The Flack

The Journal's Dave Kesmodel writes today about several companies' marketing deals with niche podcasts to tout their wares. The typical sponsorship involves a media buy in exchange for some kind of traditional commercial mention, e.g., "brought to you by," or a product give-away.

From a marketing perspective, these micro channels allow the company to efficiently and cost-effectively reach the audience demographic it seeks in an increasingly hyper-fragmented media environment. Still, the growing practice simply applies an old marketing approach to a new delivery channel. We're not even talking about working messages into news and programming content -- frequently the domain of the PR practitioner.

Mr. Kesmodel observes how PR departments often are charged with creating podcasts that (less-overtly) associate the company's products or services with the programming. He writes:

"A number of large companies, including General Motors Corp. and Whirlpool Corp., have seized on the popularity of the broadcasts as part of their marketing strategies to tech-savvy consumers. The companies have little to lose – podcasts can be created cheaply with little more than a microphone and a computer. Often, the hosts of corporate podcasts are public-relations staffers who are doing double duty."

It's encouraging that companies have seized on some of the new digital tools for marketing purposes, but will new media purists purists pundits denounce this as just more corporate "command-and-control" tactics, albeit with a more modern (and viral) means of content distribution? Ultimately, I believe, message control will endure and be melded into CGM, but the exact blend remains a TBD.

PR podcasts marketing public relations message control

In the category of "been there/seen that," today we get the first glimpse of an airbrushed, hair-dyed, big-bellied Britney on the cover of Harper's BAZAAR.

The tactic of splashing an exposed, expecting entertainer on a glossy magazine cover is nothing new, though we do learn that this is a first for Hearst's century-old fashion book, obviously looking for a boost in single-copy sales. But that's the only first.

I suppose the impression Ms. Spears left with "Today" and "Dateline" viewers was not exactly what her Ob-Gyn ordered. (Though this shoot likely pre-dated the Matt Lauer interview.)

Frankly, I wouldn't have advised my client to pose for something gratuitous like this (or the Lauer interview) when the only benefit lies in the preservation of her celebrity. Even Jessica Simpson and Paris, yes Paris, have legitimate reasons to exploit themselves media-wise. Both have new music product.

I'd be curious to learn what Annie Leibovitz thinks of the image? For the authentic version, check out Ms. Leibovitz's photo retrospective opening at the Brooklyn Museum in the fall.

PR Britney Spears Harper's BAZAAR public relations Annie Leibovitz

If you're a New Yorker or more specifically, a New York Knicks or Rangers fan, chances are you have little love for the owner of those once-vaunted professional sports teams.

Conversely, if you are the PR person charged with maintaining a decent public image for that owner, you have a quixotic challenge on your hands given the futility of these teams under your employer's reign.

Now I know the CVC PR people fairly well. They're a most adept group. Hence, I was surprised to see the report from a (rightfully) disgruntled New York Post sports columnist about the media "relations" strategy used to soothe Jim Dolan's explanation of his unceremonious canning of his (also) once-vaunted NBA coach, Larry Brown. The disrespected columnist bristled:

"One of his favored flacks was probably up all night trying to form Dolan's rambling incoherencies into that rationale, which gives you a headache just pondering it. What Dolan is really trying to do is control his message, as addled as that message may be...

And so he excluded the columnists, and the TV commentators, and all the others who, in Dolan's enfeebled logic, spread lies and half-truths about his franchise. The last organization to try and succeed using these methods were the Bolsheviks, and they never came close to winning a championship, either."

This strategy to only talk to "to the seven men who cover the Knicks as a daily beat for newspapers," in my mind, was ill-conceived (as we now know from the visceral reaction by the disenfranchised journalists). Banning bona fide journalists or creating a media pecking order for coverage of an important piece of news will almost always backfire. Even the composition of the White House press corps is somewhat democratic.

PR Jim Dolan New York Knicks public relations Larry Brown media relations

I had a chance to join some A-list PR bloggers today on a PRSA technology panel hosted by Eric Schwartzman who reluctantly left his three-year-old in CA to moderate. (Thanks, Eric!)

It was good to see David Parmet again, and meet in person Robert Ricci and B.L. Ochman. All of us had a hand in the Constantin-driven PR Blog Week 2.0, last fall. In fact, B.L. asked whether we'll see PR BlogWeek 3.0 (or 2.1?). Will we?

