filter by date: January 2010

If your clients aren’t talking about social media, get them started now! A new study from Cision and George Washington University finds nine out of 10 journalists turn to at least one type of new media channel for story research and source information. That’s especially true for newspaper and online journalists, three-quarters of who use social networking sites for research, compared to just under two-thirds for magazine writers.

The big takeaway here is that while journalists used to go directly to the source for information, they are increasingly looking to social media to act as conduits. This means that we need to make sure our clients are participating in and taking ownership of the online dialogue and their presence across social media, blogs and traditional online media. This requires an entirely new level of rigor and in many cases, new skill sets to maintain their brand.

This could be a good opportunity to start a dialogue with your clients about the importance of online brand maintenance and reputation – beginning with a basic audit of their online presence. From there you can start to home in on the key places where consumers are talking about your brand.

Josh Bernoff, Forrester analyst and author of groundswell – winning in a world transformed by social technologies, is a leading force in helping survey and segment how people use the Internet. His research is an invaluable resource for marketers trying to understand social technology behavior. His Social Technographics “ladder” is a segmentation model of how adults online are using technology socially. In most cases a person falls into more than one group, groups include:

• Creators – Who actively create content for an audience.
• Conversationalists (New) – Who have quick exchanges back and forth through Twitter/Facebook updates.
• Critics – Who rate sites, comment on blogs and edit wikis.
• Collectors – Who use RSS feeds and add “tags” to pages or photos online.
• Joiners – Maintain a profile on social networking sites.
• Spectators – Consume content online but do not create.
• Inactives – None of the above

This week Bernoff released an updated version of the ladder specifically to address how Internet users are using Twitter – the microblogging site. Here is what Bernoff had to say,

“Well, it worked. Despite the rapid pace of technology adoption, the rungs on the ladder have shown steady growth, with some (like Joiners) growing faster than others (like Creators). We have analyzed data for 13 countries, for business buyers, and even for voters. My colleagues and I have done profiles for over a hundred clients, profiling Walmart shoppers, non-profit donors, and doctors. In all that time, only one thing has been bugging me: there was no place for Twitter. We fixed that today.”

The “fix” Bernoff is referring to, is a new rung called “Conversationalists” a group that 33% of adults online fall in. This Forrester’s ladder update is a big win for all who champion using online conversations to build relationships and trust. It illustrates the point that conversations among friends, families and between brands and consumers are shifting to the online space. With a third of all U.S. adults in this group it makes it hard for brands to ignore the status update phenomenon that is Twitter and Facebook.

How many of the rungs do you fall under? Is there one or two you would add?

-- Marcus Andrews, New Media Associate

Almost 80 percent of new media users interact with companies or brands online. So, it's pretty much an imperative that your brand have a social media strategy in place. But that poses a puzzling question: Who should take the lead when it comes to developing your social media strategy? PR or digital?

2009 Cone Consumer New Media Study

A recent PRNews article lays out the argument for the PR folks, and our own director of new media, Mike Hollywood, couldn't agree more. "Our channel agnosticism affords us the luxury of looking at the entire media landscape before deciding which channels are best for our client's message AND audience."

Read his take on the debate and get tips for implementing your own social media strategy.* And be sure to tell us what you think. Who should own the strategy?

*Check out our updated new media research, the 2009 Consumer New Media Study.

Is it a sign the worst is over for the newspaper industry?

An industry that only a few months ago was suffering massive layoffs and closures now sees one of its leaders embarking on an ambitious marketing campaign. The Wall Street Journal announced this week that it will launch a new brand awareness campaign with executions across print, online and broadcast.

The paper’s first marketing initiative in three years is designed to improve people’s perceptions of the quality and breadth of the newspaper’s coverage. With the tagline “Live in the Know,” the campaign stresses the importance of moving beyond bite-sized news briefs to longer, more comprehensive coverage and analysis – like only a newspaper could deliver. WSJ hopes “Live in the Know” will appeal to readers looking to be better informed about current affairs, especially in the wake of the financial crises of the last year.

Despite the shuttering of long-established papers like the Seattle Post-Intelligencer and Rocky Mountain News, declining ad spend and 15,000 layoffs in 2009, refocusing on content and quality might be just what the industry needs to get back on track. Although downsizing was the trend for newspapers in 2009, Rich Boehne, CEO of newspaper publisher E.W. Scripps, doesn’t see that as a sustainable business model for the industry. "In the longer run, we will need to add (newsroom) jobs, add content and raise (circulation) rates."

For the sake of all newspapers, and those of us who read them, let’s hope the WSJ will deliver on this promise and lead by example.

Hanes’ decision to end its advertising campaign featuring Charlie Sheen, following the actor’s domestic violence charges, comes right on the heels of a flurry of other terminated celebrity partnerships stemming from the Tiger Woods scandal.

Given the recent spate of high-profile celebrity partnerships turned sour, many brand marketers are scrambling as they rethink their celebrity engagement strategies for 2010. But, before you hit the panic button, be sure to take a step back and carefully weigh the benefits and risks of celebrity engagement.

Celebrity spokespeople can be a powerful addition to a marketing communications strategy. Celebrities have strong influence with consumers and drive valuable media coverage and exposure for a brand. But there can be some risk involved. Keep in mind that celebrities are human beings – meaning they have plenty of flaws and are apt to make mistakes. While most celebrity partnerships go off without a hitch, those that don’t often end up splashed across news headlines, creating problems (and headaches) for brand marketers.

So what’s the best approach for maximizing value from a celebrity partnership while minimizing your risks?

