Accentuate the Positive, 3.0

Blogs are a technology, and nothing more. There is nothing magic about the word blog. Blog, blog, blog, blog, blog. See, I did not turn into a frog.

What is a little frightening is the lack of perspective about where bloggers belong — and that goes back to fundamental misunderstandings about journalists.

Here’s the example de jour: as Congress starts shutting down national security loopholes, the lines they tread are blurry at best.

Ohio Senator Mike DeWine is drafting a bill that would make it illegal to disclose information about either terrorist surveillance, -or- any activity carried out under the 1978 wiretap law that is cited as authorization. A draft of the proposed legislation got leaked to the Associated Press, and there are a number of concerns about it.

The bill is apparently still rather broad in its language, which leads some to believe you could be prosecuted for reading an article about surveillance and telling a friend about it. Highly doubtful.

It’s not uncommon for these drafts to float out as “trial balloons” as part of the vetting procedure. You find out what is troubling, and you fix it before the final release. What is disconcerting to me is the attitude of the policy wonk who is helping write this thing:

“It in no way applies to reporters – in any way, shape or form,” said Mike Dawson, a senior policy adviser to DeWine, responding to an inquiry Friday afternoon. “If a technical fix is necessary, it will be made.”

Reporters love to brag about how they are the “Fourth Estate,” and bask in their special privileges. But are they really that special? Doesn’t the same First Amendment apply to all Americans?

What worries me is how exactly Congress is going to go about defining what is and is not a “reporter.”

Blogs. Blogs, blogs, blogs, blogs, blogs. Nothing magic about the word, but there is something magic about what people put in them. Especially the ones with lots of letters and words and stuff. There’s no telling what kinds of thoughts and opinions can be expressed. And that’s the problem.

This is not a salvo in the debate about whether blogs will ever be on par with the mainstream media. This is about fairness. This is about free speech.

How do you define what a “reporter” is? By their activity? Is one who gathers facts and summarizes them in a publishable form a “reporter?” Is it defined by the medium? Radio-TV-Pulp okay, Blog bad? Whatabout those writing for “online magazines” like Slate? Surely, they must be considered reporters.

Well, maybe we look at it from a professional definition. Does that mean that you have to have a press pass from an “approved” entity to be a reporter? Does it mean that you have to be “professional” in the sense of making money at it? What about people with AdSense on their blogs? Do you have to make certain amount of money to be considered a pro? What if your newspaper hasn’t made money in five years, and some blogger is raking in six-figures?

There is not yet an adequate definition of “reporter” that could not conceivably include every U.S. citizen. There is no “test” you have to pass, no professional certification, no government regulation.

When there is, you have my permission to be scared.

A short, pithy synopsis of the material to follow — with enough of a tease to entice readers to click beyond their feed readers. Of course, these sentences must stand alone, and in the largest font size.

Less cryptic introduction to the topic at hand, in a large font — and aligned with the image of the newsmaker or object seen floating to the right.

Sentence meant to bridge to PR topic, establishing relevance, usually with a hyperlink to the source material. Interesting insight, in the form of an analogy meant to convey meaning in a short fashion. Contrary statement, highlighting the fundamental key difference (in italics) that fine-tunes the reality described by the analogy. Supporting evidence of that contrary statement, indicated with a blockquote from another external source available as a link, and ending in a colon:

Relevant passage from source material, designed to provide just enough context for those who are too lazy to follow or are on dialup. Preferably, a second sentence that highlights an emotional attachment to the perspective — saying something that I would never dare say myself. All enclosed in a large voice balloon that came with the WordPress theme template.

Transitional sentence, usually done in a larger font, again reiterating the main point.

Return to smaller type, to disguise the fact that I am about to steal borrow someone else’s thoughts and opinions. Preferably someone who flaps his gums a lot as outspoken as I am, and in another city:

Quote lifted from another PR blogger, accompanied by an animated .gif that I cleverly assembled using Microsoft Paint, IrfanView, and unFreez — all because I am too cheap poor to buy software. Preference given to quotes from A-listers, on the off chance that my TrackBack link will drive traffic to my blog.

Summary of AB-lister’s point, implying my tacit agreement without committing myself to controversy.

Slow build toward conclusion in a larger font. Synthesis of two main points of quoted texts above, in a callous effort to “break new groud” with a meta-observation.

