Last night, I decided to go shoe-shopping from the comfort of my sofa, so I whipped out my iPad and went to a popular shoe site. A screen popped up saying that the site had an app for shoe-shopping. Heaven! Three pairs of shoes later, my idle desire to go shoe-shopping had turned into [...]]]>

Last night, I decided to go shoe-shopping from the comfort of my sofa, so I whipped out my iPad and went to a popular shoe site. A screen popped up saying that the site had an app for shoe-shopping. Heaven! Three pairs of shoes later, my idle desire to go shoe-shopping had turned into a “need” for shoes. Why? Because the site grabbed me by making it so darn easy!

Photo courtesy of Steve Rhodes on Flickr

I thought of this as I read that mobile devices, such as my iPad, have outpaced PCs in using wi-fi bandwidth. Just as the shoe site reached out and grabbed me on my sofa, smart communicators are taking advantage of this format evolution to make sure their audiences receive their messages.

Studies show that our brains change when we spend more time browsing the Internet than reading books — our brains become “trained” to be flexible and grasp ideas quickly. So, it stands to reason that people who are using mobile devices to get their information need quick bursts of information and not the “War and Peace” of press releases.

Mobile isn’t just for youngsters anymore. Communicators wanting to reach adults can forgo in-depth prose, because the latest stats show that adults are using wireless more. The trend is even more striking among African-Americans and English-speaking Latinos, who not only outpace whites in cell phone ownership, but also in the use of the phones’ features.

So, the question for communicators:

Hw fst cn u commnic8?

As someone who spends a lot of time working on the issue of electricity grid modernization, I get a number of trade publications every day.  They love to cover (and we love to weigh in on) the power industry’s struggles to engage customers. Since most utilities are virtual monopolies, most have never really talked [...]]]>

As someone who spends a lot of time working on the issue of electricity grid modernization, I get a number of trade publications every day.  They love to cover (and we love to weigh in on) the power industry’s struggles to engage customers. Since most utilities are virtual monopolies, most have never really talked with their customers, much less asked them what they want or need. One of these trades, an online publication, covered the most recent study asking electricity customers what they think about upgrading the power grid. The subject line read “Consumers still don’t grok smart grid, though buy-in key: studies.”

[Insert sound of stereo needle screeching to a halt] Grok? In over 20 years working in communications and marketing, I have never run across that term. But it’s quite possible I missed something along the way, so I conducted a quick poll of my colleagues. Of 29 employees, eight thought they had seen the word before but only two — less than 10 percent — knew what it meant.

So you don’t have to Google it, the word originated in the 1961 Robert Heinlein novel Stranger in a Strange Land. In the book, it’s a Martian word! It has entered our vernacular and now is defined in the Oxford English Dictionary as “to understand intuitively or by empathy; to establish a rapport with.”

Whether the average customer will ever understand, much less “establish a rapport with,” the smart grid is material for another post. But the point here is that the publication used a word in its subject line that likely grabbed attention, but distracted from the larger message. I and others spent so much time looking it up and chuckling about the word choice that we never did read the article thoroughly — and the article was about communicating with customers! The ironies in this situation were stumbling over each other to present themselves.

The New York Times recently ran an article about words in our language that are better left unwritten. The list had originally been compiled by a certain New York magazine editor, and is thus quite subjective, but still a good rundown of words that are, as the writer called it, “phony baloney vocabulary.” Words such as authored, celeb and dubbed were listed. Both that list and the situation above spotlight the urge that writers sometimes feel to get fancy with language — and the folly in doing so. Writing should be greater than the sum of its parts. If you want your reader to “grok” you, avoid over-taxing his or her vocabulary. Otherwise the reader, whether dumbfounded or smug, will spend too much time thinking about you — and not enough time absorbing your message.

Photo courtesy of Stef Thomas on Flickr

Today is Earth Day. Since April 22, 1970, people everywhere have celebrated the Earth and worked together to find ways to protect Mother Nature. But as commercialism has crept into Earth Day celebrations, I have to wonder how “eco-friendly” shopping really is.

Headlines such as Earth Day 2011: [...]]]>

Photo courtesy of Stef Thomas on Flickr

Today is Earth Day. Since April 22, 1970, people everywhere have celebrated the Earth and worked together to find ways to protect Mother Nature. But as commercialism has crept into Earth Day celebrations, I have to wonder how “eco-friendly” shopping really is.

