Morgan McLintic on PR

New restroom supplies

I've been in two minds about whether to share this. It's a mass email from our office landlords here in SF that went to all tenants. Thought you should know in case you ever visit. It's an important missive. About toilet paper. OMG.

Dear Tenants,

You may have noticed that the Building made a change in restroom supplies. We changed the toilet tissue to one that is more environmentally friendly. The new toilet tissue does not have a cardboard center, it actually has no core so there is no waste with the new toilet tissue as the entire roll is used. In order to use this toilet tissue in the buildings' existing dispensers, an adaptor is required. With this adaptor, the toilet tissue is placed in the dispenser with the toilet tissue dispensing under the roll with the plastic adaptor bar at the back of the roll. Occasions where the adaptor bar would fall forward are if one tries to re-roll excess tissue back onto the roll or if one is trying to remove tissue over the top of the roll. All that is necessary to return the adaptor bar to the back of the dispenser is to push the adaptor bar back.

We realize this is a change and that some individuals may prefer the old method of toilet tissue dispensing, however, we hope that all the tenants can appreciate the buildings' efforts to become more and more environmentally conscientious. Thank you for your cooperation.

So, sorry if you prefer the 'old method of toilet tissue dispensing', and be warned all you re-rollers.

Talent spotting

Drew's just been selected to the 'Top 29 under 29' by PRWEEK UK [sub req]. I'm claiming full credit for plucking him from relative obscurity at a small regional boutique and plunging him into the bright lights of London PR. At last his name in lights and the recognition he deserves.

OK so all I did was meet him through his blog. And even then he approached me. And it's his work which has rightly earned him this accolade. And he wasn't exactly in the sticks or unknown beforehand.

You're right. Should have kept my mouth shut. It's his moment.

Oh and my colleague, Katie Jamieson's too. Congrats to both.

Monday poll: Will press clippings services survive?

Press clippings services monitor the news for mentions of key words, normally a company name and perhaps its competitors. It's largely a manual process whereby readers literally cut articles from print publications and then send them to their customers. These services, provided by companies such as BurrellesLuce in the US and Romeike in Europe, charge a monthly fee and used to be a staple of any PR campaign.

The advent of online publications, then blogs and Internet search technologies, are changing the game for press clippings services. Many start ups would rather save the $300+ per month, relying on cheaper online services from Google News Alerts to Magenta News. In response clip services, are moving more towards evaluation and analysis, while at the same time moving staff overseas to reduce costs.

Large organizations will probably always want, and be able to afford, a print clippings service. But for the majority of SMBs and emerging companies, will these services be seen as a luxury? Will PR firms insist on a clip service as they did a few years ago? Given the speed of online news, are these services still valuable when it comes to response? Then again, are the newer propositions as comprehensive? Is cutting the clip service really just forcing PR teams to take the process back in-house? So, will traditional press clippings services survive?

[For those reading this via a newsreader, there is an AJAX-based poll pasted below which may not appear in this post via RSS. Please vote on the site - thanks].

Ten reasons why your competitor is getting more coverage than you

Companies get different amounts of media coverage. For everyone but the top dog this is a cause of frustration. Normally that frustration earths itself in the PR department. Questions are asked - what is the source of this injustice? Well, here are ten to start with:

1. It doesn't have to be fair - Media interest in a company does not have to reflect commercial success, technical innovation, charisma, managerial excellence or track record. Your widget may indeed be better, but the media is not duty bound to reflect that. That's no its mandate or raison d'etre. You're making a mistake if you think all press coverage must be objective in tone and volume, and that an injustice has been done to you if you're not getting your share.

2. Fortunes wax and wane - there will be times when you get more coverage than your competitors. Around a big announcement for instance. At other times, when they have the news, it'll be their turn to shine. Don't compare your trough with their peak - take an average over time, say six months to a year.

3. Some companies are bigger than others - the bigger the company, the more news it will have in general. There's just more going on. David shouldn't complain that Goliath's clothes don't fit. Now, I don't mean a small company can't get a disproportionate amount of press attention. Far from it. But recognize that has to be the exception not the rule.

4. Some companies are better than others - this is a hard admission, I know, but regretfully some companies are just better than others. They have a better product, they're more organized, they have a sharper message, better spokespeople. Sometimes your competitor kicks your butt in sales because it's faster, cheaper, better. Same in PR. Leaving the Kool Aid behind, in the cold light of day - are you really as good as them?

5. Some companies put more effort into PR than others - all things being equal, your competitor may win the PR war if they simply allocate more resources to the program. More staff, more PR spend, greater attention, more commitment, a higher priority. If they do that, they should get more coverage. If you do it, so should you. Do you know what their PR spend is for instance?

6. They started sooner - as a rule, you'll get more coverage in your second year of a PR program than the first, and for every year thereafter as your profile increases. In the PR race, some companies start their investment earlier than others (perhaps they were founded 12 months prior) and so they reap the rewards of those efforts. Not to say you can't catch up, but just recognize the race didn't start under the same starting gun.

7. They have a press magnet - regardless of corporate performance, some people are more press-friendly than others. There are people who naturally use soundbites, are personable, have vision, are great connectors, make themselves available and just have that 'it factor'. If your competitor has someone like this - try to poach them and you'll win that magnetism. Meantime, recognize that this is as much about the person, as the company. And congrats to your competitor for hiring them.