The audience of 50 pros -- young and not-so-young -- many of whom on the corporate side of the PR equation, seemed to appreciate much of what was shared. However, there was one point during the exchange when the issue of "command and control" surfaced. My fellow panelists, almost in unison, proclaimed that there's no such thing as command & control any longer.

Being the mild-mannered contrarian that I am, I posited that command & control remains valid. After all, what would one call all those media trainers prepping their clients for live TV interview segments or the drafting of message points or a speech? Aren't these vital manifestations of command and control that remain in practice at most enterprises?

In the end, we all seemed pretty much in sync on this scary, tumultuous and exciting new era of digitally-driven dialogue. I just hope that we don't throw out the baby with the bath water. There are many core competencies in traditional PR that should never be forsaken.

PR PRSA blogs technology public relations

Now here's a novel PR strategy: proclaim that you slept with Lindsay Lohan to draw attention to your band's soon-to-be-released music CD.

That's just what Ms. Lohan's publicist Leslie Sloan alleges, according to the lead item in the inimitable Jeannette Walls' "The Scoop" column today on MSNBC.com. Harry Judd of the band McFly describes in a track on the new CD how he was seduced by Ms. Lohan following a night out clubbing.

If only Ms. Lohan's publicist had recognized that her denial of her client's tryst would make bigger news than the acknowledgement thereof...given how prolific the actress has become in such relational matters.

"'He’s using these lies for publicity,' Lohan’s rep, Leslie Sloane, tells the Scoop. 'It’s convenient how he’s making up these stories when he has an album coming out.'"

Personally, I think there's some validity to the claim and that after (yet another) night out partying, this particular liaison probably just slipped Ms. Lohan's mind.

PR Harry Judd McFly public relations marketing Lindsay Lohan Jeannette Walls

When does an issue reach crisis dimensions requiring public acknowledgement and action? The chocolate makers at Cadbury Schweppes were accused last week of dragging their feet in the face of allegations that their chocolate bars contained some rare strain of salmonella.

"'We followed regulations at the time of detection, which was below the level for any alert or concern,' said Cadbury's spokeswoman Andraea Dawson-Shepherd in an interview."

So what prompted the company to suddenly assert its position in the court of public opinion (other than the prospect of a total product meltdown)?

Does a crisis only become a crisis when a mainstream news organization splashes the news on its pages and airwaves? Last week, this blog reported on an issue-turned-crisis for AOL when a blogger posted an annoying conversation he had with an AOL customer service rep when trying to discontinue service. Had that conversation not spilled onto the pages of The New York Times and subsequently to other mainstream outlets, would AOL have felt compelled to take action?

What about Comcast? When one of the MSO's servicemen dozed off on the couch of a cable subscriber during a house call, the subscriber decided to capture the snooze on video then post it on YouTube. Had the video, and word of it, remained in the domain of the fragmented, but growing number of online media consumers, would Comcast had suffered as big a black eye?

As PR counselors, our role often is to advise enterprises when action should be taken, if at all. More often than not, a story will dissipate after the first news cycle. However, the growth of citizen journalism and viral nature of digital content present us with a greater challenge in deciding which situations merit a public statement or action and which would be categorized as knee-jerks. (Some will argue that every wart should be made transparent to the public.)

Did the 300,000 downloads of the Comcast video prompt the public apology and tangible action from the company, or was it the embarrassing mainstream media coverage trumpeting the YouTube video? I wonder.

PR AOL Comcast Cadbury crisis communications customer service

As missiles rain down on the Israeli town of Sderot, the empathy one would expect for the villagers doesn't exist. This, of course, is due to the retaliatory actions (and bad aim) of the Israeli military. It's gotten to the point where even the country's "national PR man" has thrown up his hands in futility:

"Even Nachman Shai, nicknamed 'the national PR man' is having a hard time doing PR for Israel abroad: 'It is not possible to explain what happened here and receive support for it.' Shai stated that no one knew how to explain the fact that so many civilians had been killed by the IAF lately.

In its headline today, the Jerusalem Post acknowledges how difficult it is to win the war of public opinion when civilians get killed. After all, pictures of the damage caused by the missiles being fired from Gaza by the Palestinians are rarely broadcast.

