filter by date: March 2010

When it comes to embarking on a media relations campaign and generating valuable coverage, I’m still surprised at how many in our profession prioritize their efforts and approach. I don’t know many folks who don’t consider themselves, or aspire to be, STRATEGIC.

Why is it, then, that too often strategy ends up on the cutting room floor?

• Focused media lists evolve into list with 500 contacts
• Quality coverage is sacrificed for quantity
• Coverage in a “cool” outlet becomes more important than coverage in the right outlet
• Speed is valued above thoughtful research and knowledge of the outlet and reporter
• Desperation for any result defeats dogged determination to get the big win
  

Sound familiar? It’s almost always the result of setting unrealistic expectations about impressions and coverage volume – sometimes by the client, sometimes by the agency and sometimes by both. Regardless of the reasons, we all feel the pressure to deliver results.

Sure, the media environment has changed. Non-traditional media play a more significant role, true “beats” have largely disappeared and the competition for coverage is fiercer than ever. But the basic tenets remain the same:

• Identify the business objective
• Define your audience(s)
• Solidify the message(s)
• Determine the best venues for reaching those audiences
  

Perhaps most importantly, though, make sure everyone – the client, stakeholders and the agency team – is aligned on the expectations. Collaborate on what success looks like, create a plan that maps to that success and then faithfully execute it. But be flexible and adapt to the situation. If something isn’t working, don’t toss away the strategy and just throw a bunch of stuff up against the wall to see what sticks. Think about new and creative ways to reach your goals.

The bottom line is we all want to be valued partners and counselors to our clients. And that sometimes means having courageous conversations about strategy, activation and results.
It can be uncomfortable, but we owe it to ourselves and our clients to ask the tough questions – “What’s important to you, quantity or quality?” – and give the unpopular opinions – “Oprah just isn’t going to care about this story.” Remember, be respectful and provide a rationale. They may not agree, but at least they’ll respect you.

--Marc Berliner, Vice President

Where would Susan G. Komen For the Cure be without the month of October or a pink ribbon? Where would Livestrong be without Lance Armstrong and a yellow bracelet? When it comes to branding, it turns out nonprofits and for-profits aren’t so different – at least in the eyes of the consumer. Whether the dollar goes to the beneficiary or the bottom line, a recognizable brand image is a powerful tool in a marketer’s tool kit.

Our 2009 Cone Nonprofit Power Brand 100 demonstrated that nonprofits who take a for-profit approach to brand management can reap the benefits of additional awareness and increased revenue. So, it shouldn’t surprise you that six of the top 10 nonprofit brands were also top 10 revenue earners. And, our latest research proves nonprofits can use the same principles of branding their own organizations to brand their causes, too. According to our recently released 2010 Cone Nonprofit Marketing Trend Tracker, traditional marketing elements, such as an association with a special event or time period, a memorable color, logo or icon or the involvement of a celebrity or other notable spokesperson, help nonprofit causes stand out in the minds of American consumers.

What else can nonprofits do to ensure their causes break through? Check out our sister blog, “What Do You Stand For?” for more insights. In the meantime, we want to hear from you. What are your favorite examples of a nonprofit that has done a good job branding its cause? What were the marketing factors that left an impression?

Disclosure vs. Style
No one wants to be the one who is made an “example” by the FTC - bloggers, brands and agencies included. However, the gray areas left by the FTC disclosure guidelines have many nervous. The truth of the matter is that if you are a blogger, brand or agency, and you already maintain a high standard of transparency, you are most likely covered. That means that giant red disclosure image you have on your blog, or are requiring bloggers to use, is the worst kind of unnecessary.

Image credit: LouisGray.com

Each blogger, influencer or online media maker has his or her own style, and it would be a real travesty if he or she ever had to alter that style to adhere to a set of government guidelines. Disclosing the blogger-brand relationships within the prose of a blog post or the dialog of a podcast effectively safeguards all parties involved in the eyes of the FTC. It also allows online media makers to keep their style as well as maintain an honest and enjoyable relationship with their readers.

The Elephant in the Room

So what if you are limited to, let’s say, 140 characters when telling your readers about a post in which you review or discuss a product that was provided to you by a brand?

This very tough question really has no good answer yet. The best Twitter solution presented so far has been to add a hashtag to a status update. WOMMA has a suggested list of different tags to explain different relationships. They include:

• #spon (sponsored)
• #paid (paid)
• #samp (sample)

An alternative would be to use the tag (client). This tag is used to disclose a relationship between a brand/company and the person tweeting.

Where do you stand when it comes to style vs. disclosure? As a blogger, do you feel you have had to change your style in regard to the FTC guidelines? Is there a good solution when it comes to using Twitter? We’d like to hear from you.

--Marcus Andrews, @Marcus_Andrews

Day 2 of South by Southwest brought (among other sessions) a discussion on "Measuring Blogger Credibility: FTC Regulation v. Crowdsourced Solutions." I attended this session because I knew it would be a great opportunity to hear unbiased opinions from bloggers about the new FTC guidelines. The session certainly did not disappoint on that front, but sadly (thought not unexpectedly) I don't think it helped lots of folks to better understand the guidelines.

It was, however, a diverse group that represented many different viewpoints; present were many bloggers, Brian Hall from Transverse Legal, a lawyer specializing in FTC guidelines, John Moore from WOMMA, one of the founders of cmp.ly, agency representatives and even an FTC lawyer that was participating via the twitter stream. Here's the quick rundown of what came from the discussion:

• No one felt the new FTC guidelines added additional credibility to a blogger who reviews products as part of his or her regular activities.
• The FTC guidelines have succeeded in "putting the fear of God" in bloggers, despite the fact that the supposed $11,000 penalties are actually a myth being spread by the media
• Most bloggers understand they need to disclose, and for their own sake, they want to in order to maintain credibility with their audience.
• However, there is no standard for bloggers to follow, and there are many questions around how to disclose across multiple technology platforms - particularly when dealing with micro-media such as Twitter and syndication of content through RSS to multiple platforms.

An interesting parallel was drawn between the frustrations of bloggers and marketers with regard to this issue and the frustrations felt when COPPA was first released. It took time, one participant noted, for the marketing community to figure out what the regulations meant. In time, marketers and agencies did what they felt was right, and set the standard for others to follow.

We at Cone have established our own interpretation of the FTC guidelines, and will be putting our recommendations into action across our client programs as they roll out in 2010. Over time, all of us in the communications world will certainly learn and evolve accordingly, as the question of disclosure works itself out.

It's day one for the South by Southwest Interactive festival in Austin, Texas, and I'm lucky enough to be on the ground here at the Austin Convention Center. The entire city is buzzing with geekery - you can't swing a 3-foot USB cable without smacking someone who's busy blogging, tweeting or generally acting engrossed in their laptop or iPhone. (author included)

So far, the big buzz has been around location-based applications and services like Foursquare and Gowalla - and the announcement that Twitter turned on its version of location-based status for all users. Add to that other services like SitBy.Us and Plancast, and it seems that everyone wants to know where you are and where you are going.

One's thing for sure - EVERYONE is using these tools here. The question will be if they can make the crossover to mainstream culture the way Twitter did in 2007. If there is a front runner right now, it's Foursquare, with all of the exposure it is getting lately. Gowalla is putting on the full court press here in Austin, though Will it be enough to command the attention of the digerati?