Social media, good for PR or bad?

As the use of social media increases among people, businesses, and especially the PR world, it could actually cause some PR problems of its own.

However, with any internet site or service it is not free. There is always someone behind the operation who is paying for the basic underlying framework of the site. Internet has become such a common thing among everyone in the world today and is not something people think of having to pay to access. This, however, would be changing soon.

As bandwidth, or the speed of data transfer increases, so does the cost of providing it. Along with the increase on bandwidth is the increase in popularity of social media, which also adds to the rise in funds.

This change could cause many PR problems for the companies who begin monitoring internet use and charging or capping usage. Internet users are accustomed to being able to freely use whichever internet site they wish and some will not be excited to hear about this transformation.

Many PR practitioners and companies have become more involved in social media sites and blogging. This includes large sites such as Facebook and Twitter to sites specific to PR such as PR Open Mic and PR Blog Spot. These sites create a huge networking opportunity which therefore increases the opportunity for many other advances, jobs, internships, and more for those involved in PR.

PR practitioners in telecommunications better be aware and ready for the near future and the PR problems that are most likely to occur. Although the rise of internet usage, specifically social media sites, is supposed to be a positive addition to the PR world it could actually end up causing damage.

People will have to realize that as social media becomes increasingly demanding and the economy continues to experience a difficult time, they might have to begin paying for their internet usage. As this change slowly occurs the companies who first begin charging their users will most likely have a bad reputation. However, I think over time more companies will also have to start charging and the bad image will fade away.

So, although bad PR might follow those companies who first instigate charging users for their internet usage I think the trend will slowly become more accepted as other companies follow in their footsteps. The positive effect of using social media will override this problem and continue to provide good PR opportunities for the PR business.

A funny thing happened when using celebrities for PR

Ryan Reynolds, Scarlett Johansson, Ben Stiller, The Who, all well known names who continue to provide good PR for a good cause.

On Thursday, November 6^th “A Funny Thing Happened on the Way to Cure Parkinson’s” benefit for the Michael J. Fox foundation took place in New York City. Who ever said using celebrities is a bright idea for good PR is right.

Along with Michael J. Fox, his wife and the previously mentioned celebrities, many other well known names also showed their support, including celebrity chair Ryan Reynolds. No other celebrity could fulfill this role better, as he understands the importance of Parkinson’s disease since his dad suffers from it as well. Just days before, Reynolds completed the NYC marathon under Team Fox in which he ultimately raised over $80,000 for Parkinson’s research with much support from his friends, family, and of course fans.

Some people think using celebrities is an easy way out of getting positive PR and getting consumers to buy into you product or your idea, but its one that works. So, if it is successful then I wonder why would you not continue using what you know will work?

These days you see celebrities endorsing charitable causes all the time. Whether they are an honoree guest, a spokesperson, are auctioning off their items, or offering a meet and greet, people like to be involved in what the stars are also involved.

Celebrity involvement is a proven way to gain publicity and funds; however it is important to find someone who supports the cause in which they are going to represent.

On the other hand, there are the negatives of using celebrities to endorse a worthwhile cause. One public relations guru, Max Clifford explains how sometimes celebrities using their fame to help out a cause can be misleading. Clifford discusses how there can always be those celebrities who eat up the spotlight and only want to advance their public image and fame.

Clifford also brings up the point that the celebrity chosen to represent the charity must be one whose other publicity will not end up spreading a bad reputation to the benefit. The celebrity must be chosen carefully, because if bad publicity surfaces about that celebrity they will be linked to the charity, therefore putting it in a bad light as well.

However, Clifford does agree that using a celebrity in one of the most successful ways for charities to gain publicity. So, does using a celebrity usually make for good PR or bad? (Rowling, 2006)

Going back to the Michael J. Fox benefit for Parkinson’s disease I would say it only put the benefit in a positive light. Performances by Ben Stiller and The Who combined with celebrity chair Reynolds’ opening, the event was nothing short of a success, and an enjoyable one at that.