8. Your message is wrong - you might have all the ingredients of a great campaign, but you're firing blanks. Take a look at the press releases, pitches, web site - does it resonate with what the media is looking for? Are you current? Are you giving the media what they want or just what you want them to hear? A good indicator of a problem here is if the interviews you hold, don't ink. You've got the opps, but you're missing the target.

9. Your mechanism is wrong - it could be that you're saying the right thing, but in the wrong way to the wrong people. The PR engine may be misfiring. Take a look at how long it takes to get a press release written, approved and out the door. If you're looking at more than a week, including the icy finger of legal review, that's a warning sign. Ditto for arranging press interviews - if you're not booking them sameday and then find you repeatedly re-arrange, that's a problem. Your PR engine is generating heat, not light.

10. Your team is wrong - some PR departments are better than others, some agencies are better. It could be that you have the wrong team implementing the right program. If your competitor has a better agency, and all else is equal, they'll win. Thankfully the signs here are fairly clear in terms of understanding, speed of response, accuracy, availability, team churn, media contacts, and quality of counsel. This is often the starting point when there's an issue. Sometimes, the cause is right there, but sometimes, it's worth looking a little deeper - even if that's uncomfortable.

PRWEEK UK's New Media Conference

A few notes from today's afternoon session:

• McDonalds UK - 'we need to tell our story, not sell our story'. McDonalds is embracing online interaction such as using web chats. For instance, with Channel 4 after a showing of the SuperSize Me movie, the McDonalds UK CEO took live, unfiltered questions. During a 40 minute web chat Channel 4 received 15,000 questions,of which McDonalds answered about 20. McDonalds is engaging in podcasting. It is also about to invest in an interactive online web presence.

• Howard Kosky, founder of Markettiers4dc, a broadcast consultancy - gave an example where he threatened a major automotive company with setting up a blog expressing his dissatisfaction with the problems with his car. Within 48 hours, after a year of trying traditional complaint channels, he received a replacement car. Most consumer blogs about brands are negative complaints rather than positive brand endorsement. Consumers are quicker to complain than congratulate.

• A quick show of hands demonstrated that most delegates did not have Technorati alerts set up about their companies, competitors or key issues.

• Howard Kosky warns organizations not to rush in to blogging 'just because it's fashionable and your advisors are suggesting it.' Companies must recognize that a corporate blog requires significant resource. He also believes that every organization in the UK will have an RSS feed which will replace/augment its email marketing program.

Technorati Tags: markettiers4dc, McDonalds, PRWEEK

Monday poll: Should PR agencies agree to re-pitch an account?

It's an account director's worst nightmare. The client calls and tells him that she'd like to re-pitch the account. She's happy with performance, you've exceeded your agreed objectives, but the client wants to 'see what's out there'. From an agency perspective, the campaign is running like clockwork - good relationship, writing style aligned, know the spokespeople, understand the issues, lots of ideas and directions to take. Now this. Question is - do you fight or do you bow out gracefully? If the client doesn't appreciate the effort you've put in why continue? If it's got to the stage of a re-pitch, do you stand a chance of retention? Can you afford the opportunity cost of the effort involved?

Then again, the client is thinking the agency might have lost its hunger. Perhaps it's time for new blood, some fresh thinking? The campaign is going well but could we do even better? Perhaps there is something else out there? Perhaps not - but best to check you have the best team at the right agency. Why not invite a few others to see what they'd do? Might be a chance to address those niggling issues. At least it will keep the agency on its toes.

And so we enter the no-man's land of the re-pitch. Some would say that at this point, the incumbent agency has lost, so best to cut your losses and move on. Others, that you have to fight your corner, hammer home the achievements to date and show there's plenty of gas in the tank. So what's best? Should agencies jump the hoop or find someone who appreciates their efforts? If they do, will they win? Should PR agencies agree to re-pitch, or is this just a polite way of saying goodbye?

[For those reading this via a newsreader, there is an AJAX-based poll pasted below which may not appear in this post via RSS. Please vote on the site - thanks].

Long time, no post

Sorry to drop off the radar. Afraid a combination of client work, industry events, and moving house rather soaked up every spare moment. The campaigns and event calendar continue, but I'm finally moved in to my new home in San Francisco. The house is in good shape, which is good because for a handyman, I make a great PR person... so you can imagine how bad I am at home improvement.

Anyway, briefly back up for air, before shooting off to the UK for the PRWEEK UK New Media event on Wednesday, and then back to sunny SF on Friday.

Thanks for your patience. Good to be back.

Monday poll: When will the 'social media release' be the norm?

The humble news release has long been under scrutiny and criticism. It's a PR tactic unchanged in many years despite the fact that many journalists prefer to ignore them. With the advent of bloggers as a new audience, the news release is stretched still further, perhaps to breaking point. Some have suggested it's time for a rethink. Todd Defren has pulled together many of the facets this new vehicle might take in his 'social media press release'. This multimedia format might introduce images, audio, video, tags, RSS, links, comments, trackbacks to the traditional news content.

The format had a warm reception and sparked quite a conversation among PR bloggers, who we'd assume would be the early adopters. But the fact remains that the newswires in the US are ill-equipped to handle such a format. And clients, particularly listed firms, may be cautious about changing their PR mechanisms, particularly since some believe news releases are also aimed at end-users.

So the question is, when will the 'social media release' become the norm?

[For those reading this via a newsreader, there is an AJAX-based poll pasted below which may not appear in this post via RSS. Please vote on the site - thanks].