When the secret was revealed to the bloggers, reaction was opposite of what the ConAgra/Ketchum team was hoping for. In fact, many bloggers felt as though they had been slapped in the face and took to the web and voiced their disgust over being tricked to eat frozen meals filled with preservatives and loads of calories – which many attendees strive to avoid daily. ConAgra and Ketchum eventually ended up cancelling any remaining “dinners” and quickly started apologizing for the switcheroo and for leaving a bad taste in anyone’s mouth (pun intended).

So why did such an elaborate stunt, designed to generate positive and “surprising” coverage, backfire? Both Ketchum and ConAgra seemed to forget two critical points about food bloggers (and bloggers in general):

1. Bloggers are passionate about the topics they cover (especially Foodies). Why else would they be blogging about it? Most bloggers start writing because they feel strongly about a particular subject – especially when it comes to food. People who are passionate about food – a.k.a “Foodies” – have an intimate relationship with the things they eat. They want to know who prepared it, where it came from (local vs. imported) and really pay attention to ingredients in their meals. So it’s only expected that then trying to fool food bloggers, who pride themselves on being foodies, into enjoying a frozen meal simply, it’s just not going to fly.
2. Bloggers are just as influential as a journalist at a major publication and expect the truth. We live in a digital age where everyone is connected to the internet, Googling everything in sight and most likely following at least a handful of blogs about topics they are passionate about. Bloggers know their audience just like every other journalist and their audience expects the truth – sometimes even more so from a blogger than from mainstream media. As a PR professional, you cannot take a blogger for granted just because they don’t work at the New York Times or Wall Street Journal. Bloggers are journalists and can potentially be more influential to your key demographic than other sources. Why else would we want bloggers at our events and covering our news?

As PR professionals we rely on relationships to do our jobs. From my perspective, the best way to build a relationship and gain trust is to be transparent – whether you’re working with a blogger, mainstream journalist or your neighborhood dog walker. ConAgra and Ketchum lost touch with this and probably burned some relationships along the way. What this situation really boils down to is this – no one wants to be fooled when they’re looking for a surprise. Especially when you’re hungry.

In either case, we can all confirm the importance of nurturing relationships in both realms. Social networks and online communities allow us to interact with others from around the world on any number of subjects, but there are still many times when meeting face-to-face can provide real benefits.

In public relations, this is especially crucial. We spend a lot of time tracking the articles, blog and Facebook posts, tweets and other forms of digital communications leveraged by reporters, and we follow up in these same mediums or via email, but connecting outside of computer and smartphone screens brings a deeper level of understanding and respect to your relationship.

A recent opportunity to take a predominantly online relationship offline occurred for several communications professionals and journalists when a well-regarded San Francisco-based TechCrunch writer announced that he was leaving the outlet to join another publication. Immediately after announcing his departure, an enormous number of tweets and Facebook posts were directed his way, asking about and commenting on his new plans, demonstrating how many people, whether virtual or in-person contacts, were alerted to his departure via social media platforms. To give him a proper send-off, his TechCrunch colleagues used Facebook and Twitter to organize an in-person celebration.

In addition to several TechCrunch writers, reporters from a number of other publications, like Wired, attended, and because the event was posted on Facebook, friends both real and digitally sourced were able to join. Many of the contacts who may have just had an online relationship with the reporter turned out to say hello.

By taking the online relationship offline, you set yourself apart and give any connection, but especially reporters who get hundreds, and sometimes thousands, of emails, tweets, Facebook messages, etc., a day, another way to remember who you are and what you can offer. Despite the number of people now tracing connections at least partially to digital beginnings, offline relationships are as important as ever and taking the time to meet in-person can remind both parties that there is a real person behind those screen names and profiles.

Facebook and Burson-Marsteller have issued statements admitting their missteps, but the damage is done. The tactics employed have been called surreptitious, sleazy, underhanded, unethical and more – all words that taint not only the two companies directly involved, but our entire profession.

I am sure there will be PR practitioners who join the public lambasting of the PR agency in question in a holier than thou attempt to position themselves above the fray.

The truth, however, is that anyone who has worked in our industry for a significant time has probably engaged in somewhat similar tactics. It is a regular practice in PR to create fear, uncertainty and doubt about our clients’ competition.

The key issue in this latest battle between Facebook and Google, of course, is that the FUD campaign was mishandled. The Public Relations Society of America states in its ethics policy that members shall “reveal the sponsors for causes and interests represented.”

This is more important than ever, as social media has raised the expectation for authenticity and transparency in all communications.

