We’ve previously discussed location-based advocacy in regard to foursquare – [...]]]> On Wednesday, Facebook rolled out its long-awaited, location-based offering called Places.  Like competitors foursquare and Gowalla, Facebook Places allows users to “check-in” at locations, such as businesses, public spaces or even their homes, to broadcast to friends and connections where they are and what they’re doing.

We’ve previously discussed location-based advocacy in regard to foursquare – but this announcement from Facebook ups the ante by bringing a half a billion people into the location-based check-in world.  Facebook’s reach among social network users ensures that more people will be checking in–for better or for worse.

Just as businesses are growing increasingly aware of potential benefits from check-in services, nonprofits and advocacy groups should be aware of how location-based social networking can help them.  Here are a few things to keep in mind:

• Don’t be afraid to create a place and check in. Facebook has made it very easy to create a “Place” in their new service.  While the program aims to identify businesses or landmarks, there is nothing to say that you can’t just as easily create meeting spots, rally points, or strategically-located sites around key areas.  Trying to get a school board to pay attention?  Add your own “Places” around public schools or libraries with your message included.  Want to impact a member of Congress?  Ask supporters to check-in at their district offices using strategic messaging. Because all “Places” are public, other users will see these messages when they browse potential check-in spots.  The opportunities are limited only to your imagination.
• The benefits of location-based check-ins are immediacy and proximity. The business community has embraced check-in services, because it lets companies communicate with a customer at exactly the right moment–when they are in the business and ready to make a purchase. Advocates using check-in services should look to greet potential supporters with a call to action tied to where they are and what they’re doing.  Encourage passersby to join a nearby rally, or provide potential advocates with talking points, phone numbers and email addresses so they can take immediate action.
• Know your place. Advocacy groups and nonprofits now have new, virtual locations as part of Facebook Places, whether they like it or not.  Make sure you own your own, official Place that represents your organization, and monitor how people interact with it.  This can be your headquarters, offices or meeting points – but make sure you’re the one defining your Place.
• Location isn’t everything. Facebook Places is new and exciting, but it remains to be seen how it will be embraced.  Like any digital offering, use Places only as it makes sense to you–don’t let the buzz force you into rushed strategic decisions.  Keep your goal, audience and message in mind.

Keep an eye on Facebook Places to see how it develops.  It has tremendous potential for businesses and advocacy groups alike–but only if people embrace it.

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

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 [...]]]> 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.

Recently, The Economist took heat for a Gulf Coast oil spill cover that featured an isolated President Obama standing at [...]]]> Everyone can be a photo editor in this age of inexpensive digital cameras and a variety of tools available for altering photographs. In the newsroom, however, some photo editing can do more harm than good.

Recently, The Economist took heat for a Gulf Coast oil spill cover that featured an isolated President Obama standing at the coast’s edge with an oil rig in the background. The magazine altered the source photograph to remove a local elected official standing next to the president. As you can see in a side-by-side comparison by NYTimes.com, the original image and the altered cover tell very different stories. In response to NYTimes.com claims of unethical photo editing, Emma Duncan, deputy editor of The Economist, said:

I asked for Ms. Randolph to be removed because I wanted readers to focus on Mr. Obama, not because I wanted to make him look isolated. That wasn’t the point of the story. “The damage beyond the spill” referred to on the cover, and examined in the cover leader, was the damage not to Mr. Obama, but to business in America.

Well, whether The Economist editorial staff intended to or not, the now-public photo alterations have undermined their cover’s message and impacted the credibility of future cover images as well.

Unfortunately, BP has created its own credibility problem by altering photos, as if their recent PR missteps were not enough. Treehugger.com, one of the most widely-read environmental blogs, reported that a recent BP photo of the company’s oil spill crisis command center in Houston had been altered to add radar images to blank monitor screens. The image appeared prominently on the company’s website. In an article about BP’s altered photo drama, Washington Post energy reporter Steve Mufson’s lead paragraph read:

Apparently BP is no more adept at doctoring photos than it is at plugging deep-sea oil leaks.

Ouch.

Update (7.22.10): more photos doctored by BP continue to come to light, as reported by the Washington Post.

While photos may have to be tweaked or fixed in photo editing programs like Adobe Photoshop before production, communicators and designers should be careful that their image changes don’t alter the original, intended message of the photograph. That’s where The Economist and BP ran into trouble.

Every photograph should tell a story. When sharing enhanced images with the public and the media, transparency is key. Organizations must make sure that story behind the photograph and the story presented in the photograph actually match. Any inconsistencies raises red flags from the media, and the resulting coverage can hurt organizations’ reputations and offer the public an unfocused view of the message they originally intended to convey.

Newly released documents reveal BP’s standard crisis response strategy to be “accentuate the positive, downplay the negative, tell everybody they’re sorry, they’re gonna fix it, they’re gonna do [...]]]> As if BP’s crisis response mistakes mentioned in a recent post weren’t enough, apparently their public relations disasters continue as more oil pumps into the saturated Gulf Coast.