Reynolds supports the cause, as it hits close to home, and is a celebrity who does not have negative publicity associated with him. According to the Michael J. Fox website, last year this annual event raised $5.5 million and more than 1,200 guests attended. It seems even celebrity run charity events can benefit from other celebrities endorsing the cause.

Works Cited

Rowling, M. (2006, March 24). Chosing and using celebrities wisely. Retrieved November 10, 2008, from Reuters AlertNet: http://www.alertnet.org/thefacts/reliefresources/114321127884.htm

Saving their image by making it worse

In trying to save face they managed to only cause more bad images for themselves, and that is not the first problem the FDA, Food and Drug Administration, has had this year. They were simply attempting to put themselves in a better light after several incidences brought their image down. First there was the foreign inspection issue, followed by the FDA asking the government for more funds to inspect our food and drugs, which, according to The Wall Street Journal, the lack of inspections of our food and drugs from other countries ended up being the cause of more than 80 deaths this year. (Francis, 2008) Secondly, was the wide spread of salmonella in tomatoes all over the world.

The FDA seemed to be struggling this year and did not have the trust or confidence of the people that it once did. So when trying to restore the publics image of the FDA, their new PR head, Mildred Cooper seemed to make things worse. Using his connections, Cooper conducted a deal with an Alaskan agency known as Qorvis Communications.

 However, he also avoided following government regulations, which states that a $300,000 competition to the lowest bidder be conducted to determine the hiring contract. By using an Alaskan corporation Qorvis Communications is excused from regulations requiring them to bid on federal work.

I guess Cooper didn’t think this issue would be uncovered, but when the Washington Post discovered the FDA’s sneaky contract with Qorvis Communications, Cooper denied intentionally doing anything wrong. Upon the Washington Posts discoveries, the deputy commissioner, John Dyer, immediately cancelled the contract and claims, “The FDA has full confidence in the integrity of its contracting procedures.” (Silverman, 2008)

Does the FDA care more about saving their image than the health of people and the quality of the products they provide us? This is a question many want answered.

It’s obvious the FDA cares about its public image, and wants to regain a positive thought in the publics mind. However, going about it behind the back of the government is clearly not the way to go. So with nothing accomplished, the FDA is still in need of a good PR firm, one who can hopefully restore the mess the FDA seemingly has gotten itself into.

Works Cited

Francis, T. (2008, June 11). The Wall Street Journal. Retrieved November 2, 2008, from Health Blog: http://blogs.wsj.com/health/2008/06/11/sen-specter-says-fda-cant-even-ask-for-money-properly/

Silverman, E. (2008, October 2). Pharmalot. Retrieved November 2, 2008, from FDA Tackles Image Problem With Tainted PR Deal : http://www.pharmalot.com/2008/10/fda-tackles-image-problem-with-tainted-pr-deal/

Economy vs. the church

With the economy in bad shape it is definitely taking a toll on our everyday activities. It seems the price tag on everything has risen, from gas to groceries. So as the economy continues to head south are the churches becoming worried as well?

It seems the economic problems might even been one that God can’t control. As many people have less money to spend, churches are seeing a decline in the amount of tithing from their members. With prices rising and people even being laid off and losing the income they have always depended on it’s expected for things to change.

Lisa Schwartz, a minister in Kansas explains her thoughts about the issue by saying, “I would imagine that if the economy continues to turn down and people are facing job loss and foreclosures, there’s no way it could not affect churches and other nonprofits.” (Anderson, 2008)

Churches depend on donations from their members as well as other organizations in order to continue its upkeep. Not only do they need to keep the church looking nice, but the church has to pay for employees, food, trips, utilities, and much more. Basically everything that makes up a church and everything that keeps it running is paid for by the donations people give each week.

Some church goers, who like to refer to themselves as “firm believers,” as well as many church leaders try to instruct their members that during this time of hardship is when you should be giving even more to the church so it can offer the services and help that you need to make it though this difficult time. However, others wonder, wouldn’t God want us to take care of ourselves and our family?

