Michael O'Connor Clarke is proud to be a card-carrying flack. Currently based in Toronto, Michael has spent almost 20 years in corporate communications and marketing roles. He started blogging at almost the same time as he first moved into PR - over five years ago. Now he's trying to figure out how to combine these two areas of expertise for the benefit of clue-seeking clients. In his time, Michael has pitched people, products, processes and pop-tarts, but he has a congenital inability to peddle fluff.
Email Michael
Tom Murphy, on his splendid PR Opinions blog, points to this interesting survey of the use of blogs in corporate PR:
"Tim Jackson is a student of the Chartered Institute of Public Relations in the UK. As part of his coursework he is conducting an online study exploring blogging and public relations. The deadline for the survey is June 03, 2005. Why not participate by clicking here - it only takes a couple of minutes."
Some of the questions will definitely give you pause for thought (e.g. "Is the ghostwriting of corporate blogs by PR staff on behalf of senior executives acceptable?"). Good stuff.
A quick object lesson in the perils of media manipulation from today's papers.
Yesterday, Canada's largest and most closely-watched public company, Bell Canada Enterprises, held their Annual General Meeting in downtown Toronto.
The Toronto Star ran a surprisingly brief piece, buried on an inside left-hand page. The accompanying photo shows BCE's chief exec on a TV monitor outside the room where the meeting was taking place. The caption notes: "The Star's Rick Eglinton said photographers were forbidden to take pictures at the meeting."
The Globe and Mail's choice of photo is even more pointed. Denied access to the meeting room, the Globe's photo editor chose to run a shot of the protesting union workers picketing the meeting outside.
This Deadly Agency Type is a little harder to characterize – the type more often manifests itself in individuals than entire agencies. I’ve seen some agencies, however, especially smaller ones, build their entire business approach around the Flack Of All Trades mentality, as I’ll attempt to explain here.
Some of the best PR people are, almost by definition, good generalists – expert communicators who happen to have a reasonable amount of knowledge about many different areas of business and society.
At the very top of the game, there exists a small group of PR innovators whose experience extends well outside of pure flackery, and whose ability to understand and, more importantly, to guide macro-level corporate strategy, sets them far apart from the usual.
These rare individuals operate at the level of trusted business advisors to clients enlightened enough to understand their value. At best, truly strategic PR advisors can go far beyond crafting the publicized version of the corporate story – helping to actualize the strategic arc of the long-term narrative itself, as it’s played out day-to-day through the company’s vision and operations.
While it’s fair to describe these unusual professionals as generalists, in truth their level of insight makes them more like the PR world’s version of A.E. Van Vogt’s nexialists.
At a level some rungs below this, one finds a species of PR generalist whose chameleon veneer of talent exists in being able to know (or to learn) just enough to fake their way in just about any market sector. These are the Flacks Of All Trades (and the masters of none).
AdAge (free registration required) is reporting another example of big corporate advertising dollars being used to dictate acceptable news content.
In a move even more clueless than Morgan Stanley's, petrochemical giant BP has instituted what AdAge terms a "zero-tolerance policy toward negative editorial coverage". BP's new policy insists that "ad-accepting" publications inform the company in advance of any "news text or visuals they plan to publish that directly mention the company, a competitor or the oil-and-energy industry".
The scope of this new policy is so outrageously broad -- insisting that the company's media buying agency be informed before a publication runs "any editorial that contains fuel, oil or energy news" -- it strikes me that any "ad-accepting" magazine or newpaper agreeing to these terms is accepting much more than BP's advertising.
This is not the first time a big corporation has used its advertising muscle in an attempt to control editorial content, and it certainly won't be the last, yet the arrogant confidence of both BP and Morgan Stanley's approach is still startling.
It's also disturbing to note how little coverage this issue is getting. Apart from the AdAge stories, there's been precious little attention paid by mainstream media. Even the Reuters piece referencing the original AdAge story only seems to have been picked up in a couple of places. (Aux armes, blogizens!)
On reflection, this really isn't all that surprising. According to AdAge, BP's print media buy was $21.7 million in 2004. Morgan Stanley spent over $10.5 million with the Wall Street Journal alone in the same period. For the WSJ to run a piece critical of these gagging policies would mean kissing goodbye to a sizeable chunk of the advertising revenue that is their lifeblood.
A Reuters report in this morning’s Globe and Mail describes changes introduced by Morgan Stanley and their ad agency into the contracts they’re proposing to use in booking print advertising.
“Under the policy, Morgan Stanley wants publishers to tell it about any objectionable stories that will be run in their newspaper or magazine,” according to Reuters’ sources.