Headlines such as Earth Day 2011: Go Shopping For Your Planetseem benign enough, but they communicate a subtle message that consumerism is the way to fight climate change. According to Andrea Uku, “green” shopping is a great way to show the planet you care:

I can’t think of a better way to show the planet I care than to do a little green shopping     this Earth Day…these items will not-only help you support your environment, but they’ll also help you with a much-needed spring wardrobe update.

In communications and advertising, “eco-friendly” seems to be a buzzword for ecologically friendly, but  as consumers, we have to be careful. For some companies, “eco-friendly” translates to economically friendly greenwashing. Wikipedia defines greenwashing as:

… the deceptive use of green PR or green marketing in order to promote a misleading perception that a company’s policies or products (such as goods or services) are environmentally friendly.

As Slavoj Žižek and others have pointed out, the concept of conscious consumerism is a paradox, because mass consumerism ultimately supports the economic systems that breed environmental degradation and social inequity in the first place. For example, if a person buys Ethos water at Starbucks, five cents goes to helping provide clean water for more than a billion people worldwide. How much clean water (and money) does Starbucks waste in making the plastic Ethos water bottles? Well, they don’t advertise that part so clearly, but I bet it’s much more than the water inside. Annie Leonard’s The Story of Stuff shows that 70 units of waste created every one unit of waste we throw out.

I am just as guilty as the next person of buying things I don’t really need, but taking care of the environment does matter to me. While most of us won’t become climate change activists, even on Earth Day, we can examine our consumerist habits. The next time you see that awesome shirt or those great shoes, ask yourself a few questions:

• Do I really need this or do I just want it?
• Is the company trying to make me think I need it?
• How many resources went into the making  this one product?
• (If they say it’s eco-friendly), is this company an exampleof greenwashing?
• Can I help others discern between environmentalism and consumerism? Need help: Here are some tips to teach kids good practices from the start.

While this may not be big news to you – for a family with two kids in diapers – it’s HUGE!  Beginning today, Sesame Street will feature a daily segment with Super Grover, whose powers involve the “ability to observe, investigate, question and report phenomenon to help kids solve problems.”

Add “and build mutually beneficial [...]]]>

While this may not be big news to you – for a family with two kids in diapers – it’s HUGE!  Beginning today, Sesame Street will feature a daily segment with Super Grover, whose powers involve the “ability to observe, investigate, question and report phenomenon to help kids solve problems.”

Add “and build mutually beneficial relationships” to the end of that sentence and Grover becomes a PR Super Hero!

So what does it take to be a PR Super Hero?  Of course, everything our wise professors and Grunig, Grunig and Dozier explain in The Public Relations Excellence Theory, but beyond that it’s a matter of opinion. Here’s mine:

• A nose for news (Grover’s is pink, but any old nose will do)

• Curiosity that can’t be satisfied

• Constant yearning for learning (Rhyme inspired by too many children’s books)

• An open mind to all perspectives

• A belief that “mutually beneficial” can be achieved

• Flexibility and adaptability to rapid change

• Impeccable writing and presentation skills

• An urge for constructive criticism (because you know it can only get better)

• Passion for your cause

• A sense of humor, genuine smile and – a cape would be nice too!

What do you think it takes to be a Public Relations Super Hero?

Much like Kenneth Cole’s mishap earlier this month, the social buying site Groupon found itself in hot water after its Super Bowl commercial that seemed to mock the struggles of the Tibetan people. The organization has since pulled its ad, with Groupon founder Andrew Mason taking personal responsibility for airing the commercials. While Groupon [...]]]>

Much like Kenneth Cole’s mishap earlier this month, the social buying site Groupon found itself in hot water after its Super Bowl commercial that seemed to mock the struggles of the Tibetan people. The organization has since pulled its ad, with Groupon founder Andrew Mason taking personal responsibility for airing the commercials. While Groupon continues to rank in the top 10 free application list in Apple’s App Store, it will be interesting to watch its long-term trajectory, especially as it prepares to enter the Chinese market, in addition to facing competition from many other social buying sites.

Many are incredulous as to how Groupon wasn’t aware of the commercial’s obvious problems, even if the company was trying to mock itself and not Tibet. Incidences like this underscore the importance of cultural competence when planning any kind of public campaign. Cultural competency requires, at a minimum, research on the potentially controversial issue, an understanding of the current environment, and focus groups to test the concepts. If Groupon had tested its commercials with the representatives from the groups mentioned in the ad, the company would have known immediately that the approach would not go over well.