Others like to argue that the church is also a business. It works and runs just like business, therefore it is struggling during this economic hardship just as much as anyone else.

Much to be disputed about and little time in which to do so. As everyone sits around comparing and arguing about the situation our economy continues to struggle. For many people this is an even harder time that you might imagine. Funds are low and many are even seeking help from their church.

Bob Broxterman, leader of a church in Virginia explains how the bags their church puts together which are filled with things such as food have been flying off of the shelves lately. So during this hard time do we help the church or does the church help us? (Anderson, 2008)

I wonder if there is even a correct answer to that question. Either way, someone is going to been seen in bad light. There is a negative connotation seen on those who stop giving to their church, a place where they worship and a place always giving back. On the other hand it’s bad PR for the church if you’re not helping out others, especially your own members.

Anderson, P. (2008, October 11). Church donations not yet affected by economy. Retrieved October 27, 2008, from The Capital Journal: http://www.cjonline.com/stories/101108/rel_342733430.shtml

Is e-mail taking over?

183 billion are sent each day and 12 in about 25 people rely on it everyday, email. According to a technology market research firm last year, email is growing daily in its popularity, especially within the workplace. The questions remains is this a good growth and will our generation rely on it even more strictly when we enter the career field?

 There are many strong advantages to using email to communicate. For example, it is very good if you need to keep written records, or have something to refer back to, whether it’s a list or instructions. It is also very convenient if you do not need any discussion about a topic. For things such as, scheduling or confirming dates and appointments email is very practical.

Email is asynchronous, meaning the receiver of the email can decide when to read the message and how much time to spend on it. This has been found to be very useful in business situations. When employees are communicating with other offices in different cities or even countries they could be on different time schedules and communicating through email eliminates any time conflicts. Email is also much less time consuming and less expensive than something such as making several conference calls each week.

Communicating through email is non intrusive and great for document transfer and exchange. When used correctly using email throughout the workplace can eventually enhance companies, in 2006 companies reported seeing improvements when using email communication whether when communicating with each other or with their customers. (Shoman, 2006)

 Communicating through email is easy to use, fast, efficient, and versatile. However, being fast and efficient can be one of emails disadvantages as well. Emails composed out of anger or frustration, or without a lot of thought put into them cannot be undone, once an email is sent it is irretrievable. This could obviously cause many problems when using email to communicate at work.

Using email to communicate also causes you to lose all dialogue and personal touch. Without face to face communication there is no way to be assured that the information communicated is clear and understood by the receiver. There are no non verbal cues to interpret through email either, which are a number one sign of comprehension and feedback. This year 67 percent of executives and managers say that they believe their organization would be more productive if employees communicated more often in person. (Martin, 2007)

Often time people communicate through email in order to delay decision making. Avoiding the personal contact allows the person receiving the information more time to think and more to time to avoid immediate decisions or commitments.

Obviously, email also presents a privacy issue. Emails sent throughout a business are monitored. You must be aware of the messages that you are sending because potentially anyone could end up seeing them.

As email continues to grow in use over the years businesses may try and administer some control over how often email is used. Our generation is more dependent on email as a communication tool than any other generation which ultimately affects every aspect of PR and how it will work. So as we enter the workforce and as the popularity of the internet develops many begin to wonder, will face to face communication eventually be a thing of the past?

Works Cited

Martin, C. (2007, March 6). Importance of Face to Face Communication. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from CIO: http://www.cio.com/article/29898/The_Importance_of_Face_to_Face_Communication_at_Work

Research, F. (2008). Industry Statistics. Retrieved October 6, 2008, from Ferris Research: http://www.ferris.com/research-library/industry-statistics/

Shoman, J. (2006, July 13). Advantages and Disadvantages of Email. Retrieved October 7, 2008, from EZine Articles: http://ezinearticles.com/?Advantages-and-Disadvantages-of-Email&id=242832

Are you putting us on?