The clear implication is that the mighty Morgan Stanley is threatening to pull lucrative advertising from any publications running stories critical of the firm.
The Reuters piece points to coverage of the new contracts on AdAge.com, including this genuinely disturbing clause:
“In the event that objectionable editorial coverage is planned, agency must be notified as a last-minute change may be necessary. If an issue arises after-hours or a call cannot be made, immediately cancel all Morgan Stanley ads for a minimum of 48 hours.”
The request has apparently been made to a number of prominent news outlets, including The Wall Street Journal and USA Today.
As leading business newspapers, it would be very difficult for these guys not to write about Morgan Stanley, especially during the company’s ongoing battle with disgruntled former execs and shareholders.
It might be tempting to simply deny the firm the oxygen of “earned media”, but that would be almost impossible for a paper such as the WSJ to contemplate – how can the leading business newspaper in the States possibly avoid writing about Morgan Stanley, whether its good news or bad?
At the same time, any editorial board with an ounce of integrity must surely object to this kind of extortionate shake down.
Whether they intended to or not, it looks like Morgan Stanley have just introduced a clear test of editorial probity. Any newspaper that accepts paid advertising on these terms is displaying, at best, questionable integrity, IMHO.
It might seem extreme, but I think the cleanest response would be to refuse to take Morgan Stanley’s ad dollars, and continue to run whatever stories the paper sees fit to run completely free of any coercive restraint.
This is not an episode in the Seven Deadly Agency Types series, but it could be - except that here we're looking at an example of an apparently deadly PR person, not an agency type.
Long time blogger and citizen journalist Christopher Frankonis (a.k.a. The One True b!X) whose razor intelligence I first encountered on email discussion groups about six years ago, currently writes, edits and publishes Portland Communique - a blog b!X modestly describes as an "ongoing experiment in amateur journalism and hobbyist reporting".
In my opinion, Portland Communique is an example of the very best in citizen's journalism. What may have started as a hobby site has become an absolute must-read for politicians and pundits in the Portland area, shining an unflinching spotlight on the machinations and manoeuvrings within the local political scene.
In an article earlier this year, b!X waded into the matter of the Portland Development Commission (PDC) choosing to award a $200 million development contract to a Minnesota-based company, Opus Northwest. To quote the Portland Mercury's story on the topic:
"...in the days following PDC's decision to award Opus the development contract, questions have been raised about the tight-knit relationship between Matt Hennessee, PDC's executive chairman who oversaw the selection of Opus, and Nathaniel "Than" Clevenger III, the public relations representative for Opus. Over the past few years, Clevenger has informally served as a political advisor to Hennessee."
b!X applied his forensic reporter's mind to this issue, and wrote a couple of posts exploring the links between the flack and the bureaucrat.
What happened next is simply astonishing.
Through a series of email exchanges and public postings to the comments on b!X's blog, the "PR professional" went completely and utterly off the deep end.
To get a real taste of the whole thing, read b!X's post here, then follow the war of words as it plays out through the 70+ comments. This is just plain ugly.
I find it hard to comment further without spilling over into a full-blown rant about the damage being done to the reputation of the entire public relations profession here.
Let's leave it with this -- for fellow PR people or other readers, can you possibly imagine ever finding yourself handling a client crisis by sending something like this to a journalist:
[Note: not all of my posts here at Flackster will be stupidly long. This one is. Again. Mea culpa. The executive summary: bloggers are like dogs. Only they’re not.]
So. I’ve been noodling on this post for quite some time. I kept coming back to it, tweaking and kneading the argument over the last few months, then putting it away again to think about other stuff. Earlier today, something happened to break through the inertia and push me into finishing the thought.
If you take a look at the previous post, below – a short “Blink” piece pointing to something John Wagner wrote – you might notice there’s a comment showing. Read it. It’s a polished little pitch from a lady at Backbone Media, encouraging me to take part in their survey of corporate bloggers. Comes complete with a helpful little definition – “Blogging is all about starting online conversations about a particular topic.” Thanks for the epiphany.
Odd.
The urge to fisk is so strong, but rather than respond directly (and, no doubt, grumpily) to this specific manifestation of flack-on-flack action, it’s made me want to take a longer look at the curious business of PR people pitching blogs.
This is a long one, so here’s the three line summary:
Good PR is people.
People with relationships.
People and relationships don’t scale.
Over the past 10 years or so, the agency world has seen wave after wave of consolidation, with most of the tier one PR firms getting rolled into one or other of the three main marketing conglomerates – IPG, WPP and Omnicom.