"It is hard to expect people to feel empathy towards the children of Sderot when the news pictures being sent from Gaza every day show children being killed or wounded in IAF operations," one of the ambassadors said.

Even so, Gideon Meir, the Israel Foreign Ministry's director-general of media and public affairs managed to put a positive spin on his nation's reputation by saying on Army Radio:

"...that the view on the situation in the Middle East from Europe was predetermined. 'Europe judges everything that happens in the Middle East through its colonial past. Having said that, there has recently been a significant improvement in our relations with Europe. I think that in the long run, our image in the minds of the public is better than it has been in the past. For example U.S. public opinion hasn't changed since the Six Day War,' he said."

My advice: find a way to step up your efforts to capture and quickly disseminate to the world media words and pictures of the damage these bombs bring (and don't forget the heinous celebration by the bombers). Layer your "disproportionate" military response with an aggressive, but proportionate media relations response to balance the imbalance created by your (more media-savvy) attackers. In other words, stop letting them eat your lunch!

PR Israel Gideon Meir Gaza Jerusalem Post public relations

Segueing from the posting earlier this week on Angelina Jolie's interview with Anderson Cooper, to the blog posting this morning by arguably The New York Times's most successful blogger David Pogue, I can't help but sense a wonderful trend afoot.

Ms. Jolie leveraged her post-partum celebrity to garner global attention, via CNN, for her humanitarian work in Africa. "When CNN's Anderson Cooper marveled that she gives away a third of her earnings, Ms. Jolie laughed" and offered Mr. Cooper this great quote: "Yes, well, I have a stupid income for what I do for a living."

When Bill Gates announced his decision to step down (in two years) to turn his full attention to his foundation, he further bolstered his reputational transformation from capitalistic monopolist to global humanitarian. (Some will attribute the transformation to former MS'er Mr. Scoble and the legions of Microsoft bloggers, but we're talking personal not institutional here.)

And let's not forget about Bono -- another A-lister who's traded on his celebrity to do real good in this world. Jolie, Gates, Bono all have morphed into a whole new dimension of uber-celebrity through their humanitarian deeds. Now if only Mark Cuban could keep his petulance in check. Mark, for your own good, see what Sir Elton has become before you decide to publicly berate the refs (or anyone).

PR Angelina Jolie Anderson Cooper public relations CNN journalism Bono Bill Gates Scoble humanitarian Elton John Mark Cuban

As if Dell didn't suffer its share of reputation damage from the pounding its customer service department took from A-list blogger Jeff Jarvis last year, we awaken this morning to learn that one enterprising blogger (at the tail end of the blogosphere) has shined a punishing spotlight on AOL after jousting with one of its call center reps. (I must have missed the earlier item from Dan Mitchell's column in Saturday's New York Times.)

The testy exchange happened when the subscriber tried to cancel his account after five years, a phenomenon that the company would likely prefer to stay under the media's radar. I mean, who knew that 800,000 subscribers cancelled their accounts during the last quarter?

As company CEO Jonathan Miller struggles to re-make the once mighty premium portal into a free, ad-supported, content-rich and relevant broadband-delivered haven for news, information and infotainment, his success rests to some degree on how his communications team (and their outside crisis experts) manage the company's contrition in the face of a chorus of complaints. (Here's a take on AOL and T-W from The New Yorker's Ken Auletta appearing on beet.tv.)

Where is Mr. Miller during this fracas anyway? Is it sufficient that AOL's head of corporate communications took the lead in making an apology? I wonder. From the (once) subscriber's blog:

Nicholas Graham, Executive Vice President of AOL Corporate Communications contacted me to officially apologize for the infamous “Jon” call. Here’s the full text of the e-mail:

Vincent, thank you for returning my phone call. I appreciate hearing from you and being able to talk to you - and to personally apologize for your experience. At AOL, we have zero-tolerance for customer care incidents like this - which is deeply regrettable and also absolutely inexcusable. The employee in question violated our customer service guidelines and practices, and everything that AOL believes to be important in customer care - chief among them being respect for the member, and swiftly honoring their requests. This matter was dealt with immediately and appropriately, and the employee cited here is no longer with the Company.

Vincent - please get in touch with me again in the future I can be of help at all. And good luck to you and to “Insignificant Thoughts”.

Sincerely,
Nicholas

PR lesson learned: The long tail can also sting.