As PR professionals, this episode is a cautionary tale and a reminder that anything we say or send to journalists and bloggers can be shared publicly. We may increasingly find ourselves dragged out from behind the curtain and thrust right into the conversation.

And that’s OK – in fact, we should embrace that opportunity. But, let’s choose our words – and our tactics – carefully.

Editor’s note: Facebook is a Text 100 client in several APAC and EMEA countries.

Similar to announcing his plans to run for president in 2008, President Obama announced his plans to seek re-election in the 2012 presidential campaign through a largely digital program. Knowing that many of his supporters are online, active on Facebook, and general consumers of digital media, the announcement consisted of an email and text message sent to existing supporters, a post on Facebook and a YouTube video – posted simultaneously. The news spread virally and within minutes created more buzz than any traditional campaign may have created in one day. And by making the announcement via social platforms, Obama’s campaign was able to stay in control of the message while still receiving coverage in mainstream media. The announcement even received coverage on social media outlets like Mashable, which reaches a younger, tech-savvy audience – a key demographic for Obama. By creating collateral like the campaign video, outlets had multi-media components to use in coverage, increasing exposure to Obama’s message.

So how can government agencies and companies supporting government agencies leverage Facebook and other digital and social media tools to their benefit? Below are three things to take into account when using social media in government:

• Make it accessible: First, and perhaps most importantly – make sure social media platforms are actually available for employees to use. Many government agencies block social networking sites for employees, citing concerns about productivity and confidential information. The U.S. Department of Defense is a great example of a highly regulated agency that embraced social media, completely reversing a three-year policy banning the use of social platforms. In fact, the DoD launched a Social Media Hub to share news and insight responsibly and effectively for both official and unofficial business.

• Get to the point: In terms of content, consider your end goal – what is it you want to inspire followers to do? Make sure the content has a call to action (donate, share, etc.) that incites a reaction in followers. That said, some news or announcements coming from government bodies is difficult in terms of readability, so be sure to take in to account how well your end-reader will understand the content. Make your shareable content as direct and to-the-point as possible – users are much less likely to share content they don’t understand.

• Inspire trust: Be clear about your organization’s mission and purpose for being active on social networking sites, and be transparent about who is running the show. The go.USA.gov URL shortener is available for use by government agencies, and is a great way to back up the credibility of your content.

Research has shown a positive correlation between the time a business invests in its online presence and its success. A study of the world’s 100 most valuable brands, carried out by Text 100 and Context Analytics, showed that a business’s media presence can be responsible for approximately a quarter of its value. The 2008 Interbrand Best Global Brands Report found that 27 percent of the differences between brand values could be attributed to media presence. Considering the explosive growth of social media in recent years, this percentage is likely to increase in the future.

But this growth has opened up new questions: Is it even possible to manage a business’s media presence and image? With consumers’ influence on brand image expanding thanks to their new role as prosumers, how much power do they now wield?
Democratization of the Web is changing the way people form opinions. In the past conversations and topics were restricted to a consumer’s social circle. These days conversations are available for everyone to see and opinions are exchanged at a global level. We trust recommendations from digital friends, experts and celebrities more than businesses.

Transparency, openness, honesty and a focus on dialogue have become the fundamental building blocks of successful marketing communications. The new requirements of the digital age are forcing brand managers to rethink conventional wisdom. Despite this, a recent survey published by PR Week found that 70 percent of brand managers have never used feedback from social media to improve products or services. All too often businesses hesitate to introduce online branding activities for fear of losing control of their brands. Many do not even trust their employees’ social media habits; how can they expect consumers to trust their brand?

Join us as we discuss the opportunities and challenges presented by online branding with a panel of industry experts.
• Dr. Tim E. Fischer, Ravensburger AG, Innovation and Digital Business Development
• Hermin Charlotte Hainlein, Coca Cola, Manager Consumer Communications
• Yousef Hammoudah, MTV Networks, Head of Interactive Product Development & Management
• Alexander Lengen, Paypal, Senior Manager Corporate Communications
• Michael Umlauf, brandamazing, Brand Consultant
• Hosted by Ines Bieger, Text 100, Managing Consultant and Lars Basche, Text 100, EMEA Social Media Consultant
The event is aimed at visitors to the Medienwoche@IFA, communications and marketing professionals, business executives, media representatives, bloggers and other opinion leaders.

Check out the results of the study here.

I’m not surprised the results of this study reflect the growing influence of social media. What’s more interesting, in my opinion, is what seems to be a more fundamental shift toward collaborative decision-making in professional environments. Certainly social media facilitates that but it strikes me as a deeper shift than technology and communication tools.