Pithy, clever conclusion in a massive font, thematically in tune with the opening line and closing the circle.

Birmingham-Southern College is stepping out with a statement about the arrest of its students implicated in the Alabama church fires.

It’s not earth-shattering by any stretch, but when your sky is already falling you’re better off playing it safe. There are some obligatory points you have to hit in these situations. The key is to be humble, sincere, and apologetic without admitting any culpability or liability. You don’t want to over-apologize to the point of a guilty posture.

The quotes from Birmingham-Southern College President Dr. David Pollick run the gamut from sympathy…

“In response to the two students having been charged with arson of nine Alabama community churches, Birmingham-Southern College has suspended each student from the college and immediately banned them from campus awaiting further action by the authorities. The students, faculty and staff of our college are at once shocked and outraged, and we share the sorrow of our neighbors whose churches represent the heart and soul of their communities.

…to blaming society…

“These cruel and senseless acts of destruction have profoundly touched our college community. Where there once existed such a clear line between the harmless and playful and the harmful and cruel, we increasingly see young adults throughout our nation incapable of distinguishing between healthy and destructive conduct. Boundaries are all too often exceeded. The social use of alcohol moves easily and too frequently to dangerous irresponsibility. Innocent and healthy stages of interpersonal social encounters too frequently degrade to violent and personal acts of violation. We see symptoms of a culture of personal license so powerfully magnified in the actions of these young men.”

… to an extension of humanity and aid…

“We also are deeply concerned for the families of these young men, knowing the pain they are experiencing. The entire community of Birmingham-Southern College—students, faculty, and staff—pledges to aid in the rebuilding of these lost churches through our resources and our labor. Together we’ll stand as a reminder of the strength of communities that transcend the differences of religion and place, as well as the effects of mindless cruelty.”

Campus Police Chief Randy Youngblood added the obligatory comment designed to demonstrate transparency and a commitment to justice:

“The college cooperated in every regard to the investigation by the Federal Bureau of Investigation, the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco, and Firearms, and the state Fire Marshall’s Office, and we will continue to do so as needed.”

To be honest, those cop-talk bites are fairly rote and scripted. I’m fairly certain part of the “cooperation” entails saying just this much about the investigation, and no more.

Thoughts from the peanut gallery, anyone?

Fires are a staple of television news — and church fires are a symbol of outright hatred and violence. Put them together, and you have a compelling combination that draws attention from around the globe.

The ATF and FBI have arrested three college students — charged with the intentional torching of nine churches in central and west Alabama. The first five happened in rural Bibb County. The other four were scattered in other counties a few days later, in an attempt to throw a wrench in the investigative track.

In one sense, these communities can start putting these events behind them. Knowing that it was dumb college kids and not race-or-religion-based hate is a slight comfort. Unfortunately, past history tells us that public perception on the national scale will not catch up to the facts. If asked, most people outside of the state will tell you that the last round of hyped church burnings (mid ’90s) were a racial plot, when in fact most were set by members. A year from now, others will insist the Bibb County church fires were set by the Klan. (A funny thought, considering that all five of the Bibb churches were white congregations.)

The state of Alabama has a long way to go in changing perceptions, and its people are at the mercy and whim of those who are content to carry the stereotypes. Those minds won’t be changed until they are ready.

While the state’s image is the indirect “loser” in this affair, the PR staff at Birmingham-Southern College is working to avoid direct fallout. Two of the three arrested are BSC students — and that is not exactly the top-of-mind impression you want to leave. Already, the school is fielding questions about the investigation, part of which occurred on campus:

“I can confirm the FBI was on our campus last evening conducting an investigation,” school spokeswoman Linda Hallmark said today. “At this time, we know nothing more than that. We’re waiting on information and instruction from the FBI.”

UPDATE: Birmingham-Southern is going out of its way to come out of this in as positive a position as possible:

At a press conference this afternoon, Birmingham-Southern President David Pollick pledged to “aid in the rebuilding of these lost churches through our resources and our labors.”

Pollick said it was too early to determine whether the aid would be in the form of money or labor. “We’re hoping to find the best way to help.”

UPDATE 2: An analysis of the BSC official statement

The embers of perception burn long after the fires of hate go cold.

If you really want to cook a butt, you keep the temperature low and roast it slow.

I’m talking about Boston Butts, and I am a bit biased — my father cooks them for fundraisers. Sure, you can fry, braise, broil, blacken, char, sear, and bake a roast. But you can’t beat a butt that’s been slow-cooked.