Everyday we are presented with thousands of messages everywhere we go and everywhere we look. The question is what makes us pay attention to one message and totally disregard another?

A particular Kenneth Cole ad that I found dealing with gay marriage immediately stood out to me. Getting the audience to pay attention is one of the first steps in the successful influence of a persuasive message. The image is what first caught my eye. You see two hands, male hands, grasped together. It is out of the ordinary and some people might find it odd to see two men holding hands. Then, at a closer look you see a clever line where it says, “52% of Americans think same-sex marriages don’t deserve a good reception.” This witty expression also grabs my attention and makes me think, a good reception as in the party after a wedding, or a good reception meaning being well accepted or received?

Comprehension is one major part of advertisements effectiveness as well. Once the advertisement has the audience’s attention they need to understand exactly what the advertisement is trying to say. This double meaning message could be understood in one of two ways. Most likely Kenneth Cole wants the onlooker to walk away or turn the page and still remember what his ad was about. Although this message is simple it is not one that can be figured out by just reading it over once.

After the first statement it then goes on to say, “Are you putting us on? –Kenneth Cole.” However there is also a double meaning to this message as well. As you read this message and look at the picture you assume that the watch and shirt that the men are wearing is in fact Kenneth Cole. So, are you putting them on, are you wearing their products? Or in other words, are you kidding me?

This particular advertisement is trying to persuade the attitude you have towards gays, the beliefs you have toward gays, or the behaviors you have towards gays. So if acceptance is reached then they have effectively persuaded you to think about or change one of these factors. Due to the fact that Kenneth Cole is behind this ad makes it much more effective.  Being a well known and highly accepted fashion designer makes him have a greater impact than someone whose name was uncommon or not as respected. 

To see that a big luxury clothesline and designer is supporting the issue on gay marriage might interest the audience to research the topic themselves and research their feelings about it as well. 

I find this ad to be very effective because it first grabs the audience’s attention and then makes them think about the ad. Although some may find it to be controversial as it is dealing with gays, I think that it is a unique ad that would be remembered by those who see it. Therefore I think it is great PR for Kenneth Cole and a great example of a successful advertisement.

Wilke, M. (2006, March). Same Sex Marriage Ads. Retrieved September 24, 2007, from The Gully Online Magazine: http://www.thegully.com/essays/gay_mundo2/wilke/img_closet/700×502cole.jpg

Tweet, Tweet

Facebook, Myspace, and Twitter are all social networks; however my perception of them has recently changed. Forced to join Twitter by one of my Public Relations teachers at Auburn University, I had only logged in one time and that was to sign up for my account.

At first all of my fellow students and I thought that the whole Twitter thing was kind of creepy. We didn’t want people “following” us and we certainly didn’t want to be “following” anyone else. After a couple of weeks of leaving my Twitter account unused and untouched we were asked to play around with it in class one day. Our teacher put up a “tweet” that said, “I am trying to teach my students the importance of Twitter as a social network,” and before long we had several responses. It was incredible how fast people from all different places would respond to this statement with reasons why they found Twitter to be important.

So after deciding to “follow” all my fellow students I really started to get into Twitter. I searched around for people who I might want to be in contact with because they could potentially be of some help to me when looking for things like internships. One group I recently found on Twitter was PRJobs.  I learned how you can find a variety of different Auburn networks to connect with as well such as AuburnPR.  Already knowing the importance of networking I realized that this Twitter thing might be kind of neat after all.

