Welcome! Welcome to InSites, Vanguard's award-winning blog dedicated to communications for social change. Please visit our "About" page for more information on InSites. |
Brittany Vanderpool posted this on January 27th, 2012
We all make mistakes in our careers, but it is how we communicate those mistakes that shows our true character.
On January 21 around 8:30 p.m., reports began surfacing that Penn State football coach Joe Paterno had passed away. It started when Penn State’s online news organization, Onward State, posted to its
Twitter account, “Our sources can now confirm: Joseph Vincent Paterno has passed away tonight at the age of 85.”
 Source: Poynter.com
The news was quickly picked up locally and nationally by other outlets, including CBS Sports, which tweeted the story and published an obituary of Paterno without attribution.
Around 9 p.m. that same night, a Paterno family spokesman made clear that the rumors around Paterno’s death were “absolutely not true.” Onward State and CBS Sports both made official retractions immediately following the family’s announcement Saturday night, but Onward State took it one step further.
At just 21 years old, Onward State Managing Editor Devon Edwards possessed the maturity to understand that a simple retraction was not enough. He published a personal apology letter on the publication’s website and Facebook page that is both well-written and genuine. The letter works because it is heartfelt, and he did not make excuses or place blame.
We can all learn something from Edwards. Thanks to social media tools like Twitter, every day brings headlines about crises, most of which immediately go viral. As professional communicators, we need to be as transparent as Devon Edwards in all of our communications–especially our apologies–in order to be effective.
LeAnne DeFrancesco posted this on January 25th, 2012
Picture this: You’re in a staff meeting, and a colleague serves up the great idea you expressed during an earlier brainstorm as her own. You want so desperately to raise your hand and say, “Um, excuse me? That was MY idea.”
 - Source: webster.edu
Perhaps this is because, of all the ideas we generate during say, a year, only a couple — if we’re lucky — are considered truly brilliant, either by our peers, colleagues or clients. That kind of batting average makes one both hungry for credit (also known as attribution) and intensely protective of it because we all know that one great idea can lead to fame and fortune.
Think of inventors. Songwriters. Visual artists. WRITERS. Don’t you wish you would have thought of Post-Its®? Wrote “Jingle Bells?” Developed the storyline for the “Twilight” series? (That would be 3M, James Lord Pierpont, and Stephenie Meyer, respectively.) The medium for idea sharing may vary, but it all comes back to the creative process. When the result of that process generates a masterpiece, creators naturally want (and deserve) credit.
On Jan. 18, several major Internet sites blacked out their content for users in protest of the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA), and predictions were flying that another major blackout was planned for Jan. 23. The latter blackout didn’t pan out as predicted, but the Jan. 18 blackout made people pay attention to the issue. Seems a good time to revisit what’s both appropriate and required in giving credit in PR communications.
As you draft that brochure or conceive a campaign tagline, keep in mind that Plagiarism.org lists the following as conditions for committing plagiarism:
1) Turning in someone else’s work as your own
2) Copying words or ideas from someone else without giving credit
3) Failing to put a quotation in quotation marks
4) Giving incorrect information about the source of a quotation
5) Changing words but copying the sentence structure of a source without giving credit
6) Copying so many words or ideas from a source that it makes up the majority of your work, whether you give credit or not
Similarly, citing your work — and doing so completely — is the responsibility of all communicators. If your heart is where it should be (directing readers to the original source for more information), then there’s really no excuse for sloppy citations. Dig deep, look up the exact page online, do whatever is required so that you can feel good about what you’ve contributed to the process.
Crystal Borde posted this on January 19th, 2012
 Photo courtesy of acf_windy on Flickr When we first posted about the Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) blackout protest scheduled for January 23, we had no idea that Wikipedia and Reddit (which had planned a January 18 blackout protest) would persuade other sites to join their effort yesterday. According to the Los Angeles Times, more than 10,000 sites participated in the SOPA protest by either making their sites inaccessible, or “blacked out”, on Wednesday or posting messages to encourage visitors to contact Congress about SOPA.
It appears their bold effort worked.
By the end of Wednesday, at least three lawmakers withdrew their support for the legislation – Sen. Marco Rubio (R-Fla.) withdrew as a co-sponsor of the Protect IP Act (PIPA) in the Senate and Reps. Lee Terry (R-Neb.) and Ben Quayle (R-Ariz.) withdrew from SOPA, which is the House version of the bill. A few more may be added to that list this morning.