Enough “butt-puns.”

So much of our PR mindset is predicated on speed. Faster response, faster reflexes, faster spin. We forget how useful slow communication can be. Here’s an example of a new tactic:

I’ve written before about one of the quirks of a “bottomless internet:” the fact that nothing truly fades away anymore. Where you might be aware of things said about you during the news cycle, items that drift in days or weeks later can go unchecked and unchallenged.

So… use that dynamic to your benefit:

1. Don’t link to the complaint. You’ll only draw attention to the original issue.
2. Copy the complaint verbatim, then address it.
3. Make your statement, keep it clean, and get out.
4. Don’t address multiple complaints on the same page. Don’t even link to them together.
5. Don’t use a blog, or any other of your instant channels. Use a web page in an area with low traffic, and don’t publicize it. Let the spiders find it. Then link to it, if necessary.
6. Don’t use urls that are sequential or easy to guess.

The idea is to show up in the very same web searches as the original complaint — which you will, having the same keywords and phrases. By keeping one response to a webpage, you are not advertising any other complaints.

Thoughts, anyone?

We’ve all heard of “shooting the messenger.” However, NBC has taken this to a new low, by shooting messengers in the back.

I thought the whole point of viral marketing was to get other people to carry your water. Take advantage of the relationships and networks millions of individuals maintain, and allow them to evangelize your message and your brand. Thanks to LiveJournal and MySpace, kids who flunk the genetics part of a high-school biology test understand exactly what a “meme” is.

So how is it that a show like Saturday Night Live — which has been lively in name only for years — gets smothered so recently after coming off life support? Instead of allowing fans to spread the news, the messengers get plunked from behind.

The Natalie Portman rap wasn’t the classic that “Lazy Sunday” was — yet the thought of a foul mouth on sweet little Natalie was enough shock-value to get people talking about the show. And sharing the clip.

Here’s the way the listing looks on YouTube:

4-1/2 stars. Impressive. Don’t bother Googling it —
the Peacock has snatched it away:

Now you can go to NBC’s own site and watch it for yourself… as one person pointed out, “without all that bothersome resolution.”

Now, instead of searching the web for “borrowed” NBC highlights, you can go to the source! We’ve taken your viral favorites and gathered them into one convenient location. Watch. React. Tell a friend.

Yes, NBC owns the content.
Yes, NBC has the right to pull it.
Yes, NBC has done nothing wrong.

Just seems a little strange to call it a “viral favorite” when you’re so rigidly controlling the infection. And shooting your messengers in the back. There’s got to be a better way.

I suggest allowing the fans to post what they see on the air, and reserve a special “director’s cut” of the Digital Shorts for the NBC site. Best of both worlds, as fans spend time watching both to see what comes extra in the “official” release.

PR would be an easy business, if only we could get rid of all of the non-trained people who make our jobs difficult.

(Of course, then no real work would get done…)

Your corporate reputation is in the hands of every person who draws from your payroll. And we know how many employees don’t wash their hands.

Here’s a case where the employees can do just about every thing you could want, and still get you in trouble. An AMC theater in Florida is now treading lightly after kicking out a developmentally-challenged boy who laughed too much during a movie. The 19-year-old has a little-known condition called Angelman syndrome, which limits his functions to that of a two-year-old.

“Here’s a child that was laughing at a comedy,” Susan Brown said Monday. “His way of expressing delight and joy at this movie was laughing, but because his communication technique got in the way of someone else’s space, he had to leave.”

The family has been to the theater a number of times, but this is the first where there had been a complaint. The staff tried offering replacement tickets to another screening, but to no avail:

“That (the ticket) wasn’t the point,” said Brown, a stay-at-home mom. “Nobody apologized. Nobody looked at Matt in the eye. It was like he didn’t exist.”

About 20 minutes later, Brown said she went in to get her younger son. Once back in the theater, she paused to give the audience a piece of her mind.

“I guess it’s not appropriate to laugh at a children’s comedy and if you have a disability you don’t need to laugh too loud,” she told the crowd. “Have a nice evening.”

This is a tough one… the ADA does give discretion when one person’s condition affects many others. But that typically has been defined as a violence or safety issue… not a disruption caused by laughter.

