Activists know this: Posters are magnets for media coverage

Capturing a sound byte used to be a great way to thread a breaking story. News organisations such as NPR, or BBC for instance use the formula well. Some use it to balance a story, others, to tilt one in favor of a point of view it wishes to hold up.

Audio is also a great way to capture the ambiance of a particular environment. A machine grinding away on factory floor, a call to prayer from a far away minaret, children on a playground…

So why is it that the poster is suddenly making a comeback? It’s one dimensional, after all!

I think of it as a powerful tool not only because of what it says but how it is displayed. In other words, there is more contextual detail that surrounds a poster that adds to the story, even though it is a frozen moment. Two things come into play that make a poster powerful:

• The image is at once analog (when printed) and digital (when photographed and preserved in a digital stream).
• The message feeds a story because it tends to be connected to a human who holds it up, or a group of people in which it seems to be rooted

There is a third element – mystery. The unknown or un-clarified details take on greater significance, goading our curiosity, and our need to fill in the gaps of the larger story.

The protests in the past few weeks in Egypt  demonstrate this. From the simple pen sketches, to the large-font messages to the administration:

 

No face here, but the reference to another country adds a new dimension to political intrigue in the region.

Adding more context, a paper poster is just another element to counterpoint the heavy machinery around it!

 

A working model of ‘Social Capital’

I’ve been indulging in Wikis a lot this year.

I wrote quite a bit on the topic here and elsewhere, recently. And his Monday I was in charge of the wiki portion of what amounts to the launch of the first open source business development plan in Sustainability, for Arizona. More about this here.

So on Wednesday, when I visited Gangplank to get a better sense of this remarkable working environment I could not help notice the parallel.

If Gangplank is a piece of software, it would most probably be a Wiki!

It’s a a true collaborative space, whose ‘permanent residents’ (independent businesses) don’t pay rent, though they get to use the utilities, the workspace, conference rooms, wifi etc for no charge. Derek Neighbors, co-founder of Gangplank and our guest on the radio show this week, prefers to call this an investment in ‘social capital.’ It reminded me of another semi-financial term used in the book Groundswell –how collaboration earns a person ‘psychic income.’

But to get back to the topic of wikis, if you consider how much time has gone into Wikipedia –approximately 1 million man hours, according to Clay Shirky-- it is a model that works even among largely anonymous people. So of course it world work when you get a room filled with creative people.

Just step into Gangplank, and you’ll see a working model -or a ‘use case’ if you prefer another geeky term!

 

As recession eases, time to hire Misfits, Troublemakers, Square Pegs

I have been talking to a potential guest (for an upcoming session on my radio show) on HR practices and social media. She’s Patty Van Leer, Chief Interactive Strategist at, NAS Recruiting, a division of McCann Worldgroup, advises companies on how to motivate and engage employees.

Most HR agencies are also asking their clients to plan for a new wave of  talent that only know (and will certainly expect) to have access to a range of engagement tools. Gone will be the days when you walk a person over to a desk and give her a notepad, some pens, and a login for an email address. The picture could be scary or exciting, depending on your perspective.

As the gears of our economy begin to re-engage, and talent acquisition becomes a priority once again, what will we do with these always-on employees?

Park Howell makes an interesting point. He applies the lens of ‘Rudolph Thinking’ to look inward for managing business tough times. Park’s blog post, “The 15 characteristics of Rudolphs and how they can help steer your company thru the fog of the recession” refers to one of our favorite books on the show, The Rudolph Factor. (Its author Cindy Laurin was a guest on our radio  show.)

You see, Rudolphs make great employees despite the fact that –or perhaps because –they are a bit ‘weird.’ They are weird to most people who are just doing their thing, doing what they are supposed to be doing according to their job description.

Rudolph’s are also the ones who defy their job description, stick their snouts out, and are quickly labeled misfits.

It reminds me of the line Apple used (‘Think Different’) when it celebrated the ‘rebels’ and misfits’ who believed in the personal computer back in 1997. The narration went:

“Here’s to the crazy ones. The misfits. The rebels. The troublemakers. The round pegs in the square holes.”

Where do you find these  ’square pegs’ and Rudolphs?

And when you do, what must you do to motivate them, and unleash their creativity?

Luckily I’m also having Jay Baer as a guest on the same show. He’s dealing with some of these prickly issues in a chapter in his upcoming book, The Now Revolution.

If you like to get some answers to some of these questions (or have some of your own), ping us via Twitter at @your3bl, or email me here: angelo AT hoipolloireport dot com

• The show: Wed, 17 Nov, 2010 –  your3bl.com
• Listen Live: http://bit.ly/Your3BL (7 PM (Pacific)
• Call us, toll free at 1866.536.1100

 

Should BP spin its wheels on its pesky little PR problem?