Google reports that at least 4.5 million people signed their online anti-SOPA petition during the protest. Even the White House received nearly 104,000 signatures on a We the People petition calling for President Obama to block passage of bills like SOPA and PIPA.
It is still too early for SOPA protesters to get excited, as support remains for PIPA and SOPA in the Senate and House, respectively. However, the success of the SOPA blackout protest thus far demonstrates how understanding your audience and using what they value to make them take action can spur policy change.
Internet users are constituents, and removing their access to content or interrupting their Web routines with SOPA and PIPA protest notices compelled them to get involved in the protest in their own way. It just goes to show that reaching your audiences where they are is an effective way for communicators to raise awareness and encourage action on an issue. Plus, it doesn’t hurt your cause if you get support from an opinion leader like Facebook Founder and CEO Mark Zuckerberg.
While time will tell if signatures to online petitions and increased calls and emails to Capitol Hill on Wednesday changed the outcome of the January 24 vote in favor of SOPA and PIPA protesters, it is already evident that the reach and response to yesterday’s Internet blackout will definitely impact it.
Crystal Borde posted this on January 17th, 2012
 - Flickr photo courtesy of Redjar
While I may not be able to foresee the future, my media savvy crystal ball is suggesting that Monday, January 23, 2012, will be a dark day for communicators.
If you haven’t heard the troubling news already, Google, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, Paypal and other major Internet mainstays will be staging a “blackout” on January 23 to protest proposed federal legislation that will make them liable for lawsuits for content posted on their websites.
Congress is considering a new bill – called the Protect IP Act or Stop Online Piracy Act (SOPA) – which would allow companies to sue websites for posting protected content without permission and force them to go dark. For example, if I posted a video on YouTube of my friend dancing at a party with our favorite Adele song playing in the background, the record company could sue YouTube and force them to close their whole website for my infraction. There will be a hearing on Tuesday, January 24, to consider this legislation, hence the January 23 protest that could endure for a few hours or an entire day.
For communicators, the uncertainty of the blackout compels us to find and plan for alternative ways to do our online-heavy tasks on January 23. It is rare for a public relations activity to have less than one Internet-related tactic, so, word to the wise: Avoid scheduling events or releases for January 23. It is likely to be a day when our world is narrowed to those we can communicate with in traditional ways so that protesters can enlighten us about our dependence on the World Wide Web and social media.
UPDATE 1/17/12 12:15 P.M. – Wikipedia and Reddit announced that they will blackout their sites on Wednesday, January 18 to protest SOPA. Be prepared as other websites may follow suit. However, it may be unnecessary now. Due to White House pressure over the weekend, House Oversight and Government Reform Committee Chairman Darrell Issa announced this morning (on his website, ironically) that his committee is postponing a hearing on SOPA, essentially shelving the legislation and postponing a vote on the House floor on the bill. Time will tell if communicators need to be concerned about Internet blackout protests actually occurring since the bill seems to be old news now.
UPDATE 1/18/12 9:20 A.M. – Wikipedia and Reddit kept to their threat to go dark for 24 hours today in protest of SOPA, but other big Internet sites, such as Facebook, Twitter and AOL, have declined to participate. Google is just placing copy on their homepage today asking users to contact Congress about the bill. Looks like a widespread Internet blackout as predicted earlier this week will not materialize after all. However, the potential blackout did raise a lot of interesting questions for communicators and Internet users.
Rachael Siefert posted this on December 30th, 2011
This weekend people around the world will gather to celebrate one of the biggest events of the year, New Year’s Eve. To wrap up our InSites for the Future series, Vanguard’s event manager Scott LaLonde looks at the future of event planning.
2012 Will Set A New Standard for Green/Sustainable Events
 Source: Convention Industry Council Associations, government organizations and nonprofits that pride themselves on hosting “green” events may have an eye-opening 2012. The event industry’s first-ever guidelines for environmentally sustainable events are in the final stages of creation and will be rolled out in the new year. The guidelines, created through a partnership of the Convention Industry Council, ASTM Standards (formerly known as the American Society for Testing and Materials), Green Meeting Industry Council and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency will set new standards and criteria measuring the environmental impact of event components, including venue, food and beverage, transportation, audio/visual production and accommodations. Given the potential for media and communicators to scrutinize the legitimacy of “green” events, those who want to promote sustainable events in 2012 and beyond will need to evaluate their plans using these new standards.
– By Scott LaLonde
|
|