According to a statement issued by AMC spokeswoman Melanie Bell, “AMC Theatres has great respect for our guests with special needs and we work very hard to provide everyone the opportunity to attend our theatres comfortably.

“In this particular instance, several members of the theater audience complained that the guest’s outbursts were disruptive,” the company said.

The family is petitioning the ACLU to pursue a case, which only serves to keep AMC in the headlines. And it’s hard to beat a sympathetic kid, even when the law appears to be on your side.

Everyone could use a little media training, even if they never stand before a camera. You’ll never know when an appearance before the wrong lens will end your career. Even if your “career” is fraud.

Wesley Warren of Walker County, Alabama, has pleaded guilty to two counts of FEMA/Hurricane fraud. Each count carries a five-year/$250,000 maximum penalty. Warren passed himself off as a New Orleans evacuee, when in fact he’s really from Jasper.

That’s Jasper, as in Walker County. The same county where he filed his claims.

So, exactly how did this criminal mastermind trip himself up?

The Walker County native gained local notoriety after being featured in a Daily Mountain Eagle article under the alias Wesley Wood. An article published on Sept. 11, in the Eagle’s Lifestyles section featured several accounts of individuals who had fled their homes to escape the destruction of the massive hurricane. Among them, Warren, posing as Wood, related a dramatic story that, according to prosecutors, never happened. Warren’s picture also ran with the story.

Emphasis mine. He allowed his picture to be taken by his hometown paper.

Kidding aside, fraud has been a simmering issue in the relief community. The Red Cross and other groups were faced with a choice: fraud-proof the system, or get the help out the door. They opted for the latter. The difficulty comes when the “bad news big fraud” stories get front page play, and all of the individual convictions and prosecutions get leaked out over time. It’s hard to get reporters and editors interested in a trickle of good evidence, even if it outweighs the bad.

That’s life. Deal with it.

(A tip of the ole fedora to Scott over at Media Orchard.)

Journalists were quick to jump on James Frey for shattering his credibility into a million little pieces, and didn’t cut Oprah much slack for not smacking him around quickly enough.

Journalists talk tough when it comes to credibility… at least when they think no one is listening.

CNN legal guru Nancy Grace is now in the hot-seat, after what appears to be a case of perjury in the court of public opinion. Grace has been very open about her drives, ambitions, and influences in the past. Now those statements are coming back to haunt her.

We’ll let others deal with the fallout and the outcry. I wanted to peel back the skull of the collective journalistic consciousness, and let you see how they perceive this. A sample reaction:

Clever Login Name: When does an embellishment become a lie? I’ve never watched NG, so I have no opinion of her work … but this evokes kind of an ‘eh’ from me. That said, you’d think people in her position would be more careful about the wording of their resumes and profiles.

WARNING: This is a broadcast journalism message board. There is no guarantee that the people you see making posts are actually in the business, but most of them are. Read at your own peril.

Managing reputations in a vacuum is easy. But life is messy — and like sanitation engineers, our job is to make the work environment a little more livable for our execs, stakeholders, and stockholders.

Sometimes all it takes is one wrong click of the mouse. Eric Govan got bounced out of the Golden State Warriors PR department for sending an inappropriate e-mail to a rather large list. Since this happened in the same market as last year’s 49er training video debacle, the effect is somewhat magnified.

Sometimes, the ball bounces in your favor. At the Sundance premeire of “Thank You For Smoking,” Katie Holmes’ anticipated sex scene was nowhere to be found. The explanation is that the projectionist screwed up:

Jason Reitman isn’t mad at the projectionist he said accidentally eliminated Katie Holmes’ sex scene from a screening of “Thank You For Smoking.”

In fact, he joked that he deserves a raise.

Reitman said the mysterious disappearance during the Sundance Film Festival has been great publicity for the movie. He also understands why some people prefer to think Tom Cruise ordered him to cut the scene. Reitman said the problem with the term “projection error is that it’s the truth but it sounds like a lie.”

As it stands, that little bit of publicity may pique some needed curiousity. It’s not like Katie has millions of people thinking she’s been brainwashed by Tom’s Scientology buddies or anything.

I’m willing to ditch this if there are enough complaints… but you may notice that I’ve added a string to the front of the title.

I’m told that an increasing number of people use aggregators and are melding their own feeds. Those who run their own blogs understand the source of the content, but many many more are inclined to think it’s all original to the aggregator (Yahoo or anyone else.)