I bet this will be question that many presenters on crisis communications and PR turn to –at the IABC World Conference in Toronto this week, and many other events.

Variations of this question could come range from “can social media rescue a company’s reputation,” to “Is this a warning shot for corporations dabbling in social media?”

You could say BP which has the  nation’s largest environmental crisis on its hands should ignore the PR disaster they have inherited (as Len Gutman at ValleyPRBlog noted, “There are some things PR can’t fix”) and stick to fixing what it has wrought. It’s near impossible for them to address the ‘wisdom’ of the passionate crowd leveraging new media.

Take these responses to the oil spill:

• The BP Logo Redesign Contest. I’ll don’t need to tell you what this means in a Web 2.0 world where images are shared, commented on and archived forever.

• Fake Twitter Account for ‘BPGlobalPR’: With 129,000 followers and counting, it shows how seemingly powerless Goliath is when David’s got the slingshot. The tweets themselves are entertaining.

• Facebook Protests, including this one calling for a Worldwide BP Protest Day in the coming week -12 June 2010

• More logo attacks on Flickr - Behind the logo group

• Wikipedia edits. Lots of activity on the discussion pages of BP’s Wikipedia page, where editors this week seem to be dredging up –still unpublished– unsavory details of cancer etc.

In the face of all this, what in the name of crisis communications is the value of the full page ad in the New York Times, and some of those TV spots? Is there any value in using old media Tylenol-type tactics to fix the situation BP is in? I recall BP used to run a great series of ads, when it was re-branding, that said things like “It’s time to go on a low carbon diet.”

I think its time for BP to go on a low PR diet!

 

Is your company ready for a private social network?

Mixed signals. That’s what’s out there when it comes to social networks.

A few weeks back some UK companies approved of banning social networks in the workplace. A few years back organizations such as the CIA embraced such collaborative spaces. They created their own private network called A-Space, and another information sharing hub, Intellipedia.

But did you know that despite the rush for ‘corporatized’ LinkedIn or Facebook groups, many institutions have adopted private social networks?

Sometimes called ‘walled gardens’ these networks are created using free of paid platforms where smaller communities can share their ideas and –to use that overused word again -engage.

Two examples of this trend:

ResearchGate. This social engagement hub for scientists built by scientists may not be as well known as other networks, but it’s quite a hangout. Population 400,000! While groups on Facebook plan boycotts of oil companies or befriend brands, these specialized networks discuss topics such as the Human adenovirus A-31 genomic sequence, or neural networks and artificial intelligence. Groups range from American Society of Plant Biologists to a one discussing Zebrafish husbandry.

Pluck is one of the popular platforms used by media, insurance and marketing companies. It offers more than the bare template, lending editorial support – for what it calls a “curated, professionally produced content library.” I find it interesting that Pluck is not standing around building fortifications around its clients’ private social network, but making it easy for them to provide pass-through integration with Facebook, for instance.

You know your organization is ready for a private social network when you see the following signs:

• You mention a document posted to the web site and you get 80 percent blank stares. You mention a statistic about your competition, and 95 people already know about it –via Facebook.
• People complain that they can’t find anything on the company Intranet. They whine that “the search engine is so nineteen-ninetees.”
• You overhear that there are unauthorized LinkedIn groups within the company because they hate having to share ideas via email
• Someone in HR complains that someone has created a FriendFeed room in which designers are chatting; the guys in Marketing are equally ticked off.

 

Quotes for the week ending 15 May, 2010

“The iPad is just a giant iPhone without a phone and that’s the best part about it, the iPhone is too small to be able to appreciate all that it can offer.”

Kevin Roberts, CEO of Saatchi and Saatchi Eorldwide, on his about turn on the vakue of the iPad

“We anticipate being able to have the iPad later this year”

Gary Severson, senior vice president of entertainment for Wal-Mart’s U.S. stores

“It is like a mini-PC with the telephone of the future. Someone also made a reference to it being a bit like the iPad but it is not. It is a different size and shape..”

BT Chief exec, Ian Livingston on a device said to rival the iPad

“Bucket of megabytes.”

Verizon Wireless’ Lowell McAdam commenting on the high speculation that it is soon to launch a Google tablet that will take advantage of its new network and new pricing plans.

 

Quotes for the week ending 8th May, 2010

“In the Future, we’ll all have 15 minutes of privacy.”

Scott Monty, head of social media for Ford, on a post about Facebook’s latest move to connect to the rest of the web

“No one is laughing in Arizona. Do your job and secure the border.”

Governor Jan Brewer, in a YouTube video aimed at president Obama, who made a joke about the immigration Bill that Brewer signed into law.

“A lot of great stories are hidden within the public”

Manesh Nesaratnam, Malaysian film director of a movie, Your Grandfather’s Road, which is being crowd-sourced.