PR AOL subscription Jonathan Miller crisis communications customer service

In the previous posting, we touched on the fact that red flags rise when a journalist senses a mettlesome PR person in the room. In Britney's case, the pregnant pop star probably could have benefited from a savvy PR pro to help ease the way in to the interview with NBC's Matt Lauer.

Angelina Jolie's PR reps also appear to have stepped aside after successfully courting CNN's Anderson Cooper for Ms. Jolie's "first U.S. media interview" following the low-key birth of her child.

"When Angelina Jolie came into the room, just four days after returning from Namibia, she was alone. No handlers, no entourage," Mr. Cooper reports on his blog.

The decision on how assertive a PR rep should be in a media interview situation often depends on the confidence the rep has in his or her client. Apparently, Ms. Jolie can fend for herself (though I would argue that there's always room for improvement).

Separately, Mr. Cooper staunchly defended CNN's journalistic integrity by denying the rumors that the cable network compensated Ms. Jolie for the interview. He cited his Time-Warner sister, People magazine, and its cash payoff to land those baby pics.

"What I do know is that CNN did not pay anything -- directly or indirectly -- to get Angelina Jolie to sit down for an interview."

Perhaps not...at least on the surface, but the Jolie camp-prompted interview did come with a price tag: an agreement by the network to use the two-hour block of time to showcase Ms. Jolie's humanitarian work in less developed countries.

Do you think ABC "Good Morning America," "Entertainment Tonight" or even CBS "Sunday Morning" would have agreed to allocate that much of a programming block to this sobering subject in exchange for the first U.S. interview? Unlikely.

Mr. Cooper may be right in denying the existence of a quid pro quo for having Ms. Jolie on his program. But, believe me, there is a tacit agreement between Ms. Jolie's handlers and Mr. Cooper's producers that will minimize (but not ignore) the Namibian birth and maximize the actress's global philanthropic endeavors.

Hence, the choice of CNN...on this day "World Refugee Day."

PR Angelina Jolie Anderson Cooper public relations CNN journalism

I'm not obsessed with Britney Spears, but boy did she ever take her trailer park look to the next level for her "Dateline" interview with Matt Lauer! The usually plugged-in "Page Six" attributed the train wreck of a look to the absence of "her handlers:"

"'Neither of her publicists, Leslie Sloane Zelnick or Nanci Ryder, showed up,' said our source. Spears insisted on doing her own hair and makeup - a regrettable decision."

At one point, during Ms. Spears' tear fest, one of her fake eyelashes fell off, which prompted her handlers to make a post-interview request of NBC PR to not feed that clip to any of the early fringe syndicated entertainment shows.

When asked why Ms. Spears was left alone to fend for herself with the NBC crowd, her publicist quipped: "Britney is a grown-up and makes her own decisions." (Shades of Michael Jackson before agreeing to appear in that British documentary?)

Truth be told: few journalists care to have a meddling (i.e., controlling) PR person hovering over an interview. On the other hand, the occasional gentle suggestion from a savvy PR pro can go a long way to satisfying the goals of both parties. As for make-up and hair, that's better left for others...at least on this coast.

PR Britney Spears Matt Lauer public relations Dateline NBC

I had a chance to stop by the Business Development Institute's con-fab in NYC yesterday to get the lowdown on the mainstreaming of web video. Opening keynote Ron Insana, former CNBC "Street Signs" host and now a contributor there (and elsewhere), took the attendees down memory lane with a history of "creative destructive" events, e.g., the advent of the locomotive and the financial chaos that accompanied it.

In talking about Web 2.0, he said "we are now realizing everything we assumed would happen in the 90's, but without the financial destruction" during which "1000 publicly-traded companies disappear within two years." He told the story of the "last marginal buyer" -- the sidewalk pan-handler outside the NYSE who, at the height of the bubble, asked a trader for an Internet stock tip.

While not as steeped in the digital vernacular as the others, he was insightful and articulate...though he probably could have done without the reference to the hair-piece phase of his CNBC career or his polyester leisure suit and afro back in the day. He went on to moderate a first-rate panel that included:

-- Daniel Blackman, Strategic Partner Development, Google Video
-- Kevin Conroy, Executive Vice President, AOL
-- Adam Gerber, VP, Ad Products & Stategy, Brightcove
-- Todd Herman, Director, Advertising & Business Strategy, MSN
-- Larry Kramer, President, CBS Digital Media
-- Scott Meyer, CEO, About.com

Some of the notable quotables:

Ron Insana (CNBC):

Didn't re-new his satellite radio subscription for lack of a "value-proposition." Linear news "probably done" some years from now. The financial community simply doesn't digest information linearally anymore. Traditional style broadcast is another area that will "fracture."