At least for now, AtP2: ought to be a reminder that a post comes from “Accentuate the Positive, 2.0.”

There are a lot of ways you can go about cashing in on a trend. This latest deal between Pontiac and Google has me scratching my head.

Maybe I just don’t get it. I don’t pay enough attention to ads, but the flashy graphic told me to “Google ‘Pontiac’” to find out more.

If you’re making an internet search your “action step” for a potential buyer, why send them to an undetermined destination? What’s going to stop a bunch of kids from Google-bombing the results page? Further, what will stop an underhanded rep from paying kids to Google-bomb?

Now — is Google giving Pontiac some type of guarantee that it can be made bomb-proof? And is that the sort of guarantee that only comes with a (wink wink nudge nudge) co-branding effort?

Remember this little snarky comment at the end of my last post?

“(When is someone going to develop the AJAX blog template layout, letting you drag and drop to design?)”

Well, it’s here. It’s called Logahead.

It still is in Beta, and has some issues.

Call me psychic. The thing went live on the 25th — more than a full day after I called for it.

No, I am not ready to switch to Logahead. But I am interested to see how it does, and who installs it.

Too many new tools and gizmos… and I am a sucker for trying them out.

At least I have hacked my sidebar so I can keep some things hidden.

Tips of the “tech hat” to Scott and Kami for hitting me with a double-barrelled wakeup call. Maybe I’ve been in Texas too long.

You’ll notice that the last menu item on the right is “Recent Faves.” That has links to the three most recent posts on my Technorati Favorites list, followed by my last five comments on others’ blogs.

Thank goodness these things are automating themselves now. (When is someone going to develop the AJAX blog template layout, letting you drag and drop to design?)

When I left teevee news, you could have heard a pin drop in newsrooms across town. Some of my coworkers thought I’d be the last guy to leave. Big-J Journalism, through and through.

As I started my fledgling steps in the world of public relations, I was quite fortunate to do it in a market where I had worked for seven-and-a-half years. I knew the reporters and the gatekeepers, and they knew me. Some questioned why I would go over to “the dark side.” For the most part, I knew they were kidding.

Apparently, some aren’t kidding when they make comments like that.

Again — having been shielded — I never stopped to think about the source of this antipathy. (At least not in a deep, philosophical way.)

Others have written about this in the past, so I’m not going to rehash with a war story. (And a tip of the hat to Scott at Media Orchard.) I instead offer an allegory:

A great wall divides two camps. On one side, you’ll find a scattering of wells, mines, and other resources. On the other side, you’ll find all of the roads that go to market, and the keys to the fence.

The first tribe knows it must befriend the second tribe if they want to get the most exposure in the market. The second tribe knows they can forage for themselves on the other side, but they can find what they want more quickly if the first tribe guides them in.

It’s a somewhat symbiotic relationship that still appears to favor the tribe with the keys. (If you are urging me to use the word “parasitic” instead, you might be too close to the situation!) I say “appear” because there is a final dynamic at play: competition.

The “keymasters” ought to be living on easy street, but there are too many of them to act as a bloc. As much as they want to exploit the guide-tribe, they know they’ll lose in quantity and quality if they go it alone. If they are the last to market with the wool/water/gold/firewood, they lose.

That’s how competition balances the relationship — but that same competition sours it when misplaced. Journalists are predatory in nature. They seek. They stalk. They hunt. And they do so in an environment where they are competing with several other news-related outlets. And they also compete in-house with the very people that ought to be helping them. When you see nothing but competition in your own editorial meeting, and nothing but competition coming from the other shops in town, and nothing but competition for the ever-fickle consumer… it’s easy to see how that competitive drive ends up aimed at the PR practitioner.

The attitude of many journalists is that they are out for a “higher calling.” That the PR people have “sold out.” The PR people have something to hide — and (here’s the competition) the game to reveal “the truth” is on. “The truth,” of course, fitting their template.

The real irony at play is that the “Big-J” journalists like to adhere to the old line about “giving hope to the helpless and voice to the voiceless.” In other words, providing a platform for those who would not otherwise be heard. But if that “voiceless” person happens to own a business or be somewhat successful — well, all bets are off. There’s no need to “represent” these people fairly, or help them communicate their point of view.

Tribe #2 had better get its collective (cooperative) act together… the tools are changing, and those of us on the PR side are getting less-and-less reliant on their precious keys and gates…