Newly released documents reveal BP’s standard crisis response strategy to be “accentuate the positive, downplay the negative, tell everybody they’re sorry, they’re gonna fix it, they’re gonna do better, and not to worry.” Well, it is good that they developed a crisis communication plan, but it misses a key element—flexibility.

From Flickr User Geoff Livingston

Effective “damage control,” BP’s highest priority, means that your plan should include situation analysis development so your crisis response strategies, messages and tactics are relevant and resonate with your audiences. While taking into account the current news cycle is important when responding to crisis, it should be a part of your situation analysis and not your whole assessment.

And one more blunder of note—apparently BP has hired a private security company to block media from reporting from impacted beaches or interviewing people involved with the clean-up. This exchange between a local reporter and a security guard caught on video is the last thing a PR team would want posted online. These damage control tactics represent short-term thinking and are not helping your cause, BP.

Here’s a new communication strategy free-of-charge—provide full disclosure, access and transparency to the media.

Let them see and document it all: the oil spill containment process, polluted marshes and beaches, oil-covered animals, BP employees helping in the clean-up effort, local fishermen collecting oil from the Gulf. Answer all of their questions and make it clear that BP has nothing to hide or leave unanswered.

By doing so, you let the media tell the full story to the public—and your shareholders—and allow the public to draw its own conclusions and be your judge and jury, instead of relying on aggravated reporters to paint the picture.

Recently, the Christian Science Monitor reported that BP has been buying up top Internet [...]]]> Wow. The BP PR team just can’t get it right. Even fifty days plus after one of the worst environmental disasters in history, the BP crisis communication strategy (if there is one) continues its downward spiral and never ceases to surprise me.

Recently, the Christian Science Monitor reported that BP has been buying up top Internet terms related to BP and the oil spill to push their messages and improve the public perception of the company. Really, BP? Is this the best way to communicate with key audiences and rebuild a tarnished brand? When Saturday Night Live’s next season premieres, count on a Weekend Update Really?!? commentary from Seth Meyers on this one.

From Flickr User lsgcp

Let’s face it: BP is collecting quite a laundry list of communication missteps.  Their gaffes and mistakes will be analyzed and used as examples of poor responses in crisis communication 101 classes for decades to come.

Hopefully as PR professionals, we won’t personally have to deal with a crisis the size and scope of the Gulf Coast oil spill.  Nevertheless, here are a few lessons learned from BP PR strategy to add to your own crisis communication preparedness kit.

1. Prepare spokespersons to be spokespersons. The Boy Scouts’ motto – “Be Prepared” – should be the mantra of your organization’s spokespersons. BP’s CEO Tony Hayward has not represented the company well in interviews thus far. Since crises happen unexpectedly, spokespersons should be prepared at all times for media interviews. Identify potential crisis scenarios in advance and then train spokespersons on how to conduct themselves during interviews and important messages to remember. Spokespersons are your most public presence during a crisis, so make sure they look AND sound good when talking with the media.
2. Manage your audiences’ expectations. Since BP’s oil rig exploded in April, the company has done very little to manage anyone’s expectations about stopping the oil spill and cleaning up the mess — whether Gulf Coast residents, the White House, Congress or the American public.  As a result, it seems no one really knows what is happening – and public outrage grows. When communicating during crises, we must tailor talking points and materials to relate reasonable, achievable next steps. These messages will help keep your audience informed and prepared while keeping their expectations realistic. If BP was more measured when discussing options for dealing with the leak and the recovery process, they would give the impression they were in more control of the situation and ease resulting frustration with their response.
3. Listen first, and then communicate where it makes sense. BP’s attempts to manage the crisis by buying Internet search terms related to the oil spill or trying to shutdown a BP Twitter parody profile were not the best use of PR resources. Instead, they should have taken a page out of Toyota’s crisis communication playbook: listen before you speak. BP PR strategy fails to listen to important audiences not only for responding to this crisis, but also for repairing their brand. During crises, communicators should devise methods — whether formal or informal or online or in-person — to first listen to the needs and perspectives of your audience and then determine where, when and how you will communicate with them. While it’s good to start this practice at the beginning of crises, it is never too late for mid-course corrections and to start doing more listening than talking.

There is a long road ahead for communicators involved in the Gulf Coast oil spill. However, it’s never too late to admit errors in judgment and attempt to communicate differently during a crisis.

So listen up BP PR team. Please do the PR profession a favor and start implementing a communication plan that can be a credit to us rather than perpetuate the notion we’re just flacks and spin doctors. The truth is that right now, you’re not even making “spin” look very good and communicators, the environment and America is paying for it. Like SNL character Oscar Rodgers (a.k.a. Kenan Thompson) says, “Fix it!”