• Do your homework – In addition to the basics of ensuring a celebrity partner is a good fit for your brand and your target audience, conduct a thorough background check to uncover any “skeletons” that may be hiding in his or her closet. If a celebrity has been tied to scandals in the past or has had previous run-ins with the law, be aware of the risk you are taking.
• Set clear parameters – When developing a contract with a celebrity, clearly outline your expectations and behaviors that will result in termination of the contract. Be sure to structure your contract in a way that gives you an out if the celebrity should engage in behavior that is not in keeping with your brand.
• Be prepared – Tiger Woods is a prime example that even celebrities with a squeaky clean image can be a risk, so prepare for the worst. Have a clearly defined action plan for handling a crisis involving your celebrity spokesperson. Determine in advance what key factors you will use in deciding your course of action. Be sure to identify the key decision makers and map out how you will communicate your decision. This will allow you to take swift action if the need should arise.
• Act quickly and decisively – In the hours following a scandal involving your celebrity partner, what you do – and don’t – say can have a significant impact on your brand. Hanes’ quick decision to pull its ad campaign sent a very clear message to consumers about its brand values to ensure the Hanes brand image stayed intact.

-- Amy Russ, Director

‘Tis the season to get skinny…and fast! The mother of all New Year’s resolutions didn’t disappoint in 2010, as “lose weight” tops the list again this year with 22 percent of consumers who made resolutions looking to shed some extra pounds.

Long on top of the weight-loss trend, fast food restaurants haven’t been shy about pushing lower-calorie/less-fat versions of their standard fare. This has been a boon for consumers who don’t want to make drastic changes to eating habits that may already include fast food indulgences. As counter-intuitive as it may seem, fast food diets can actually help some people lose weight, at least in the short term, if the products provide less fat, sugar, sodium and/or fewer calories.

The latest entrant into the fast-food diet wars is Taco Bell, who recently introduced its Drive-Thru Diet, featuring seven “Fresco” menu options with fewer than nine grams of fat. The campaign stars Christine, a woman who lost 54 lbs. in part by switching to Fresco menu items. Marketing is also supported by new media elements, including an online “Frescolution” pledge to eat less and exercise more, a Twitter contest and e-cards to invite friends to take the pledge. Taco Bell even joined forces with the NBA to promote the diet as part of a fit and healthy lifestyle.

The young campaign has already faced some harsh criticism, but by avoiding words like “healthy” or “weight loss,” Taco Bell is in the clear, at least from a legal standpoint. Marketing healthy foods or diets can be fraught with legal and ethical pitfalls. Below are some tips for authentically communicating your foods’ health messages:

1. Provide the facts (even the less desirable ones): Your foods may be low in fat, but are they high in sodium? Let consumers know the whole health-related story. And be sure when using testimonials to provide your consumers with details about dietary and lifestyle habits outside of your diet.
2. Avoid claims that aren’t substantiated with research: You could be opening yourself up to criticism, or even worse, liability if your claims are not founded on legitimate scientific research. Take the time to research your claims before slapping them on a Web site or billboard.
3. Provide context: There’s no official definition of “health food,” so be careful if positioning foods as healthy vs. unhealthy. Instead, be upfront about the foods’ nutritional contents and how they vary from typical offerings.
4. Engage a credible third party: Endorsement by a credible health expert can help communicate the real nutritional value of food offerings and convince skeptical consumers. Have a third-party expert serve as a spokesperson, or at least publicly sign-off on your products and promises, for your marketing campaign.

Few stories over the past months have gotten as much attention as the Tiger Woods saga. And as marketing and public relations professionals, it is worth taking a look at the way this story has spiraled from a one-car fender bender to worldwide scandal that will be measured in the hundreds of millions of dollars.

This story, more than most in recent memory, has precipitated a flurry of opinions and advice from public relations professionals on how things “should” have been done as the scandal began to take shape. Some say it would have been best for him to speak publicly and put the rumors to rest – the David Letterman approach. Others argue his silence has been valuable. Still, some say the media are infringing on a hurting family’s privacy and should only be interested in Tiger Woods as a golfer, not as a family man. But for those of us whose business isn’t what is happening in Tiger’s personal life, it is worthwhile to look at the impact this scandal has on Tiger Woods the brand.

Image Credit: Examiner

Tiger Woods isn’t “just a golfer.” For many, he’s essentially the public face of golf. And he certainly is the public face of many companies who have paid millions to see Tiger don their watches, consume their products or speak to the superiority of a company, with the expectation that both deliver high standards and superior performance. His sponsorships may be based on his athleticism, but they go beyond that. And at this point, his personal brand has been turned upside down, and ultimately, the financial impact of this scandal is a real one. Some say what he does on his own time is his own business, but it is a hard argument to make when his actions could do financial harm to those that have invested hundreds of millions in his image.

As sponsors continue to “evaluate” their sponsorship deals, it will be interesting to watch how much of an impact the personal side of an athlete who was celebrated for his sports’ achievements and not for his personal life will have. Recently, AT&T announced it, too, would drop Tiger Woods as a sponsor, following in the footsteps of Accenture, Tag Heuer and Gillette, who have ended or scaled back relations with Tiger.

In today’s content-obsessed media environment few things are secret – or sacred – and it is extremely difficult for a brand (whether a person or company) to control its reputation. Reputation and credibility can be stripped away in a matter of minutes not only because of a scandal, but also because of poor communication and management during the crisis. And many would argue this Tiger Woods story is a classic way not to handle a crisis.