That’s Rich

Absolutely compelling reading for anyone working on large-cap companies.

 

http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/global500/2008/snapshots/2255.html

 

You won’t find the phrase ‘credit crunch’ in this list.

How to kill the English language

Jargon, yep, jargon. It has been addressed on this site before and the BBC did a good piece on it last month: http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/magazine/7457287.stm

However, I just can’t resist having another bite at the cherry (boom, boom).

 

In our industry we are constantly up against deadlines, time is perhaps one of our most precious commodities and in theory anything we can do to save on time is a good thing, right?

 

Well yes and no. Being able to use macros in word is a good thing. Knowing which journalists write what and for who is a good thing. Having nimble hands to do binding is a good thing. Butchering the English language to get a point across quicker is a bad thing.

 

If time is one of our most vital commodities, then surely language is our most precious. Through constant use of management speak and jargon, I have seen people put together entire sentences with nothing but a series of catchphrases, acronyms and buzz words. It takes some doing, but here is an example which I have taken from a conversation I had with a ‘friend’ in a bar a few weeks back:

 

“So, I touched base with her and flicked across the WIP before COP – we were going uphill against the wind with this one. She came back to me and asked me to action a PR calendar which we could take forward in order to facilitate meeting our KPIs.”

 

After hearing that I took a swig of my beer to make sure it was actually beer and not some mind-bending petrol!

 

I realise that people fall into the habit of talking in jargon and I am one of the guiltiest parties in my office – so I have put together a list of 10 words, phrases and clichés’ which I am trying to eliminate from my day-to-day life. Each time I use one of them, 10p goes into the Beer Money jar.

 

1.      And such – I don’t really know what this means, it just happens to end sentences where I’ve been listing something and run out of things to say

2.      Let’s touch base – The classic. No idea what it really means – shall we meet? Let’s talk about this? Do you want to play baseball? No idea

3.      Blue sky thinking – It would be beautiful if it wasn’t so cringe worthy

4.      Action it – grammatically I’m not even sure if this is correct. Can you action this for me? No, but I can do it for you if you like

5.       COP – PR is just not cricket, so there is no need for this phrase to be used

6.      I have capacity – When did I start talking like a robot? Yes, I have the time to do it for you

7.      Ya – The dreaded yuppie ‘ya’ has crept into my vocabulary with disturbing ease. I realise as soon as I’ve said it that I am a shell of a human being

8.      Flag-up – Probably the one I use most…….annoyingly

9.      Media matrix – I don’t actually use this, but it does always amuse. How exactly is a media matrix different from a media list

10.  Can we sit-down? – Is it really so difficult to say: “can we have a meeting?”

 

I have been on my jargon watch for two weeks now and I am about £23 poorer, but a much richer human being.

A woman of little substance

A first-time post here for Nicola Miller, Communications Manger, Thames Valley University. If you’d like to contribute, please do drop me/James a line on Facebook.

This week, the international PR industry gathers for the fifth annual World Public Relations Festival & Conference, being hosted in the UK for the first time. But whilst there will no doubt be plenty of healthy professional debate taking place, what about the global debate that needs to be addressed surrounding the unhealthy image of our profession? I’m talking about the comprehension of public relations beyond its own sector, and the image of its female practitioners in particular.

I know from experience that the practitioner role is taken very seriously by those working in and with us in our industry. But when will the rest of the world, the television-watching one that lies beyond the CIPR’s doors, finally catch on?

Sex and the City has a lot to answer for. Like most viewers of the multi award-winning TV series and now box office smash, I’ve been amused by its characters’ exploits, baffled by their wardrobes and staggered by the number of sexual partners they’ve collectively worked their way through (it’s 95, in case you were wondering). But from a professional viewpoint, I have one ‘Big’ problem with SATC, and it’s not a Mr: It’s Samantha Jones, the PR woman.

Friends think that I ought to be flattered by the show’s portrayal of a strong-minded, sexy female working in the same job as mine and who knows what she wants. But it’s the depiction of this ‘profession’ that makes me want to pull my hair out.

Samantha’s job seems to revolve entirely around casually throwing together every exclusive bash in New York and then attending them with her friends in tow. We all know the reality would be very different. I guarantee Samantha would be found running around backstage at any of her events, trying to keep everything and everyone to a watertight schedule. Just to shatter illusions even further, most of us in PR do not occupy our time planning lovely parties. Events are far more likely to consist of a corporate lunch or two or, if you’re lucky, working on a stand at the occasional conference, which is bound to be on an exciting topic, such as steel production or beekeeping.

Sex and the City is not the first programme to have damaged the reputation of women in PR. Jennifer Saunders did it first, of course, with her satirical portrayal of Edina Monsoon in the brilliantly funny ‘Absolutely Fabulous’. But a big part of the comedy lay in the ‘joke’ that Edina worked in PR, a job with so little substance to it that turning up was optional and when you did, it was an endless round of parties, drinking and the occasional lunch with Lulu. And don’t forget Bridget Jones famously ‘fannying around with the press releases’, to quote Hugh Grant in the film as Daniel Cleaver.

