We deal with them every day. We spend hours crafting pitches, preparing background documents and making sure they’re happy. But how do we decide who is and isn’t an influencer?
I was fortunate to be able to attend the Social Fresh conference in Portland (for some other takeaways, you can read them here) recently and I wanted to know how some of the attendees defined who they considered an influencer.
As you can see, the definitions covered the spectrum. In a world where everybody is a publisher, we need to be wary of who we call an influencer. As PR practitioners, we are trying to maintain gold standards while making sure we are getting our clients the best results possible.
Time management
The biggest challenge on PR pros in a world where “influencer” is a fluid term is managing our time asks. Sometimes it’s the smallest of outlets that take the most time.
So how do we decide where to spend our time? In my opinion, we can look at some simple metrics to determine how we allocate our most precious resource.
Impact: This isn’t about eyeballs. This is about action. When this person publishes an article, do people listen and act? Do they generate traffic, signups or sales? Spend some time with them.
Engaged: If they seem to genuinely care about the announcement, chances are they can become a champion for you. Spend some time with them.
Audience: There are two parts to this: Passion and interaction. If the person’s readers are commenting and a conversation generally happens around each post, this helps the “long tail” of an announcement. Spend some time with them.
So, who should you not spend some time with? Quite simply, anybody who can’t help you define your goals.
Now it’s your turn: How do you define an influencer? What effects your perception of a potential pitch recipient? What causes you to say no?
The life and times of the in-house PR counsel at most companies are a changin’. Silos are being built as a result of silos being torn down. Specialists are generalizing and generalists now have a specialty. What is happening?
Those are some of the topics I’ll be talking about at this year’s Seattle PRSA Jumpstart event. PRSA Jumpstart is an event for the next generation of PR pros that are coursing through the pipelines of the various schools offering training on what we collectively call PR.
But what are they training to do? They’re still being taught how to write press releases, but is that important? How about we teach technical skills such as HTML/PHP, SEO techniques, video editing or visual journalism?
The future of in-house PR
Here’s my theory: In-house corporate PR will become a strategic counsel, relying upon external agencies for execution, measurement and reality checks. In the next 10 years, in-house corporate PR teams will essentially shrink to as few people as possible, depending on the size of the company.
I’ll get into the hows in a bit, but for now, let’s focus on Why? I think that as public relations as we know it continues to blur the lines between marketing, sales, customer support and PR, the focus will be more on strategic communications and less on day-to-day PR activities.
As we continue to realize that social media (or pancake media) is simply media — a way of sharing information — we’ll get less hung up on the tools were using and again focus on the messages we’re sharing.
Peter Shankman is fond of saying that good writing will save society and I think this is essential for the future of PR especially.
But how will we shift?
The shift from a traditional client/agency/consultant model to a more fluid and collaborative effort is already happening. Ubiquitous methods of broadcasting to a public that’s more willing to consume information are emerging and systems for effectively using and measuring them are evolving.
The focus needs to be on quality. It’s no longer enough to throw up some blog posts and *poof * you’re a social media guru coach rawkstar. The challenge with PR as it stands today is that people are treating the Internet like a public access TV station. Everybody. This blog included.
But the problem with public access TV is that a lot of it sucks.
The good is rising to the top. The herd is being thinned. But how? By providing quality content. Social media tools have leveled the playing field of who has access to the public. But they don’t make you a good strategist or a good analyst or a good communicator. Those are traits that need to be honed and refined with experience and execution.
So, what will corporate PR look like in the future? I think it will look a lot different. Corporations need to think like a network. Find good shows that people want to watch and your audience will come.
Tell me your thoughts about what the future of public relations looks like in the comments. I would love to hear them.
A word of advice: I am not a lawyer. Nor am I a registered financial adviser. This is my opinion only and should be treated as such. For guidance, consult your legal counsel.Originally posted at PRBreakfastclub.
If you are in PR, IR, corporate communications or social media, chances are you’ll run into fun rules such as Sarbanes-Oxley, Regulation FD and FINRA guidelines. One of these things these rules have in common is that they are behind the times.
But the Financial Industry Regulatory Authority (FINRA) has taken a pretty large step in modernizing the rules that financial services companies must follow while engaging in social media and PR. You can download the FINRA social media guidelines as a PDF.