According to Twitterfacts the total number of Twitter users has grown significantly over the past year. In June of 2007 there were about 280,000 Twitter users compared to January 2008 where they recorded about 750,000 users. With the United States leading the way, Japan, Spain, the UK, and many other countries are also growing in their numbers of people getting involved with Twitter. (Twitter Facts Blogspot, 2008)

Sometimes referred to as a micro-blogging tool, Twitter is now becoming a popular source for businesses. Whether using it to respond to customers, stay up to date on the newest trends, or get up to the minute updates on anything going on around the world, businesses are slowly finding Twitter to be a very useful tool. (Baker, 2008)

Besides being a great informational and marketing device Twitter is also a social convention. Competing with other services such as Facebook and Myspace it provides communication and connections that users refer to daily. At the rate it is going now Twitter will continue to grow in its importance. Besides being a great communication and networking instrument Twitter is fun too, and once you start you might find that you can’t stop.

Works Cited

Baker, S. (2008, May 15). Why Twitter Matters. Retrieved October 4, 2008, from Business Week: http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/may2008/tc20080514_269697.htm

Twitter Facts Blogspot. (2008, January 6). Retrieved October 4, 2008, from Twitter Facts: http://twitterfacts.blogspot.com/2008/01/number-of-twitter-users.html

OMG, racy ads

As David Duchovny stands underneath water smoking a cigarette, the caption reads, “He’s in way too deep.”

With the premiere of Californication airing this past Sunday night the show has been promoted everywhere. Fans of the show might question the actual meaning behind the catchy phrase. It seems that these hit, sexual based, television shows seem to do a lot of creative advertisements that sometimes go right along with the racy content of the show.

This time last year as advertisers were placing ads out for the new season of Californication, many companies discovered that their ads were actually being screened. Coming from a Christian Lobby group, there were many complaints about the content of the ads and allowing them to run on TV. (Voice for Values, 2007)

Only recently did Gossip Girl also start up their new season as well. Known for their teenage drama dealing with everything from boys to drugs, these high schoolers get all around the upper east-side of New York City.  Their most famous advertisement caused much controversy with parents and their television network, CW.  Showing two people in what appears to be a very sexually suggestive photo, with the letters OMFG stamped across the picture. OMFG suspiciously standing for oh my fucking god, and with the sexual photo to go along with it, making many wonder the true meaning behind the abbreviation.

However it seems that these risqué advertisements get the job done, it gets viewers to tune into their show.  Although it often causes problems between networks and producers, both of these shows had millions of viewers tune into their new 2008 season.

When discussing the Gossip Girls ads, a Council representative of MediaWeek says that the Parents Television Council “deplores the CW’s deliberate use of profanity and sexual imagery to exploit and further corrupt young viewers.”  They are afraid of the negative influence these ads cold have on susceptible teens. (Carreau, 2008)

It is not just these two particular shows that seem to get away and get a good response with suggestive advertisements.  This style of promoting themselves in this manner is something that runs very common among these adult content shows.

As many advertisers would argue, even if the PR is controversial, if it’s working then why not use it? Their job is to promote the show and get viewers to watch, so it seems as though they are getting their job done.  However, all along the way they are giving their show bad PR as well. Arguments over the ads content leads to the questioning of the shows content, which in the case of these two shows, heads up bad images that are associated with each show.

So the question remains as to whether or not racy and controversial ads that work are worth the bad PR that comes a long with it?

Works Cited

Carreau, I. (2008, April 24). Retrieved September 27, 2008, from TV Squad: http://www.tvsquad.com/2008/04/24/ptc-says-wtf-over-omfg-ads/

Voice for Values. (2007, September 17). Retrieved September 27, 2008, from Australian Christian Lobby: http://www.acl.org.au/national/browse.stw?article_id=16999

Saturday Night PR

Is any publicity always good publicity, even if it pokes fun at someone?  In the case of Sarah Palin this might hold true.  Last Saturday night on the long time popular show Saturday Night Live, comedian Tina Fey dressed up as Palin with fellow cast mate Amy Poehler as Hilary Clinton, and made fun of the two lady politicians in a skit.

