Newsjacking

Newsjacking. I can't believe I hadn't heard this word until the Superbowl power outage - but it's great.

When the lights went out at the Mercedes-Benz sponsored MBUSA stadium for the US's biggest sporting event of the year, Audi tweeted "Sending some LEDs to the @MBUSA Superdome right now...". Brilliant. A controversial 'burn' directed to their competitor's biggest night of the year garnering over 10,000 retweets.

Meanwhile Oreos were on the ball with a near instant Facebook update with this image: winning over 20,000 likes... Oreo are pretty good on Facebook.

Hijacking news events and riding the publicity wave is a core PR skill, for B2C, B2B and corporations - and it's so much FUN. Whether it's these funny takes on national (or competitor) events, or more serious use of events to remind people of your brand, the newsworthiness of your story gets a boost from the free publicity wave - effectively hijacking someone else's news. And social media is the perfect medium, making this a relatively new skill where the fastest responses are the winners. So, ear to the ground everyone - who's news can you steal?

See the hubspot site for more examples.

Findus find themselves in the 1980s

Findus seems to be a brand stuck in a time warp - their products, their packaging and their crisis management strategies seem to have changed little since the 1980s.

Great article on The Drum about how media have moved on while Findus' methods of dealing with crisis have not. Where once a brand could weather the storm and wait for the waves of negative publicity to die away, now social media fuel ever enlarging ripples of rumour, rage and recriminations.

Here is Findus' response:

"We understand this is a very sensitive subject for consumers and we would like to reassure you we have reacted immediately. We do not believe this to be a food safety issue. We are confident that we have fully resolved this supply chain issue.”

Findus were aware of the issue in their supply chain for days before it became a crisis for them in the media (python crisis), while Tesco had much less time to react (cobra crisis) yet Tesco responded rapidly and proactively.  Findus almost blame consumers for being 'sensitive' by implying that they do not share the concerns, and fail to state what they are DOING about the issue. Contrast this with Tesco's apology, published in national newspapers at great expense. Note their acceptance of responsibility - while still fairly implicating the supply chain - and their explicit promise of action. Note how they invite two-way dialogue in person, in store. Tesco went on to set up a Facebook page and continue to create dialogue. This is crisis management in the modern age.

Boeing and B2B - trust, risk and reputation

The charred remains of a Dreamliner lithium ion battery

As the new Dreamliner aeroplane is grounded around the world, Boeing face the task of rebuilding the brand's reputation amongst airlines and passengers, assuring both that the Dreamliner (Boeing 787) is a safe and viable alternative to well established Airbus A350.

After problems with burnt out lithium batteries during routine flights, airlines around the world began to ground their Dreamliner fleets, until the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration took the decision to ground ALL Dreamliners around the globe. The Dreamliner is the world's most fuel efficient airliner - a mid-size aeroplane carrying 210-290 passengers and designed to compete with Airbus A350.

Boeing convinced 57 B2B customers that they could trust the brand to deliver a safe and efficient flying experience that kept passengers, regulators and the their accounts departments happy. However that trust is on the line as airlines replace burnt out batteries, face public scrutiny and lose sections of their fleet for perhaps weeks - with ongoing scepticism of the plane by future passengers who may fear flying in them. A great example to support the B2B lecture on this module - and to watch for how Boeing handle this crisis. Would you risk millions on a Dreamliner? What do Boeing need to do claw back the trust these batteries have burnt out?

Polar opposites?

You may have seen the ads on TV, or perhaps shared a link on Facebook or tweeted about it, as Coca-Cola and the World Wildlife Fund (WWF) unite for a campaign to combat climate change. The Arctic Home initiative encourages consumers to use and waste less energy (reducing carbon dioxide emissions) - and to donate money to the WWF to fund climate change research and initiatives.

From a PR point of view the WWF are clearly getting extra coverage financed and crafted by the excellent marketing minds at Coca-Cola - and Coca-Cola are building on the polar bear that became a perhaps unexpected emblem of their brand through their 1993 Christmas ads and later campaigns. The polar bears have recently resurfaced in new wintry commercials, and even a short film directed by Ridley Scott.