In the social marketing world that strives to make a positive impact, cultural competency is even more crucial, because we’re not selling products. We’re selling education, awareness and behaviors that enrich lives – many of which are culturally different from our own. Expanding our true understanding of and respect for other cultures may mean the difference between a population’s success or failure.

A worthy example of culturally competent social marketing is the Ad Council’s Superhéroes campaign from March 2008. The campaign sought to lessen the stigma for Latinos regarding going to the doctor and encouraged them to go for regular health check-ups. The volunteer agency researched Latinos’ knowledge of the health care system, preventative health, and their attitudes and behaviors concerning their own well-being. Most importantly, the agency researched what culturally relevant factors would motivate Latinos to see a doctor, and formulated those factors into the campaign. It is notoriously difficult to evaluate health campaigns’ positive outcomes, but the agency did right by not assuming it knew the specific cultural factors beforehand, nor did it assume it knew better than its target audience.

Rebranding is not a new concept in politics. We see political campaigns and candidates reinventing or rebranding themselves all the time. As soon as poll numbers start heading south, branding gurus appear and try to salvage the candidate’s political aspirations by changing the campaign’s look and feel, messaging and direction.

Today, the Democratic National Committee [...]]]>

Rebranding is not a new concept in politics. We see political campaigns and candidates reinventing or rebranding themselves all the time. As soon as poll numbers start heading south, branding gurus appear and try to salvage the candidate’s political aspirations by changing the campaign’s look and feel, messaging and direction.

Today, the Democratic National Committee (DNC) is hoping that their rebranding reveal will salvage their mid-term election hopes in November and keep the White House in 2012. At George Washington University, DNC chairman Tim Kaine revealed the party’s re-branded logo, tagline and website.

DNC reveals new logo, tagline and website for political party's brand

In his blog post announcing the new brand, Kaine stated:

Some may think: it’s just a logo—it’s just a brand. Well I don’t believe the Democratic Party is a logo or a brand—we are much more than that. We are Democrats. We create change that matters. Ours is a party of ideas and ideals, of policies and people, history and purpose.

So call it what you will—this new identity for our party captures the spirit that unites us all. Democrats—all of us—are working for the change that matters.

Whenever I hear about an organization rebranding, I flinch because so many organizations rebrand without a process. Developing organization names, logos and taglines should be a research-based process. Hopefully, the DNC and the Republican National Committee (RNC), who also launched a new look and feel earlier this year, surveyed their target audiences and used that intel to create a look and feel that would be appealing and meet the needs of current and potential supporters. If they didn’t, they may have spent a lot of money on a new brand that will offer little return on their donor’s investment.

What must we keep in mind when conducting the branding or rebranding process?

1. A brand is a promise. It’s important that organizations and campaigns create brands that they can live up to the expectations of their key audiences.
2. A brand is a combination of attributes, communicated through a name or symbol, that influences a thought process in the mind of an audience and creates value. Effective brands are memorable, communicate meaning and inspire action. However, a brand is more than a mere identifier of an organization.
3. Branding is about internal communication as much as external communication. Engaging internal audiences, such as employees, board members and key stakeholders, as well as external target audiences, is an essential element for a successful branding effort.
4. Brands must be founded on audience research. Organizations should discover their brand touchstones or six levels of meaning—an organization or campaign’s attributes, benefits, values, culture, personality and user—by interviewing or surveying their target audiences. Analysis of these findings will be the foundation for the logo design, tagline development and materials development, such as websites, print materials and even social media profiles.

After the November election results, we’ll know if both the DNC and RNC rebrand efforts fulfilled their new brand promise to supporters. If they missed a few branding steps in their process, negative feedback is sure to follow.

To learn more about branding, especially for non-profit organizations, watch the Progressive Communicators Washington DC (PCDC) webcast about branding for non-profit organizations with Vanguard’s Deanna Troust and Cyndi Fernandez. On September 23, PCDC will be discussing how to develop and manage a brand identity.  You can register for the event on the group’s Eventbrite site.

My fellow InSites bloggers Crystal Borde and Chris Connelly have given the campaign kudos in previous posts (see here and here, respectively) and there have been countless articles written about its success. Yes, we all laughed out loud and loved it. So, how much of a success was it?