With Olympic gold medalist Michael Phelps hosting the show, thousands tuned in and made this episode “The most –watched SNL for any date since 2002,” according to Fox News. (Fox News, 2008)  In their spoof, Fey and Poehler started off talking about sexism in the media.  Then as they started to discuss politics, Fey responded to a question about the current Bush doctrine with “I don’t know what that is.”  This particular scene was making fun of Palin, who recently during an interview with Charlie Gibson, seemed to be clueless about topics in the current Bush doctrine.  The live audience can be heard laughing in the background and a reported number of viewers found the humor in it as well.  However, it doesn’t really seem to make Palin look very intelligent or up to date with her political knowledge at that.

So whether or not people deem this scene in SNL as good PR for Palin or not, it definitely has not hurt her.  As John McCain’s 2008 Republican Presidential running mate, she has become a fan favorite and left her mark on many people with her speeches at the Republic Convention. 

When asked about the SNL spoof Palin has explained that she actually tuned in to the show and found it very funny.  She said that she had to volume turned down but saw the skit and not only thought that it was amusing, but that Fey did a great job of imitating her and had her down to a tee. 

I do not agree that all publicity is good publicity, because I think that it depends on the topic and the nature of what is being presented.  In this case, it was humorous and something that even Palin, the root of the joke, found funny as well.  This highly watched show put Palin’s name out there one more time and that can never hurt during a presidential race.  SNL has a good reputation and most people would gladly accept a spot on the show if they were offered. 

The shows good reputation, plus the fact that Fey and Poehler’s funny act didn’t leave a bad image in your mind about Palin and Clinton, but rather just a smile on your face; makes me believe that this might not have been bad coverage for Palin. 

It is also very important how a subject of public exposure handles it afterwards.  The fact that Palin told the public about how she watched the show herself, and found the jokes and impressions about her funny and good, certainly helps her case as well.  It turned questionable PR about a vice presidential candidate into positive PR.  Overall I think that Palin and her public relations team did a great job of keeping her image positive.  Even though the skit was not flattering and got many laughs, she still seems to remain in a positive light to the public.

Works Cited

(2008, September 16). Retrieved Septemper 18, 2008, from Fox News: http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,422883,00.html

Unpredictable, Late Nights Usually Sound Like Fun

        Everyday we see and hear about the works of public relations whether or not we even realize it.  Almost every field of work imaginable has someone who deals with the flow of information between their organization and different publics.  There are many different directions in which to apply a public relations major.  However, the one that sparks my interest the most is sports related. 

        Often known in the sports world as media relations, sports teams and sports organizations everywhere need a strong public image.  Media relations are of vital importance to a sports team because it connects the fans to their team, whether it is through the players, the coaches, or the team in general; and a team could not survive without its fans.  Hence the title, media relations, those who work in this industry are a link between the team they represent and different media outlets.  They deal with getting all of the stats to the media as well as setting up after game interviews with the wanted players and coaches.

        I have been warned several times about the long, unpredictable hours that will be set in front of you in this type of job, but that doesn’t bother me.  At the conclusion of a game it is usually the staff of media relations job to finish a complete press release, full of quotes from players and coaches as well as a re-cap of the game.  It must be complete and perfect about an hour after the end of the game.  The fact that you could be stuck at a game that didn’t start until 8 pm, that now has gone into overtime, until after midnight might be of concern to some college age students in search of a job.  However, it is what I love and I think that if you are passionate about something then long, irregular hours just add to the spontaneity of your job.  Many young adults just entering the career field may not want to surrender late nights or especially weekends, but I guess that’s just a step that I am willing to take.

        The sports field is also enticing to me because it combines many different aspects of public relations.  It combines both the informational and commercial sides of sports information.  It also allows you to serve as your own gatekeeper in deciding what specific information you want to release to the public about your team or your teams sporting event.  Most importantly it lets you serve as a liaison between your organization and its publics.  Some public relations fields only allow you to work specifically in one of these areas, and although it may be more work, sports public relations allows you to be involved in much more.

        Despite the hard work and long days that are in my future, sports public relations is where I see myself in the career world.  Public relations offers so many different opportunities for a job, its just about finding what interests you.