It's unclear whether this film was designed to set up the WWF campaign, or if the WWF collaboration and the film were designed to counteract the backfiring of the iconic polar bear imagery. Last October, the Center for Science in the Public Interest collaborated with animators and musicians to create a film about 'The Real Bears' - polar bears who drink sugary drinks and suffer the effects...weight gain, diabetes, tooth decay... The two bears in bed are particularly sad but perhaps the chainsaw amputation is overkill. In the US, sugary drinks are the main source of calories in most Americans' diets, and the soft drink manufacturers are seen as key culprits in the US obesity epidemic.

Furthermore, Coca-Cola is embroiled in a debate about their latest ad, which sought to tackle this thorny issue and the role of sugary drinks, by highlighting their low calorie alternatives, smaller portions and clear food labelling. 

And now they are supporting a charity and the fluffy polar bears with CSR on a topic that seems little related to their core business... And it is perhaps a surprise that the WWF would risk their own image being linked to such a brand, that is in no way universally loved, despite their deep pockets. Is this perhaps a defensive move, well away from controversial brand issues for Coca-Cola? Seemingly talking about the polar opposite to what everyone else is talking about when it comes to Coca-Cola?

Facebook 'fans' are fickle creatures...

Most brands are terrible at using social media: they celebrate their 'likes' and tweets and mentions, and then they abandon their consumer to the competition... Lithium, a social media marketing agency, have published 6 'dos' of social media that PR students may find pretty useful.

For instance, just 98% of Facebook 'fans' never return to the brand page a second time - why aren't brands using their contacts to lure them back again and again to build genuine relationships? Only 0.5% of fans mention the brand they like on Facebook - so is Facebook really that useful to brands? 61% of fans only 'fanned' to get the coupon or offer...its cunning and cold hearted and completely understandable. Forrester analyst Sucharita Mulpuru summarises it neatly, that selling on Facebook is like "trying to sell stuff to people while they're hanging out with their friends at the bar".

Lithium have done just what we recommend in the B2B lecture and created white papers on 6 key topics, including 'Why Facebook shouldn't be the centre of your social strategy' - some of these may be pretty useful for this module and in future careers.

Another example is their white paper on 'Nailing social media marketing ROI': (only) 42% of marketers want to demonstrate the value for money of their social media strategy - only 4% think they do it well.

Have a look at the website and see whether you're a fan...

Has AVE had its day?

Advertising Value Equivalent (AVE) has long been the industry standard for measuring PR, despite extensive academic rejection and criticism by more experienced practitioners, culminating in an explicit call to oust AVE at a European Summit of PR practitioners on Barcelona in 2010. Yet, AVE continues to permeate practice.

AVE simply measures the value of the space that PR occupies in media, traditional or new, calculating it in terms of what would have been paid for that space if it were advertising. Some agencies combine this with a spurious calculation of what the 'added' value is given that the article is more credible as 'earned' space, written by a journalist or blogger say, rather than 'paid for' space. But, as the Barcelona summit concluded, all this measures is the cost of media space, not the value of PR, and it does little to inform future activity.

Tom Watson's article, in press for Public Relations Review, sums this all up neatly, in an easy to read history of the 'orphan metric' that will really help support this module. You will need to access it via UWE library if you have access to it, but if you're not affiliated to a uni probably not worth the price as it's pretty simple.

Is this the new global democracy?

A key theme of this module is the transformative power of the internet: on reputation management, crisis management, and on public affairs. Where once private lobbyists held sway in the corridors of power in democracies around the world through financial clout and personal connections, the internet now hands power back to the people.

Avaaz are an activist group that exists almost entirely in the virtual ether of the internet, spanning international borders and lobbying at the highest levels for global change. At just 5 years old, the organisation claims to be a 'roots up' consulting its tens of thousands of members around the world about issues to campaign on. The organisation targets government policy around the world, whether targeting governments direct about issues within their own countries, or influential outsider governments and international parliaments such as the EU to pressure others.

Issues may concern government policy for their own citizens, such as Uganda's anti-gay laws, or India's ongoing failure to address abuse of women. They also impact on some of the world's largest corporations, targeting companies such as Shell by pressuring the Nigerian government to impose a legitimate $5 billion fine on the oil giant for the 2011 Bonga oil spill when 40,000 barrels of oil leaked into the Atlantic Ocean.

With  'people power' now spanning borders from smartphones, tablets and laptops around the globe through organisations such as Avaaz, governments and corporations may no longer be able to ignore upstart action groups. This is a fundamental shift in power towards the little guys requiring fundamental changes in practice and policy by governments and corporations around the globe.