For example, the fact that ‘younger’ and ‘older’ professionals are heavier users of social tools than their middle aged counterparts may indicate that a) younger people are naturally more familiar with social media (something we’ve long known) and b) older people have accrued more emotional intelligence (something suggested in past studies on the topic) and, one could argue, use social media as a byproduct of that characteristic.

A new wave of social media gurus?

Does this study suggest that ‘older’ people simply get social media more than middle aged people? Perhaps collaboration, motivation and consensus-building are more important to older people? Of course these are incredibly broad strokes but what if anything do these results suggest about our age and how we use social media?

Would love to hear your take in the comments…

Joseph Kingsbury, Text 100

Photo credit: Andreas photography

We were thrilled, but not surprised to see Julia on the list. She’s built some fantastic relationships with the media and secured great coverage for her clients as a result. On the heels of this honor, Julia shares her tips on how to shatter PR stereotypes and become a trusted resource:

Q: What advice do you have for building strong relationships?
Read their work, Be Responsive and Be Realistic. It’s no secret that clients can be demanding and have high expectations, but I don’t see the benefit in stalking or harassing a reporter every hour on the hour simply to pressure them to they cover an announcement about a customer win. Managing expectations with your clients beforehand goes a long way to saving yourself, and reporters, a lot of stress.   

Julia Graham (right) and Elise Kohen welcome press to Text 100's sneak peek holiday tech event

Q: What should PR pros know about tech reporters/bloggers?
The reporters I work with are very tech savvy, They can (and enjoy) rattle off every single detail about a server from its processor speed to the number of cores it has to whether or not it supports high speed I/O or SSDs…confused yet? My job is to help paint the bigger picture by answering “What’s the significance of this news?” and connecting them with the executive who works with those products day in and day out. They also appreciate special treatment (who doesn’t?) so anytime you can offer an exclusive customer story or a data center tour, they’ll respect you for that.

Q: How did you learn what works? What mistakes have you made?
It’s not in my nature to be the ‘used-cars’ salesman type PR person that most people who aren’t in the profession assume we are. I try to ensure my contacts have access to the executives they want to talk to and make sure to keep them updated on a regular basis, differentiating between what’s simply an FYI and what is truly ground-breaking. I’ve certainly had my fair share of reporters hang up on me and I’ve even had a reporter post my pitch on his blog simply for informing him of a client that won an award from a company that, as luck would have it, wasn’t doing too well financially. After taking a deep breath, I make a note and move on.

Q: What role does social media play in your job? In building relationships?
Social media is a great way to get your foot in the door with reporters you may not have had a chance to interact with before. You can also see each reporter’s personality shine through, something that isn’t always that easy to gauge over email. Using tools like Twitter, I’ve been able to discover opportunities for clients that have turned into stories while also finding ways to relate to media on a more personal level – once you see them “Tweeting” about their son scoring a goal at a soccer game or how angry they get when they sit in traffic, they immediately become human, which for me takes off the pressure of needing to sound perfect when you reach out to them.

Julia in the Rocky Horror Show

That all changed with Reg FD, which was enacted in October 2000. All earnings conference calls are now broadcast to the public, sites like Seeking Alpha make transcripts available in near real time, and SEC filings are also freely available. Intel, for instance, now gets 600 people on the phone for its earnings calls and 3,000 on the webcast. All combined, the information available to the public and reporters has come a very long way in a relatively short time period.

With money, its best to keep it simple. Photo by AMagill.

Here in San Francisco recently, earnings calls and quiet periods took center stage at an IR panel discussion hosted by BusinessWire and moderated by Don Clark, deputy bureau chief of the Wall Street Journal, with Peter Schuman, manager, investor relations at Intel; Alex Hughes, director of investor relations at Dolby Laboratories; Stephen Schrader, partner at Baker & McKenzie; and Jim Jelter, corporate editor at MarketWatch.

The discussion boiled down to how best to communicate financial information. Jim Jelter had perhaps the best advice of the panel when he recommended companies trying to communicate with anyone would do best to keep it simple and to write and say – whatever it is – in plain English.

Likewise, Dolby’s Alex Hughes prefers to keep his company’s earnings scripts very short at around 15 minutes with the remainder of the time devoted to Q&A. The extended Q&A, Hughes said, increases the impact of what is discussed: He attributed a statement made during the scripted part of the call as worth only half the value as the same information provided in response to a question.