According to this blog post on [...]]]>

My fellow InSites bloggers Crystal Borde and Chris Connelly have given the campaign kudos in previous posts (see here and here, respectively) and there have been countless articles written about its success. Yes, we all laughed out loud and loved it. So, how much of a success was it?

According to this blog post on AdFreak Old Spice agency Wieden + Kennedy provided these stats on the success of this integrated effort:

• The YouTube/Twitter social media response campaign was “the fastest-growing and most popular interactive campaign in history.”
• More people watched its videos in 24 hours than those who watched Obama’s presidential victory speech. (Which most of us can agree is kinda sad.)
• Total video views reached 40 million in a week.
• Campaign impressions: 1.4 billion.
• Since the campaign launched, Old Spice Bodywash sales are up 27 percent; in the last three months up. 55 percent; and in the last month up 107 percent.

View Wieden + Kennedy’s video presentation on their campaign below.

That’s incredibly impressive, but now what?

In typical PR firm fashion, my colleagues and I were discussing successful viral campaigns recently and the Old Spice campaign came up. We talked about how successful and funny the campaign was, but where does it go from here? Most companies and individuals can only dream about creating a great viral campaign, but what will Old Spice do now that it has a whole new segment of people paying attention to it?

Part of a strong integrated media strategy is knowing what the next step is if you succeed – especially in the fast-moving world of social media.  Gaining attention is only half the battle.  For example, looking at the Old Spice Twitter feed since the campaign ended reveals that messages have fallen off and direct engagement with followers has disappeared.  Now that Old Spice has a captive and engaged audience, can they keep it and use it to continue driving sales?  Only time will tell.

By now, unless you’ve been living in a cave, you’ve heard about JetBlue flight attendant Steve Slater. There’s even a Facebook page dedicated to him, “WWSSD” (“what would Steve Slater do?”).  As a communicator, I think the better question is “WDJBD” – what did JetBlue do?

Steve Slater tapped into some zeitgeist that combined people’s [...]]]>

By now, unless you’ve been living in a cave, you’ve heard about JetBlue flight attendant Steve Slater. There’s even a Facebook page dedicated to him, “WWSSD” (“what would Steve Slater do?”).  As a communicator, I think the better question is “WDJBD” – what did JetBlue do?

Steve Slater tapped into some zeitgeist that combined people’s hatred of workplace stress with people’s anger about the indignities of modern-day flight. He did it in a way that was funny (come on, don’t we all wish life came with inflatable slides?) and, most importantly, he didn’t hurt anybody during his colorful exit.

Three Airplane Tail Sections JetBlue T5 Terminal by mrkathika, on Flickr

So, the temptation for JetBlue might be to show that the airline was cool enough to get how funny this whole thing is. Except for the fact that flight attendants – Southwest Airlines’ stand-up comedians notwithstanding – are supposed to be the ones we count on to save our lives in really terrible emergencies. Emergencies where we expect a degree of level-headedness, not snapping and abandoning ship.  But a response that was too laden with legalese is counter to the slightly hip image JetBlue has cultivated.

At first, I was concerned because it looked like JetBlue was ignoring the whole incident. While the incident and the airline were both analyzed and re-analyzed in the media, JetBlue’s corporate media page was oddly silent.  Some say that JetBlue must have been muzzled by its legal department. Meanwhile, customers on the airline’s fan page began a discussion that supported Steve Slater and took the rude passenger to task. But JetBlue was silent on Facebook, too.

It was only in their blog, BlueTales, that they addressed the issue and they did it brilliantly. A bit of dry humor, a shout-out to the many flight attendants who do their jobs beautifully every day, and a refusal to be drawn out to comment on Steve Slater in particular. My only question to JetBlue is why stick just to social media? Why not address the issue with a statement to all of the media covering the story, including traditional media?

The tone was the right one, but it took two days to respond, and a gesture as flamboyant as Slater’s seems to call for more than a whispered response.

Continuing its recent successful social media initiatives (see my post about Pepsi’s decision to replace their traditional Super Bowl ad with a social media campaign), PepsiCo is looking for 10 ready-to-launch social media, mobile, location-based and digital video start-ups through its PepsiCo10 project.  Focusing on “media, communications and technology,” the project will pair aspiring [...]]]>

Continuing its recent successful social media initiatives (see my post about Pepsi’s decision to replace their traditional Super Bowl ad with a social media campaign), PepsiCo is looking for 10 ready-to-launch social media, mobile, location-based and digital video start-ups through its PepsiCo10 project.  Focusing on “media, communications and technology,” the project will pair aspiring companies with venture capitalists, media strategists and Pepsi’s branding team to help them succeed.

