Someone kindly sent me a link to the Cluetrain Manifesto this week as a "really interesting article" regarding online communications. I read it back in 2000, so someone finding it useful 10 years later, and with the emergence of Facebook, Twitter, LinkedIn, YouTube, is really telling that maybe social media has given us new tools for online PR, but the strategies aren't that different.
She prompted me to look back at some of my own research from then to see if and how it might apply today, and it's pretty critical, I think. (Of course I would say that.)
The important point is incorporating the internet and its channels and communities into communications programmes strategically. Lots of research seems to be focused on the new things we can do with social media, but it's very tactical, and often enamoured with the tech and what it can do, instead of asking the important questions - how can we make it work best for us? how can we make it work with our other communications activicies? is there an appropriate RoI?
If you're not doing much this weekend have a look at what it's still right - and what was a little naive - back in 2001 when I wrote this research document
The media, public relations, companies we meet, best practice and things that get our goat.
Saturday 23 October 2010
Thursday 14 October 2010
News of The World gate is no Watergate - how odd!
A lack of definitive evidence of complicity seems to be sole reason that Andy Coulson has managed to cling on to his job as Director of Communications in Downing Street. In damaging headlines that have been prevalent throughout September, the former News of the World editor is not only alleged to have been complicit in, but ‘actively encouraged’ the phone-hacking of several high-profile individuals during his time at the tabloid. The re-emergence of this story, first carried by the Guardian in the summer of 2009, has not only led to questions of judgement in the British Government, but clearly demands a wider inquiry into media morals and the power possessed by the media in society.
Despite the accusations directed at Mr Coulson, he can count on the support of both Nick Clegg and David Cameron who have both stood by him in the face of anxiety throughout the coalition. In Parliament, it was claimed that when Coulson originally resigned from his editorial position at the News of the World, the first person to offer commiserations was then Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. So political support from all sides, it seems – at least publicly. However, whether Cameron still feels as ‘relaxed’ about Coulson’s appointment, as he claimed when the story originally broke, is unlikely as clamours for his departure reign down from the backbenches. In many ways, it could be suggested that it’s only for a lack of cohesion and sense of direction in Labour’s PR department that Coulson has been able to remain in his job to date. A clear opportunity for the opposition to launch damaging blows in Cameron’s direction has nearly passed without the former editor having to use any of his media skills.
The emergence of the phone-tapping scandal has also evoked a need for further investigation into the role that Rupert Murdoch, owner of ‘News of the World’ parent company ‘News International’, has in the decision making process at the heart of British government. News International, in 2009, seemingly paid out more than £1 million to settle legal cases that threatened to reveal evidence of journalists using criminal methods to acquire stories. Controversially, it would seem that the intimate relationship enjoyed by Cameron and Murdoch was hugely significant in Coulson’s original political appointment back in 2007. Cameron, with Coulson in his current position, may soon experience a rebuttal of his government’s integrity, particularly with a number of MP’s, and high profile celebrities alleging their phones have been hacked, and many would argue he’d be prudent to quietly show Coulson the door before the police question Coulson following new allegations.
In any democracy one must ask if a person can remain in an authoritative position when they are under investigation for using Stasi-like tactics. Let’s not forget that it was bugging and secret tape-recordings – an offence not dissimilar to that of voicemail hacking – that was at the heart of President Richard Nixon’s impeachment.
In a coalition that has endeavoured to distance itself from previous scandal and make ‘government accountable to the people’, the Coulson predicament has the potential to be even more damaging. The fact that Coulson denies that he knew anything about the phone-tapping suggests a disregard for duty in the first place; either way, his position as ‘Head of Communications’ seems difficult to defend. It is essential that any media editor should check the strengths of his journalists sources, if Coulson was not mindful of the investigations his journalists were conducting, there should be questions as to why this was not the case, and his general competence.
Clearly, this is a scandal that Cameron would be wise to try and distance himself from, sooner rather than later, as there appears to be almost no redeeming aspects to the quandary in which he now finds himself. The sacking of Coulson, alongside an attempt to make government changes to tighten the checks and balances involved within media investigations, could help to limit the potential damage.