They say ‘sex sells’, but there is a loaded sub-text to the chosen profession of the sexually experienced character of Samantha. She even states in one episode that; “’I’m in PR’ translates as ‘I’m good in bed’”. Would Samantha’s character be as convincing if she were an accountant, or a chef, perhaps? The not-so-subliminal message is that working in PR is suited to women and neither they nor their profession should be taken too seriously. When you consider that SATC sets out to empower its female audience, it’s rather depressing. Even if it were a true depiction, what about the corporate communicators, those working in politics and generally making a difference for their clients or within the organisations where they slave away?

I cannot be alone in cringing at the thought of my mum watching Kim Cattrall play Samantha in SATC, but I recoil at her opinion of what her two daughters do for a living. No wonder she still thinks I’m going to come to my senses one day and ‘get a real, professional job’. I have a profession, just not the fictitious one that the rest of the world sees on screen.

I think it is time for some non-fiction please. The PR industry needs to do more to counter the stereotypical image of PR as an occupation that can be entered without relevant training and education. We need to do a better job at policing the reputation of our own industry.

Ironically, though perhaps not surprisingly, Samantha, Edina and Bridget are doing nothing to damage the appeal of working in public relations. Nothing could be further from the truth, with roughly 48,000 people working in the industry and PR regularly featuring amongst the top three career choices for graduates, many of them female.

Furthermore, a recent salary survey from industry bible PR Week illustrated that a career in public relations can command an increasingly attractive salary with employers set to maintain levels of graduate recruitment levels in this industry.

But why do so many fresh-faced young graduates want to work in PR over most other areas of employment? Should the industry be slapping itself on the back for offering such excellent salaries, working conditions and job satisfaction, or be concerned at the possibility that PR is being viewed as a soft-option, a Mickey Mouse career that can be done by anyone who knows how to hold a conversation and a wine glass simultaneously?

My suspicions that PR is not viewed as a serious profession were aroused when I learned that, across the country, applications to study public relations degrees were down once more this year, according to UCAS figures. Do those planning their careers not consider PR to be a vocation that values or requires the tailored education provided by universities? If you were pursuing a career in anything you perceived to be a true profession, wouldn’t you want to study for the appropriate qualifications in order to practice it?

I hope the delegates at the World Public Relations Conference remember that not all the world views PR as we do. If not, I know of a beekeeping conference they may prefer.

Child of our (The) Times

I have made no secret that The Times is my paper of choice. Were I not working for a PR agency and actually had to pay for a paper, then my pennies would go to The Times. Good home news, strong business section, the best world news section and sports pages which make the tabs look pitifully shallow – The Game being arguably the best pull-out section of them all.

However, recently, I have been thumbing through my beloved paper and find something very different. Colour coded pages, a daily universal registry page and a noticeable increase in advertising. The content is still superb and the quality of reporting is excellent, but my eye can’t help but be tracked by the funny green, yellow, mauve and so on colours at the top of the page. With a new editor in place it is natural to see so many changes occur, all you need to do is look at the weekend FT for an example of a new editor stamping their own, and forgive the pun, print on a paper.

Some will point to the Murdoch influence in these changes but the real reason, surely, is the ever competitive paper market. Not only does The Times compete with the Mail, Mirror and Express for casual readers, but the amount being digested online is also a huge factor. Recognising the threat, a few years ago, the ‘quality’ press took the bold step of downsizing in format – with a couple of noticeable exceptions - but clearly this has not been enough. The floating casual reader is still not picking up the Indy, Guardian or Times.

On a personal level, I have no problems with a paper trying to become more commercially appealing, as long as the changes don’t come at the expense of the reason why I bought the paper in the first place – the quality. Will this be the beginning of a rash of rebrandings? What new features will be introduced? How much has the new FT Weekend influenced the movers and shakers? I don’t know the latest circulation figures for the FT Weekend, but I get the feeling, having talked and listened to those close to the paper, that it has been something of a success.

So, whilst some traditionalists will be throwing their arms up and screaming the new Times is the worst thing since the death of Mudlark, I will be sitting back, getting used to the new format and hoping that any efforts made by the quality press to increase circulation figures is a huge success.

That said, I will be continuing my silent campaign for the reintroduction of Mudlark

SOS Twitter

Loads of PR people are getting stuck into Twitter these days (Check out some of the poeple I follow if you want to pick up a few www.twitter.com/alexpearmain ), but it’s well, how do I put this, a little bit unstable. Too often it isn’t working. Rather than whinge, someone (well, Chris), decided to do soemthing about it.

So, if you love Twitter, check out http://www.twitterfund.com/ and donate a few pounds to try and help Twitter get better.

Whilst I’m banging on about Twitter, an interesting aspect of this recent Business Week article about social media was the prominence of Amanda Mooney ( www.twitter.com/amandamooney ). We’ve been following each other on Twitter for a while, and she’s just started wiht Edelamn NY. I’d say using Twitter to get yourself into a major publication’s article on social media is pretty good creds at the outset of your career.