These three already owned most of the advertising companies in the world – now they’ve added the upper echelons of the PR market to their portfolios. The agencies within the WPP Group alone include Blanc & Otus, Burson-Marsteller, Cohn & Wolfe, Hill & Knowlton, and Ogilvy PR – plus 22 other PR and public affairs firms listed on their website. That's a lot of flacks.
Even at the level below the holding companies, some of these agencies are, in themselves, huge – with hundreds of billable staff in offices all around the world.
A key part of the value proposition these behemoths offer to clients is the apparent advantage of homogenous, fully integrated PR representation in every region you might want to target. The promise is that you’ll be able to get the same quality of service, the same methods, the same reporting tools, and complete coordination of all activity wherever you need PR.
There is a creative void at the top of a lot of agencies, with burnt-out VPs who had one great campaign idea somewhere in their career and haven’t been able to come up with an original thought to match ever since.
Whether it's a particular kind of launch event, a poll, a grassroots program, or a certain flavour of guerrilla branding initiative – too many agencies survive on recycling the same core ideas for every new client they meet.
One turn of phrase, in particular, resonates for me – David talks about the need for PR to "get out of the way" (a thought I’ve touched on in the past). I’d go so far as to say that "Get out of the way" should be adopted as the rubric for the entire public relations profession. But more on that another time.
Thinking along these lines reminded me of one of my favourite "get out of the way" stories, which I can’t resist posting here.
Some years ago, I had the opportunity to work closely with the huge PR machine at Intel Corporation. At the time, one of the most senior people in Intel PR was Ursula Herrick, a genuinely smart, charming, focused woman with a terrific background in corporate and high tech PR.
One of the many aspects of Ursula’s daily life at Intel was “handling” Andy Grove – looking after his speaking calendar and high-profile public appearances in particular. At dinner in Santa Clara one night, Ursula told me this great little story about the life of a PR pro. I hope she won’t object to me relaying the anecdote here.
Andy Grove was invited to give the keynote address at one of the big industry events one year, and Ursula was alongside to make sure he had all he needed for the event. She’d worked with him on researching, drafting and rehearsing his speech; coordinated all the logistics; managed the program of press interviews lined up before and after his appearance; and was there beside him in the wings as he was being introduced to the audience of several thousand attendees.
Unfortunately, Dr. Grove also happened to be struggling with a horrible cold on the morning of the event. The headachey, snuffly, congested, nose-streaming kind of cold that really throws a kink in your day.
Determined not to disappoint, Andy was primed to soldier on regardless (if you’ve read Swimming Across, you’ll know he’s just that kind of guy).
Moments before he’s due to walk out on stage, Andy had to blow his nose – trying to clear his head and his sinuses as well as possible before the big speech. Casting around for a garbage can in the half-light behind the curtain, Andy heard his cue from the event host on stage and was briefly at a loss, clutching a fist full of damp, gluey Kleenex with nowhere to chuck it.
Ursula stuck out her hand to take the bundle of tissues away, flicked a speck from his collar, and ushered Andy out in front of the waiting audience to deliver his presentation.
So here’s this woman, at the absolute pinnacle of her career – one of the two most senior PR people in the whole of the mighty Intel Corporation, and she’s catching snot for her boss.
Don't be fooled by what they tell you at PR school. This is what the job is about. And you know what? There's nothing wrong with it.
[Note: The Seven Deadly Agency Types series will continue in the next post]
Apologies to all about the huge gap between posts. Things jumped the rails for a while, but I’m back for good now. Looking for a new job again too, btw – if you have any good leads, I’d be eternally grateful for any and all referrals or suggestions.
Meanwhile, one of the topics that’s been stewing in my mind in the last few months is the question of why so many PR agencies are just so horribly bad.
I’ve worked at three different agencies now – including two of the very biggest in the world. I’ve also had the task of selecting and managing the agency of record at three different tech firms. And I’ve faced off against competitive agencies on many, many occasions and learned a fair deal about their means and methods in doing so.
Not all agencies suck - the ones I've worked with have had both good points and bad. But far too many firms out there seem to be just fundamentally dysfunctional.
The ones on the dark side tend to fall into one or other of the categories I’m going to call The Seven Deadly Agency Types. Over the next few days, I'll write up my thoughts on these, and some ideas about how to diagnose (and avoid) each type.
Michael O'Connor Clarke is proud to be a card-carrying flack. Currently based in Toronto, Michael has spent almost 20 years in corporate communications and marketing roles. He started blogging at almost the same time as he first moved into PR - over five years ago. Now he's trying to figure out how to combine these two areas of expertise for the benefit of clue-seeking clients. In his time, Michael has pitched people, products, processes and pop-tarts, but he has a congenital inability to peddle fluff.