Divisions between private and public information have become increasingly blurred post 9/11. Electronic eavesdropping is a serious crime, and should be treated as such, yet, in certain cases, also has the ability to uncover vital information that may help to keep the public safe. Nevertheless, what is inexcusable is the tapping of phones for entertainment purposes. As more people come forward to speak about the ‘News of the World’ case, the Westminster village is full of rumours about how widespread the practice really is. Clearly tighter controls on the methods used by journalists are essential to avoid repeat questions of the invasion of privacy, alleged to be practiced throughout the News of the World under Coulson’s tenure. The culture that had emerged, with allegedly nearly 3,000 people targeted, further demonstrates the extent of the problem and the need for change. This is just the latest case of journalists sacrificing professional ethics for commercial benefit.
At present, there seems to be little power or desire of holding the media to account by anyone. At present, Coulson’s close relationship to News International may have limited the backlash to issue to just a handful of publications, unsurprisingly none of them belonging to News International. The BBC also took their time in reporting a follow-up story from the New York Times which introduced a “former reporter” who said Coulson was present during discussions about phone hacking.
Murdoch’s dominant publications remain The Sun and the News of the World. As Britain’s best read paper, and a daily readership of over 3 million, The Sun is consequently well placed to influence many of the British public’s perceptions. An illustration of the power The Sun wields is the “elephant in the room” treatment of what one can easily argue amounts to porn on its third page. However, critics of Page 3, although many, remain noticeably quiet, perhaps fearful of the backlash that The Sun, with its unmatched ability to influence public perception, will almost certainly embark on.
Those who have castigated this national treasure have often performed a startling u-turn on their original statements. One recent example of this is the apparent softening of Government Minister Lynne Featherstone’s desire to ban page 3 claiming that her original comments went “against liberal principles”. If such retractions have been made because of the threat of reaction from a News International publication, then it further indicates a sense of fear that The Sun and News of the World have created, and a subsequent imbalance of power in society.
The ability for a media institution to exploit the privacy of some, whilst limiting the freedom of speech of others is something that should never happen in a modern democracy. Regardless of what happens in the instant case of Mr Coulson, the coalition has a duty under international law to protect the privacy and free speech of its citizens – including its politicians. It has promised in its programme of government to protect civil liberties. If it is proved that there is a reckless senior advisor in Downing Street who’s shown few qualms about overstepping these boundaries, it will raise questions about the integrity of the UK’s new Government.
Despite the accusations directed at Mr Coulson, he can count on the support of both Nick Clegg and David Cameron who have both stood by him in the face of anxiety throughout the coalition. In Parliament, it was claimed that when Coulson originally resigned from his editorial position at the News of the World, the first person to offer commiserations was then Prime Minister, Gordon Brown. So political support from all sides, it seems – at least publicly. However, whether Cameron still feels as ‘relaxed’ about Coulson’s appointment, as he claimed when the story originally broke, is unlikely as clamours for his departure reign down from the backbenches. In many ways, it could be suggested that it’s only for a lack of cohesion and sense of direction in Labour’s PR department that Coulson has been able to remain in his job to date. A clear opportunity for the opposition to launch damaging blows in Cameron’s direction has nearly passed without the former editor having to use any of his media skills.
The emergence of the phone-tapping scandal has also evoked a need for further investigation into the role that Rupert Murdoch, owner of ‘News of the World’ parent company ‘News International’, has in the decision making process at the heart of British government. News International, in 2009, seemingly paid out more than £1 million to settle legal cases that threatened to reveal evidence of journalists using criminal methods to acquire stories. Controversially, it would seem that the intimate relationship enjoyed by Cameron and Murdoch was hugely significant in Coulson’s original political appointment back in 2007. Cameron, with Coulson in his current position, may soon experience a rebuttal of his government’s integrity, particularly with a number of MP’s, and high profile celebrities alleging their phones have been hacked, and many would argue he’d be prudent to quietly show Coulson the door before the police question Coulson following new allegations.
In any democracy one must ask if a person can remain in an authoritative position when they are under investigation for using Stasi-like tactics. Let’s not forget that it was bugging and secret tape-recordings – an offence not dissimilar to that of voicemail hacking – that was at the heart of President Richard Nixon’s impeachment.
