a way for kids to release some teen angst. Now, I realize that bloggers can be one of a company’s most important publics.
I think as PR practitioners, we should try to educate more people about social media in order to build it’s credibility as a reliable source of information.
Chapter eight of David Meerman Scott’s book, The New Rules of Marketing and PR, talks about making your company’s big news go viral. In the chapter, he talks about the whole Mentos/Diet Coke explosion and how the videos worked so well for the Mentos company.
I think it’s hard for a company to make its own news viral. In the case of Mentos, a few scientists made the first video, Mentos just took the idea and ran with it by encouraging other people to make their own videos. I think people are tired of marketing. If Mentos had made the first video, I don’t think it would have been as popular because people would have just seen it as an advertisement. When someone outside the company makes the video, it has that grassroots feel to it.
The Dove Real Beauty campaign did make a video that has been viewed by millions of people — the Dove Evolution video. I think this example proves that the only way to go viral is to make the news, videos, etc. completely unique and interesting. Not many people are exposed to the behind-the-scenes workings of a photoshoot. People love watching an average-looking person be transformed into a billboard beauty.
Unfortunately, making a video that is 100% unique and something that people find interesting is often hit or miss. It’s an amazing form of low-cost advertising, but there’s no formula for it’s success.
Recently, I read a post on myglobalcareer.com titled How Resumes Find Black Holes. The post talks about how often people send their resumes to companies and never hear from anyone again. I commented on the post, asking what I could do, as someone who will soon be entering the workforce, to make myself stand out to companies. This is what the author of the post, Rusty Weston, replied:
“I am a proponent of using social networking sites and referrals to achieve introductions to hiring managers or recruiters at companies you are targeting for employment. LinkedIn and Facebook are the top (general) sites at the moment for accomplishing this realistic goal. For example, let’s say your research tells you that you would be happy working at General Electric - but you don’t know anyone in your chosen division. First, build a free, professional looking profile on one or both of these sites. Second, make connections with people who can and will recommend you, including professors, internship colleagues, etc. Third, join interest groups on the subject matter that appeals to you. This will help bring you contacts and possible introductions. Fourth, depending upon your facility with these sites get help as needed for your company/people searches. Once you identify targets (and they’re there for many different professions), see if you are connected via someone you both know (LinkedIn depicts this) and seek an introduction. Once you know the right person’s name you can always mail (or if you’re clever and can google their email) or send them your resume. 
All that said, you should also be on job boards such as ours - which helps employers/recruiters to find you. That’s a passive approach however so you can’t rely strictly upon that.”
This is a completely new outlook on social media for me. We’ve been studying about how commenting on blogs can get you recognized by important people in the biz, but Facebook? It’s actually very clever. I’m not sure how many potential employers are on Facebook at this point, but I’m sure recent hires who can get me in contact with potential employers are.
Food for networking thought…
So in my Style and Design in Public Relations Messages class, my teacher, Robert French, has endlessly drilled into our heads the importance of using social media tools in public relations practices. As I was perusing my favorite Public Relations publications Web site last week, I found a story that, annoyingly enough, proves ol’ teach correct once again.
According to the story on PRWeek’s Web site, Chrysler recently used social media tools to manage and end a strike that took place over labor outsourcing and health benefit issues.
Using a site called chryslerlabortalks07.com, which includes tools such as video interviews with top executives, the company was able to disseminate important information to journalists, employees and the general public. During the strike, the site was continuously updated. The company also sent email updates to employees as well as bloggers to correct as many inaccuracies as possible.
This is clearly a good example of using social media in public relations practices because the strike was ended after only six hours! I think tools such as these are going to become the standard for all crisis situations. In my case studies class, in almost every case we’ve studied, the general consensus is that the company should have communicated better with its target publics. Chrysler obviously figured out the best way to do that and other companies should and will certainly begin to adopt these practices.
Chapter 7 of David Meerman Scott’s book The New Rules of Marketing and PR talks about wikis. Perhaps it’s because Wikipedia has left a bad taste in my mouth, but I am distrustful of wikis as a valuable source of information. On any given day, you can observe the countless asinine revisions made to the Wikipedia site.
The fact that any Joe Schmoe can edit these sites, regardless of background or expertise, makes me weary. I believe that the general population will believe anything they read on the internet without question. In my mind, wikis are potentially a breeding ground for misinformation.
Am I wrong?
This week, the band Radiohead did something out of the ordinary. Rather than suing people for downloading their music for free, they gave it away themselves…for free. After the listener downloads the music, he or she can decide if and how much to pay for it.
I think Radiohead is on the right track. I don’t think every band will start using this tactic, but it’s time musicians realized that the days of $17.99 CDs are out. The internet is taking over and suing your fan base for file-sharing is being looked down upon, to say the least.
I am always skeptical of giving away something for free. I feel that it somehow cheapens the product, but since “free” music has been circulating around the internet for years now, this may be the new wave of music distribution.
Maybe this was a good PR move and maybe it wasn’t. I guess we’ll have to wait and see how “sales” turn out. Radiohead fans are certainly happy about it. Perhaps this will increase concert ticket sales? At least the band proved that it is possible to cut out the middle man and distribute its own product.