Todd Herman (MSN):

Called the current video environment the "technomedia ecosystem" analogous to a "mixed tape" with a "blend of personal and mainstream video." Highlight clips after the fact are more monetizable than a live event like "Live Aid." (See below.)

Kevin Conroy (AOL):

Compared YouTube to MP3.com. AOL wants to give viewers' a choice between promotional, consumer-generated, branded, licensed, original... -- all of which can be searched and browsed. "The platform has to enable consumers to consume how they want to consume. It's not about vertical applications." I see a day when IPVOD -- branded channels -- will be viable. In the 60-90 days after "Live AID," 95 or 100 million on-demand streams were downloaded.

Larry Kramer (CBS):

"Not all content is equal. The network invests $2 billion a year on content, starting with 50 producers, narrowed down to five that will go into production. CBS's free digital offer of the NCAA's "March Madness" didn't hurt network ratings. "Our job is to make sure content fits in all the scenarios." The network will create different story lines, which he called "D Story Lines," expressly for the digital environment.

Adam Gerber (Brightcove):

He called his company the "next gen" network. He sees "hyper-fragmentation" not only by channel, but also by time and place. The challenge (for advertisers) will be to "re-aggregate" the audience from fragmented splinters" into a mass market.

Scott Meyer (About.com):

Some of the best video he's seen has been produced by marketers. About.com has been very successful with text and pictures and he see video as a big opportunity.

Daniel Blackman (Google):

"Free is a big driver of video content online." "There will always be some content you have to pay for." The way to monetize user-generated content is to connect it with the long tail of advertiser, i.e., the small advertisers. Also, let's not forget "user-generated advertising."

Todd Herman (MSN):

"I don't believe TV is dead." "Concurrency has cancer." We're seeing more "non-expiration date media" or "supermilk." "Appointment TV can work." Pre-roll ads are terrible for consumers.

More from MSN's Todd Herman can be found on beet.tv.

I hope some of this is insightful. It was a great panel. Everyone on it concurred that we're just 12 months into the changed and changing digital video delivery and consumption landscape. Hence, the chaos is palpable.

Finally, I think PR Newswire streamed this event live, but I couldn't find it on the site.

PR digital video video MSN Google Video AOL CBS Digital Brightcove About.com

I think the quote from one snooty store owner to another went like this: "Your customers are my shoplifters." In a similar vein, the folks at Cristal Champagne have a PR problem on their hands.

It seems the managing director of the popular (et tres cher) champagne sniffed to the Economist that his bubbly brand would do better without the bling-bling crowd. Big mistake.

Jay-Z, who's as A-list as it gets in the hip-hop world -- and a restaurateur to boot -- has called for a boycott of the prestige cuvee based on the snooty comments.

Not only has champagne -- and especially Cristal -- been a favorite of the style-making hip-hop set, but the branded bubbly has flowed through many rappers' song lyrics. No longer.

Having toiled on the Champagne Taittinger account for a couple of years, I know how hard the marketing teams work to muscle their product into the hottest and most gossiped about parties. The goal is to get a newspaper to report: "Diddy is known for his love of Cristal champagne." Alas, no more Cristal Ball.

PR media public relations Jay-Z Cristal Champagne

The first news reports rarely get it exactly right. The news of an alleged gang rape of a stripper by the Duke lacrosse team produced national condemnations, on-campus candlelight vigils and all kinds of public posturing from the usual interloping civil rights leaders we've come to expect since the days of Tawana Brawley.

Now, some months later, the legal case that local DA Mike Nifong constructed so assiduously in the court of public opinion (to get himself re-elected) is in tatters. The latest revelations just seem so removed from those first reports. In fact, Mr. Nifong is now being encouraged to recuse himself from prosecuting the case.

A few months ago, the FCC levied an unprecedented $3.6 million fine on the CBS affiliates for an episode of one of the network's top-rated programs "Without a Trace." Apparently, the episode depicted young people in some kind of orgy-like setting, which supposedly set off howls of consumer protests and letters to the regulatory agency.