The big takeaways
The important pieces of this update are the changes to the definitions of static and interactive content. Under the new rules, “Examples of static content typically available through social networking sites include profile, background or wall information.” This information is treated like an advertisement and is subject to regulator approval processes.
Interactive content is a bit more flexible. Tweets, blog comments etc… are interactive content and do not require the approval of an approved regulator. One of the interesting challenges, however are the monitoring and archival requirements.”firms may adopt procedures that require principal review of some or all interactive electronic communications prior to use or may adopt various
methods of post-use review, including sampling and lexicon-based search methodologies as discussed in Regulatory Notice 07-59.”
I know this is a bit more heady than what we normally discuss, but it’s important. Our society is changing. The way brands interact with us is changing. And the need for the government to monitor those interactions is changing.
As communications professionals, we need to be able to provide sound guidance for our client. But at the same time we need to be innovative in our approach to engaging with our target audiences. To that end, the best advice I can give is know the rules and come as close to breaking them as possible.
Having a policy in place is also essential for firms looking to engage in social media. Having a set of rules that outlines approved interactions will help avoid confusion and potential violations. But in doing so, make sure you’re consulting your legal counsel.
Twitter has fundamentally changed our lives, whether we like it or not.
And people have written miles of books, blog posts and even tweets about best practices and what matters on Twitter. One of the biggest things that is almost universally agreed upon is to be genuine. So how do we as public relations professionals remain genuine when we’re asked to tweet about a client?
The precedent
Fundamentally you are free to talk about whatever the hell you want with your Twitter stream. It’s your content. It’s your copyright. It’s your reputation.
Your reputation? Yeah, your reputation. You put it on the line each and every time you post something to the public domain. When I hit publish on this post, I was subjecting myself to the judgment of past, present and future employers. It’s the same thing with Twitter.
If your precedent is to include links to client announcements or blog posts, then that’s fine. You’ve willingly shared that information. After all, without clients we wouldn’t be able to pay the electric bill so we could tweet, right? There is a conception that all posts in a social network should be neutral and objective. If you have a relationship, some feel it should be disclosed either up front or by using hash tags or other microsyntax. For example, James Governor from the analyst firm Redmonk uses “$client” to denote posts to his Twitter stream about his paying clients.
And that’s a judgement call you will have to make.
But what about when your employer says you must tweet on a client’s behalf?
Mandated tweeting
I see a potential for conflict when an employer mandates that an employee tweet on its behalf. Making a choice to share the announcement of a project you’ve worked on or a blog post from a co-worker is one thing.
Being told what to tweet and when to tweet it is another beast. The argument is that it’s not genuine. If you don’t want to post it, then why should you be obligated to? I’m all for being a team player. But sometimes you need to protect the community and precedent you have created. I don’t know what the right answer is. So, I’m asking you.
How would you respond to being given a pre-written tweet and being asked to post it? Would you? Why or why not?
Alternatively titled: What I learned in Vegas won’t stay in Vegas.
So, there I sat. On a plane. In a town car. In a drive through at In-n-Out. In the Lobby of the Las Vegas Hilton. And then it started…
Hanging in the speaker room before the session.
I started seeing people. I first saw Gregarious “Greg” Narain and Brett Petersel. I saw Lucretia Pruitt, AKA Geekmommy. I saw Aaron Brazell. And, I saw myself. I saw myself in all the new people I met. I got to see some of the “new media” minds that are going beyond social media 101 and into the Ivy Leagues of “Prove it.”
I’m still not terribly sure how to express the thoughts and ideas from the experience. I think the best way is to highlight a couple of people and have you read their words. For now.
Mark Story. Not enough words can be said about this guy. Mark is the Director of New Media for the SEC and was he savior of our panel. He is a smart guy with a personality as big as I am. Mark, many thanks for helping out with the panel and for your words of wisdom and encouragement.
Doug Haslam. Doug is a PR idol. He works for Boston-based SHIFT Communications.
Jason Falls. Falls made this happen. Thank you for letting the motley crew talk about PR and new communications practices in a federally regulated world.
Aaron Strout. All-around good guy. Glad to meet you. And destroy you in the Fatburger eating contest.