“That QR code on the left will even take your smartphone to my Twitter feed. And if you really liked this story, you can re-Tweet too.”

Kit Keaton, whose column in Fast Company, features this Quick Response code.

“A nastygram.”

Shel Holtz, referring to the letter Apple, which sent a nine-year-old girl a cease-and-desist letter after she suggested enhancements to the iPod.

“You gotta give him credit for his media manipulation skills.”

Pat Elliot, commenting on a post I wrote for ValleyPRBlog, about the value Sheriff Joe Arpaio holding a press conference to announce he is NOT running for governor.

“We are heartened by news reports that J.S.Tissainayagam appears to have been pardoned…”

CPJ (Committee to Protect Journalists) in a statement on the presidential pardon for journalist J. S. Tissanayagam in Sri Lanka

 

‘Print Grows Trees’ debate opens a fresh debate

Print has always been dinged hard by those promoting digital communications as the green alternative. And why not? We’ve seen excesses that are so revolting –boxes of glossy annual reports that have to be tossed, multiple-page bank statements etc.

The Print Council has been very sensitive to that in their PR, and has a talking points document called “The fine print” to rebut those arguments.

So this campaign is not surprising. Called Print Grows Trees, it attempts to communicate some aspects of the print industry and its relation to forests. Specifically “to show that print on paper actually helps to grow trees and keep our forests from being sold for development.”

Let’s face it: Many of us who have gone digital are big fans of print; it’s not a simple either/or choice. We buy newspapers and magazines, but avoid picking up brochures and flyers whenever we could download them and read them as a digital file. We encourage people to ‘think before you print’ but we do carry business cards (GreenNurture uses Quick Response tags on business cards to avoid brochures) using recycled paper, printed with vegetable inks.

Print on demand, and Personal URLs (‘those ‘PURLs’) are some of the solutions that almost every printer now offers. PODI, the Print On Demand Initiative, educates members and everyone else about print and social media, QR codes etc. So yes, the print industry has done some good things to erase the dead-tree stigma. This campaign though seems to push the envelope (bad choice of word?) a bit.

It definitely –deliberately–frames the debate as an economic problem-solution and not just an environmental one. Is it a dangerous myth, as Jay Purdue and others suggest, one that “has significant environmental and economic consequences” to say that print kills trees? If you haven’t run into the seemingly oxymoronic term ‘digital deforestation‘ be prepared to hear more about it in the next few months.

Or is Print Grows Trees a symptom of ‘tree guilt’ felt not just the print industry but by all of us when we forget to turn on the double-sided feature before hitting Control-P?

 

Are we crashing the conversation using social media?

I have to say I felt a bit guilty, reading Patrick Keane’s article in Advertising Age.

His point: Many people are confusing social networking with social media.

But that’s not the part I was feeling guilty about. He then goes on to talk about how there’s a big difference between joining the conversation and crashing into it.

Are you? Am I?

In this space -my blog– I have every right/reason to start and extend a conversation, one that I began somewhere else. Perhaps a face-to-face one, or one on Twitter, or as a comment on someone’s article or video.

But sometimes we use social media to dive in and out of conversations that amount to crashing the party. To use it as a megaphone in stealth mode. Two examples:

• You may have come across this annoying practice of someone  dropping into a group just to seed an URL to a product or service.
• Recently a member alerted our online group that a certain individual was up to no good. Basically posing as a member harvesting demographic information for some direct marketing scam.

So what’s the difference between that, and, say sending out a tweet with a shortened URL to one’s followers? I could come up with a reasonable defense of why this is, after all, targeted, not spammy. But the tool at our disposal has made it all too easy to go beyond what it was intended for.

It could end up being the biggest social media party-crashing tool, if we’re not careful.

UPDATED 03/15:

• This post appears at SocialMediaToday. See reader comments there.
• Great quote from Susan Young at Ragan.com:

When posting a link, don’t lead people to a landing page for your book, webinar, e-zine or CD series. If you want to “hawk stuff,” go to your local flea market.

 

Does Tiger Woods have a story to tell?

You’ve probably see the web buzzing about Tiger Woods and Nike – the video has gotten some 600,000 views.

I’m no fan of video –especially ‘ads’ — as a means of working out a credibility issue.  Seen too many of those. Face to camera, a remorseful look, a hit of a tear etc may be great, or even necessary when a CEO or leader  is forced to answer to people, and address questions he/she had dodged. Not so credible, but it’s the formula. Clinton, Spitzer, Sanford, McGwire, Bryant …

But when it’s followed by your sponsor’s logo –in this case the ubiquitous Nike swoosh –what does that say about the sincerity of the exercise?

The cynical part of me says, so what? It’s risky. But it’s not as risky as what got him into this spot in the first place.

Maybe he does have a story to tell, but he doesn’t need his sponsor, nor his diseased dad to create a narrative.