According to this Mashable article, 20 tech start-ups recently presented ideas to a room of PepsiCo executives, digital strategists and brand managers. This is especially interesting because instead of catching up to the hottest new thing, Pepsi will be helping to launch these start-ups and give them an opportunity they might never have had.

The companies in attendance presented technologies that could change the way we shop for groceries, pay our bill at restaurants, watch television and even wake up in the morning.

While some of the start-ups presented ideas about changing the way we buy groceries or entertain ourselves in lines, others presenting ideas to Pepsi recognized its recent innovative moves in the world of social media and used this as a basis for their pitch.

PepsiCo has garnered a lot of attention in the past year for some of its social media initiatives, like the Pepsi Refresh project (made possible in part by the company’s decision to forgo Super Bowl ads this year) and Dewmocracy, which let customers create a new flavor of Mountain Drew. Thus, it wasn’t surprising that the more social media-focused startups presenting devoted much of their pitches to ways PepsiCo could execute campaigns using their products.

Some of the start-ups pitching ideas to Pepsi included:

• Breakoutband. An application that lets you create your own songs from the beats to the lyrics to the vocals. The company pitched an idea for Pepsi to present a tournament “in which bands compete against each other to advance.” In other words, an NCAA bracket for the RockBand crowd.
• FanFeedr. A sports-related application that lets sports fans track their favorite teams and athletes via Web or mobile application. The company saw an opportunity for Gatorade to provide access to its athlete endorsers and “help drive ticket sales to venues where Pepsi is served, by way of knowing which teams its users like.”
• Tongal. A crowdsourced approach to viral video that would allow Pepsi to host a contest where “creatives and producers compete to create the best viral videos” for Pepsi.

What do you think of Pepsi helping to launch tech start-ups?  Will having a stake in these projects give them an edge in communications and marketing around Pepsi products? And which start-ups do you think deserve a place in PepsiCo10?

Last week’s announced demise of Google Wave reminds us that effective execution and promotion are at least as important as a good idea.

I was one of the early Google Wave proponents who spent weeks desperately seeking a coveted invite into the exclusive community of initial users. I loved the idea of melding productivity and [...]]]>

Last week’s announced demise of Google Wave reminds us that effective execution and promotion are at least as important as a good idea.

I was one of the early Google Wave proponents who spent weeks desperately seeking a coveted invite into the exclusive community of initial users. I loved the idea of melding productivity and social networking tools into one tool on my desktop. I had visions of collaborating across clients and countries without need for tracking e-mail strings and endless versions of documents. When a colleague finally sent me an invite, I jumped on to what I imagined to be a virtual cruise ship filled with innovation and idea-sharing. What I found was a bunch of canoes paddling in circles. Forthwith are some lessons I’m taking away as we wave goodbye to Google Wave.

A good brand can lead a horse to water, but it can’t make him drink.  Google Wave initially benefited from the solid, yet innovative, Google brand. Few people understood exactly how the tool would change our lives, but we believed it would, because Google said so. I actually had more discussions with people about the tool in advance of its release than I did using the tool. The problem was that Google Wave seemed complicated and exclusive, exactly the opposite of Google’s friendly, accessible brand.

Stephanie Hannon of Google Wave | Photo From Flickr User niallkennedy

A whole bunch of people in the same place isn’t the same as a community.  Google Wave was seen as a collaborative tool that could streamline communication among communities. Yet, I found myself patching together a network of unlike-minded friends to even try out the tool. Google’s cautious approach to the roll out of the Wave served to discourage early adopters who wanted to dig in with their pals and see what was under the hood.

Keep promotion simple.  For those who were motivated, Google supplied many tools, tutorials and ideas for how Google Wave could change the way we work. Unfortunately, the tool had so much potential that it was hard to describe to friends and colleagues. Apple’s new iPhone OS has more than 100 new features, but they have focused on just one simple concept—the ability to conduct video calls with friends and family.

Know when to quit.  There are lots of good ideas, but only a fraction become real products and services. Google paid close attention to Wave, and they knew when the product had lost momentum and was putting their gold-plated brand at risk. It’s hard to give up when you’ve invested a lot of time, energy and emotion in a project, but it’s even more difficult to survive a long-term, widespread public failure.