Protecting your brand (and client)

Online advertising is, as I am sure we’ll all sick and tired of hearing, the future.  And, whilst PR agencies slave away to influence old and new media, Advertising Networks are becoming power houses for web 2.0’s best and brightest.

For those that don’t know, Advertising networks are the equivalent of billboard screen owners and will buy ‘inventory’ on successful websites and will then charge clients to run their banners on these spaces. It’s all quite clever, but it isn’t cheap.

This is not a world without flaws, however, and PRs should stay vigilant that their Communications hard work isn’t being undone by unfortunate placing of adverts. Anyone who does the PR for Euro Disney should pay particular attention. 

 

It’s inexcusable that Euro Disney’s latest campaign ‘Kids Under 7 stay for free’ should be placed on an article about Austrian child abuse. This sort of thing can and should be avoided by inserting clauses about the sort of article and advert should run with.

New Media may be the future but it will always need a watchful eye.

 

In-house, out-house, dog-house?

For a few weeks now I’ve been thinking to myself: “At what point does an agency PR go in-house?” Like most of my articles, I found my inspiration whilst relaxing in a very nice little boozer. I was talking to a chap over a few halves when he revealed to me that he had been working in-house for ten years. That means his first job fresh out of university was to go straight into an in-house role.

 

It got me thinking, why didn’t I think about working in-house when I first started? I’ve always thought that in-house roles were for those who had had enough of the often frenetic agency environment, settled with kids and generally wanted a quieter life. Of course this is not true, in-house comms teams face just as much turbulence as their agency counterparts and, for some companies, it can be a daily battle to protect reputations. I also failed to consider the fact that junior jobs (like the ones I do for my agency) need to be done in-house too, so someone must be doing them.

 

So, over the last few weeks, I’ve been casting my mind back two years and thinking if I could choose a different route and go in-house, where would I go?

Firstly, I considered whether the company would be interesting enough to lose myself in, would it be a constantly shifting challenge and would it consistently have a high media profile. The list narrowed quite considerably. But anyway, here they are:

 

·         Arsenal Football Club – I’m a big fan, so no explanation needed

·         BBC – Arguably Britain’s most successful brand and one which would be a never-ending challenge

·         MOD – With some of my clients, past and present, I have seen a fraction of the technology the MOD is developing and to think about what might be going on behind closed doors, it would certainly get me up in the morning

·         The Mayor’s Office – Come on, any explanation needed? I wrote my dissertation on the devolved body and like to think I know it inside out. After nine years of quiet but steady consolidation, exciting times surely lay ahead.

And really, that is about it. With such a small list, I would really like to hear from people who have gone in-house at a junior level, why they did, what they like about it and if they would ever consider trading it all in and going to an agency.

 

I think there is a tendency from agency PRs to think in-house is the place to go once they’ve exhausted themselves, so now is your chance to prove them wrong!

 

The floor is open:

Housekeeping

Few bits of tidying up going on. Some new blogs added to the blogroll on the right. We link to people because either a] we like them, b] they link to us and are relevant, or [and hopefully this covers nearly all], c] they’re both top relevant blogs AND we like them a lot. If you link to us, think we should link to you because you’re PR gold, or just have sugestions for other blogs we should read, lave a comment, or drop us a line.

You’ll doubtless have seen plenty about the Burmese situation, but wanted to share the below vid. Tim Whirledge keen to hear more from PRs with ideas on spreading awareness.

Finally, I’ve already booked my tickets, have you? innocent’s Village fete event is back again. Apart from my love of smoothie, also sharing because it’s yet another example of innocent operating across platforms to raise awareness, [at last count facebook, blog, twitter and youtube]. They essentially deploy at a business level the philosophy I’ve always believed lay behind our efforts with the PR and Comms Network; it’s about using social media tools to make real world interaction easier and more fun. They have the benefit of making money, however, and have a fair bit greater audience…and they just won an award for exactly that.

PR Careers- the new way

Top post/presentation from Dom Whitehurst, looking at how the internet has changed the way PRs should operate in terms of the way they conduct their careers. Neatly [visually] sums up the reasons we set up the PR and Comms Network- meeting other people in the industry, ‘without the name badge’.

Ironically I can’t get the presentation to embed here, but ruge you to go have a look over on his blog. He’ll appreciate any bonus hits anyway, i’m sure.

PR Pub Quiz- the results

It was the ultimate test of your PR prowess. Questions aimed at testing media knowledge, current affairs, and even the types of major vegetables. It had to be the PR and Comms pub quiz last night!

A great [heatedly competitive] time was had, and the results were:

1] Fishburn Hedges

2] Firefly

=3] Hotwire

=3] Independents

4] Weber Shandwick

5] Geronimo

6] Edelman

7] Gorkana.

Now the fact Gorkana came last in a  quiz designed to test media knowledge didn’t go unoticed, but they took their banter with good grace.

Good to see various blogging and twittering PRs there, including: Simon Collister, Jonny Rosemont, Dom Whitehurst, Tom Malcolm, and Simon Goldie… anyone else I’ve missed off do let me know!

Photos up on Facebook for your tagging amusement shortly.