Jennifer Leggio. Jennifer is a super-smart blogger and commenter on many different topics. But her perspective on the security and privacy in social networks is priceless. Cuts a pretty mean rug too.
The Ken Yeung. Aloha, bradda! Thank you for your lens that does not filter out based on standing or celebrity. A-listers or E-listers, they’re all in your pictures.
I could really continue this list for a number of weeks. But I won’t. What I will do, however, is ask you to spotlight somebody you’ve met recently in the comments.
I have the opportunity to speak at this year’s BlogWorld and New Media Expo next month. I’ll get to the topic more in another post.
But here I wanted to share a bit about what the opportunity means to me personally. I have the opportunity to sit on a panel alongside Shannon Paul, Mark Story and a special guest I’ll reveal later. For those of you that don’t know, Shannon built and implemented the social media strategy for the Detroit Red Wings and Mark is the Director of new media for the SEC.
I am the unknown on this panel. I am the underdog in this story.
But that’s OK. I get to represent myself, my knowledge and my skills in front of an audience of bloggers, new media professionals and assorted Web celebrities.
The bigger picture
Speaking at conferences is a sort of currency in the new media world. And I am making my first deposit. I like saying that good ideas are not confined to the big names in this industry and this is my opportunity to prove it.
I have a few weeks to get over the nerves and prep my thoughts and get new cards made up. I have a few weeks to ponder what words I will use to describe my ideas facing the public relations industry. As I write this, Don Draper on Mad Men said “Our worst fears lie in anticipation.” I think that is a fitting theme for this post.
If you’re thinking about embarking on a new adventure, there is no time like the present to put your head down and charge into it full steam. Fear of failing is failure. If you are crippled by the possibility of what might happen, then you will never know what is possible. So, now’s the time to submit that proposal or write that post.
I would like to welcome TechCrunch to the world of actual journalism. Find a story, verify info, interview sources, write story, fact check, publish, repeat.
Here’s the quick background: TechCrunch obtained multiple documents from an alleged hacker who had broken into Twitter employee’s email accounts, Google Documents (There’s a reason it’s not compliant, but that’s a different issue) and other documents and information. TechCrunch verified w/Twitter and its lawyers the accuracy of the documents and even interviewed them. Then they published some of the documents. They were even kind enough to redact personal information.
But here’s an important step that separates journalist from sensationalist: The journalist attempts to verify the information before publishing. The Sensationalist does not.
As a holder of an actual, real-life journalism degree, I sat through hours of press law and have filled out my fair share of information requests. I have also obtained information through anonymous sources or obtained information in other ways. And I used those documents. But after verifying on my own.
The right to publish
Now, the debate over whether or not TechCrunch should have published or not is broken into two parts:
Is the information newsworthy?
Is the information “off limits?”
The newsworthiness discussion is for another day. I am focused on the ethics involved in publishing the documents. TechCrunch absolutely acted within the boundaries of accepted journalistic ethics in publishing those documents. If it had simply published the entire .zip file without making an attempt to check facts or redact personal information, it would have been very out of line.
Instead, it looked for the information it deemed “newsworthy” and ran with it. To recap, it verified the information with Twitter, attempted to elicit on-the-record comment from Twitter and published the information that was applicable to the story it accompanied. TechCrunch even solicited comment from third-party companies named in the documents.
One could also make the argument that Ev and Biz and some of the Twitter team are “Limited Purpose Public Figures.” This means that some of their information is subject to federal and state open records laws and that their expectations of privacy are a bit different than the average citizen.
In this case, the combination of a good journalist and a good lawyer are difficult to beat.
Should they have published
Well, in my opinion yes and no. If TechCrunch wants to use this as a standard for applying journalistic ethics to its reporting (coverage?), then great. But the fact is that TechCrunch is a blog. Its writers express opinion and insert themselves into the stories they are writing. Independant sources are a rarity, as is interviews with the subjects they’re writing about.
I’ve written about the difference between blogger and journalist before, and I think it is completely applicable here. And this gets right to the heart of the debate. If the New York Times had published those documents, would we have even flinched?
I’m sure my opinion is different than some, so tell me what you think.