That’s a great observation — a higher degree of accessibility and willingness to take questions always seems like the stronger path to take. Next up would be allowing more buy-side investors to ask questions. Incidentally, a breakdown Text 100 did a couple of years ago on conference call structures for 10 major corporations showed the average time devoted to the scripted portion of a call amounted to a third of the call’s length, with the range falling between 20% and 50%. As a reporter, the calls with more Q&A always seemed more genuine and transparent. And simple.

Another topic covered during the panel discussion covered quiet periods, the times when companies restrict communications as executives begin to get insight into material information, such as financial results, before the information is disclosed to investors.

Dolby’s quiet period covers a total of five weeks during which no executives speak with the media. Intel acknowledged a lengthy quiet period covering half of its quarter. And, indeed, an informal study of clients and non-clients undertaken two months ago by Text 100 showed most quiet periods lasting around three weeks, pretty consistent with a 2001 study from NIRI on the topic. But the variance for our informal study was high – with the range of as little as four days to as many as 43 days. The legal guidelines around quiet periods remain unclear, which helps explains the variance, with attorney Stephen Schrader acknowledging that the SEC doesn’t really like “bright line” tests.

Here again we have another argument in support of clarity, plain English and simplicity.

When the news anchors began analyzing the speech and interviewing people from around the world that tuned-in to this event– I realized that this one man, in less than an hour’s time, was able to transform the mindset of millions. Now, that’s talent. But it is also the result of a speech designed with authenticity sitting at its core.

Now more than ever, leaders of government or corporations must communicate authentically to create closer connections with their audiences. As a society, we have witnessed the meltdown of the financial markets, government bailouts and a lot of poor judgment among world and business leaders. As a result, leaders are challenged to break the halo of distrust that exists among their stakeholder groups.

So, how as PR professionals do we help leaders of companies break the halo of distrust and make stronger connections with their employees, customers, partners and shareholders?

I think the key for leaders in today’s society is authentic communications. Organizations should closely examine how the leadership team communicates and identify the best style, tone and delivery method based on a number of external factors, including the social, political and economic environments. By categorizing leadership communications into four distinct styles – Charismatic, Direct, Transformational and Pragmatic –executives can better understand what type of communicator her or she is most like and how his or her style impacts the audience . While there is no one right way to communicate – it is important to adopt a style and tone that best resonates with stakeholders at any given point in time.

Whether it’s a speech to millions of people or an intimate gathering of colleagues – authentic communications help make stronger, memorable connections with stakeholders that have far reaching results. Research has shown that a trusted leader can build a culture of respect among employees, inspire confidence among key stakeholder groups, and help to establish a trusted brand.

What are some of the other best authentic communications you’re seeing from leaders of government or business? Who’s doing it all wrong?

Not surprising at all to see yet another validation for the power of advertising.

But buried in the same press release – under a sub-head of “More Study Findings” — was data that pointed to the greater power that PR has in maintaining consumer confidence in financial institutions:

“When asked what factors would increase confidence in the safety and soundness of their financial institution, respondents cited:

– Seeing regular advertising for that institution (25 percent)

– Receiving regular mail or e-mail offers from that institution (25 percent)

– Regularly seeing internet offers/advertising from that institution (21 percent)

– Reading positive stories in the press about that institution (44 percent)” 

Read that last bullet again – it clearly states that reading positive stories in the press bolsters much more confidence than seeing regular advertising. From my perspective, Nielsen has buried the lede.

I don’t want to pick a fight with my advertising brethren and get into yet another debate about the power of advertising versus the power of PR. (Please see the recent study Text 100 and Context Analytics released for our point of view on that topic.)

Instead, I would like to simply point out that the study underscores for me that the value of PR continues to be misunderstood, and therefore it continues to be under-valued, especially as a means for bolstering brand reputation during a recession.

We’ve all seen PR budgets cut or eliminated recently as a result of the economic challenges companies are facing. I would contend that pulling back on PR is exactly the way to ensure ongoing damage to your brand reputation, both during the recession and after the recovery begins.

This recession is now as much about consumer confidence as anything else. What consumers – in fact, all stakeholders – are seeking is anything that will bolster their confidence in companies and institutions. Because consumers’ priorities have changed, companies must demonstrate that they are delivering not what customers want, but what they need.

If advertising can do that, great. But press coverage that reflects the strength of a company’s leadership, operations, products and services, while also demonstrating an innate understanding of stakeholders’ needs, is invaluable during these tough times.

Bottom line: companies need to focus now more than ever on maintaining and building brand reputation – and they must leverage communications channels that enable them to tell their story in a complete, compelling, and authentic way.

Scott Friedman