In a coalition that has endeavoured to distance itself from previous scandal and make ‘government accountable to the people’, the Coulson predicament has the potential to be even more damaging. The fact that Coulson denies that he knew anything about the phone-tapping suggests a disregard for duty in the first place; either way, his position as ‘Head of Communications’ seems difficult to defend. It is essential that any media editor should check the strengths of his journalists sources, if Coulson was not mindful of the investigations his journalists were conducting, there should be questions as to why this was not the case, and his general competence.
Clearly, this is a scandal that Cameron would be wise to try and distance himself from, sooner rather than later, as there appears to be almost no redeeming aspects to the quandary in which he now finds himself. The sacking of Coulson, alongside an attempt to make government changes to tighten the checks and balances involved within media investigations, could help to limit the potential damage.
Divisions between private and public information have become increasingly blurred post 9/11. Electronic eavesdropping is a serious crime, and should be treated as such, yet, in certain cases, also has the ability to uncover vital information that may help to keep the public safe. Nevertheless, what is inexcusable is the tapping of phones for entertainment purposes. As more people come forward to speak about the ‘News of the World’ case, the Westminster village is full of rumours about how widespread the practice really is. Clearly tighter controls on the methods used by journalists are essential to avoid repeat questions of the invasion of privacy, alleged to be practiced throughout the News of the World under Coulson’s tenure. The culture that had emerged, with allegedly nearly 3,000 people targeted, further demonstrates the extent of the problem and the need for change. This is just the latest case of journalists sacrificing professional ethics for commercial benefit.
At present, there seems to be little power or desire of holding the media to account by anyone. At present, Coulson’s close relationship to News International may have limited the backlash to issue to just a handful of publications, unsurprisingly none of them belonging to News International. The BBC also took their time in reporting a follow-up story from the New York Times which introduced a “former reporter” who said Coulson was present during discussions about phone hacking.
Murdoch’s dominant publications remain The Sun and the News of the World. As Britain’s best read paper, and a daily readership of over 3 million, The Sun is consequently well placed to influence many of the British public’s perceptions. An illustration of the power The Sun wields is the “elephant in the room” treatment of what one can easily argue amounts to porn on its third page. However, critics of Page 3, although many, remain noticeably quiet, perhaps fearful of the backlash that The Sun, with its unmatched ability to influence public perception, will almost certainly embark on.
Those who have castigated this national treasure have often performed a startling u-turn on their original statements. One recent example of this is the apparent softening of Government Minister Lynne Featherstone’s desire to ban page 3 claiming that her original comments went “against liberal principles”. If such retractions have been made because of the threat of reaction from a News International publication, then it further indicates a sense of fear that The Sun and News of the World have created, and a subsequent imbalance of power in society.
The ability for a media institution to exploit the privacy of some, whilst limiting the freedom of speech of others is something that should never happen in a modern democracy. Regardless of what happens in the instant case of Mr Coulson, the coalition has a duty under international law to protect the privacy and free speech of its citizens – including its politicians. It has promised in its programme of government to protect civil liberties. If it is proved that there is a reckless senior advisor in Downing Street who’s shown few qualms about overstepping these boundaries, it will raise questions about the integrity of the UK’s new Government.
Thursday 7 October 2010
Spam Headlines and Headline Spam
An article from ISP Grub.
"...say "marketing emails" and the man in the street would be forgiven for thinking "spam". But anyone working in the ISP industry, particularly a committed analyst of the ISP industry, such as ISP focused journalists and bloggers, would know the difference. Should know the difference. In fact, MUST know the difference."
http://www.ispgrub.org/2010/10/spam-headlines-are-headline-spam.html
"...say "marketing emails" and the man in the street would be forgiven for thinking "spam". But anyone working in the ISP industry, particularly a committed analyst of the ISP industry, such as ISP focused journalists and bloggers, would know the difference. Should know the difference. In fact, MUST know the difference."
http://www.ispgrub.org/2010/10/spam-headlines-are-headline-spam.html
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)