In my last post, I raised the issue of what I call the Twitter Relations Model. Essentially, Companies are putting on events with limited invite lists ant the expectation is that the atendees will tweet about it. The net result is a super-effective word of mouth PR/advertising campaign.
So, I talked about the problem. Now, I’m here to offer a solution. Stowe Boyd is championing something he calls “microsyntax.” Essentially, a couple of characters that denotes a more involved meaning. For example, a forward slash before and after a city or address or location denotes that I am actually there: /Kent, WA/ for example.
So, my solution is a microsyntax for sponsored Tweets. I am proposing a four-character sequence that looks something like this:
My proposal for a sponsored Tweet Microsyntax
Essentially, it’s a $ at the beginning and end of a tweet. An extra step and the loss of four characters, but in the interest of disclosure, I think it might be worth it.
The effect
If you see a tweet with the dollar sign, then assume it is a sponsored tweet and the opinion being expressed has been bought. Omit the symbols and you are claiming the opinion as a true representation of your thoughts and feelings.
Some companies are blatantly sponsoring tweets, but that’s OK. Izea CEO Ted Murphy says that the company has strict disclosure policies and that participants will be disclosing their relationships. To me, this is no different than advertising on any other content broadcasting platform. So long as it is obvious what is a sponsored tweet, then more power to you.
The effect of the dollar sign microsyntax is simple: Force disclosure of what opinions belong to you and what opinions belong to the company paying for them.
Social Media has become a catch-all term for just about any content distribution on the Web. Who would have thought that two years ago, a press release would be considered social media?
But here we are. Anybody who is blogging, twittering, publishing photos, friend-feeding, Viddler-ing etc… is social media-ing. But are they? I say that social media is the platform. The platform allows us as content creators to develop content that want to share. From there, it’s a matter of how it’s used.
Social Marketing
Social Marketing is the bulk of what social media is used for. There is a distinct difference between using Twitter to discuss the banal details of your life and using Twitter to distribute 20% off coupons for your restaurant. Using the tools available to you through social media in order to generate direct sales is social marketing.
Social Marketing is often thinly veiled and that is where some of the frustration confusion occurs. When “consultants” offer their services through social media they are participating in social marketing. But it is veiled as social media. Simply sharing ideas, right? But the intent is to ultimately lead to a sale.
Using content sharing services to promote your business and services is a great use of social media as a platform. Enabling your customers to evangelize and tell your story for you is one of the greatest ways to build your brand and message. Social media as a platform also enables those people to reach each other.
Social Networking
We all like to meet people. We all like to interact with humans. After all, if you remove the ability to physically connect with the people we interact with online, social media would shrivel to nothing.
Being able to use social media to share pictures of my pug or arrange to meet some friends are great benefits of the technology platforms that comprise social media. In fact, one of my favorite aspects of social media as a platform is it’s opt in. I get out of it what I put in and if I choose not to participate, the world doesn’t end.
Plenty of stories exist about people using social media to network their way into a job or raise funds for a charity or even find a spouse. Being able to foster relationships, both professional and personal, is one of the great uses of social media as a platform.
Social Education
If you are out to share information (like this blog?) or distribute a message then you are using social media as a means to educate. Social education utilizes the alternative definition of social. In this instance, social is a reflection of society as a whole. Building communities around lifestyles or the environment is an emerging use of social media as a platform.
The emergence of the “green” lifestyle and social awareness in general is able to reach new levels thanks to social media as a platform. Video blogs, micropayments and the Twestival for charity:water are great examples of our society taking advantage of the innovations in social media technology that have emerged recently.
What Does This Mean?
It means that there’s no right or wrong way to use social media. It means that we need to be aware of the progression of the platform and how we as marketers and social beings can utilize it in innovative ways.
Just because we’re out in the “social media-sphere” doesn’t mean we know what’s happening. This shift that is occurring around us changes daily. Having a platform to build on and capture our every thought and action is both intriguing and totally frightening.
What this means is that social media is here to stay. How will you use it?
My new IRL buddy Kenji Onozawa is running this little series where he shoves a camera into people’s chests faces and talks to them about social media.
This is a great series because it helps put a real person to the avatar. The joys of tweetups, conferences etc… are that they help us realize just who eachother is. Without actual human connections, social media would not exist. I was more than happy to participate in something like this, even though I hate being on camera.