Today the CBS affiliates are rebutting the multi-million dollar fine because the vast majority of the 4211 complaints "weren't from real people." They were part of an orchestrated campaign by two (right wing) activist groups with Ivory soap-sounding names: The Parents Television Council and the American Family Association.

I am curious to see how this one plays out, especially considering where these two activist groups fall in the political pecking order of this Administration.

PR CBS media relations public relations FCC "Without a Trace"

The big debate today in Washington concerns one State Department official's characterization of the three Gitmo suicides as "a good PR move." This, of course, prompted Department spokesperson Sean McCormack to quickly disavow the remarks:

"I would just point out in public that we would not say that it was a PR stunt." (What would he say in private?)

Now our industry is accustomed to creating all kinds of publicity stunts with the sole purpose of generating colorful headlines and photos. So the question of whether these suicides were committed out of despair or in a concerted effort to generate (U.S.-damaging) headlines is a good one.

By extension, one would have to ask whether suicide bombers do what they do to kill innocent human beings or to produce headlines -- or both? If primarily the latter, would these acts be considered PR moves? And if they are, why not call a spade a spade?

What ever happened to the simpler PR stunts like building the world's largest sandcastle (to draw tourists to Myrtle Beach)?

PR State Department Gitmo media publicity stunt public relations

This blog frequently looks at the machinations of those PR types toiling in the netherworld of celebrity and gossip. Invariably, we explore the news from the perspective of the publicist-in-charge, or at least the best-guess thinking behind the PR decisions. Rarely do we get inside the head of the celebrity as client.

My PR friend down under, Paull Young, on whose podcast I recently had a chance to chat about getting one's feet wet in PR, forwarded me a link to a bizarre piece from the Sydney Morning Herald about the wonderful world of Russell Crowe. Next to Paul Hogan, Mr. Crowe is Australia's most famous, if not most misunderstood, personality today. (Of course, we New Yorkers know him best for his phone-throwing temper tantrum in a New York hotel.)

In the rather lengthy story, the reporter recounts his dance as journalist-turned-PR rep for Mr. Crowe, and specifically the actor's "master and commander" approach to managing the media.

"And it was during these times that I saw evidence of something that made me wince - Crowe's bizarre propensity for nickel-and-dime media manipulation. It seemed Russell was running his own parallel, one-man PR fix-it campaign. It was much the same as my own, but he was pitching himself to journalists while I was handling his CD. He'd go through the daily papers and call journalists in person, chastising them for perceived inexactitudes. There was nothing morally corrupt about this, but I found it a silly pastime for a man of his stature. Sometimes it did him no service at all."

It seems that in exchange for hospitality and access, the actor was able to incur favor from a range of (star struck) journalists:

"He once bragged to me about how he had called a prominent Sydney gossip columnist who had been dumping on him, promising her that should she publish a positive word or two, he would grant her an exclusive interview. Like magic, a nice mention appeared in her column the following week, and the exclusive interview followed. It was doubtful, I thought, this transaction hadn't been noted by the columnist's peers, who'd consider her weak and Russell quite the meddler. If he needed an answer for why so many journalists disliked him, I thought, he need look no further."

As we observe the bidding war for photos of that baby, the tear-filled two-for-one Britney exclusives on "Dateline" and "Today," or Jen and Vin's tango in Paris, it's important to maintain some sense of perspective on how PR pros and journalists relate to one another most of the time. Thanks for the tip, Paull.

PR Russell Crowe media relations public relations journalism

I'm surprised more outlets didn't pick up on a small news story I came across over the weekend. It concerned the outrage felt by many Germans over the fact that Anheuser-Busch landed -- or should I say -- outbid every other company (to the tune of $40 mill) for the exclusive "pouring rights" at the World Cup...this, in a country as famous for its brew as it is for its luxury cars.

While the President continues to tout a strong economy -- even as the stock market falls and gas prices and interest rates rise -- one can't help but equating the nation's sullied reputation abroad with this anti-American, anti-American company, anti-American product backlash.

Granted, it makes perfect sense for the marketing minds in St. Louis to tap the world's biggest sporting event as a platform to extend the Budweiser brand beyond these shores.

"During the 2006 World Cup, Anheuser-Busch will invest more than $70 million in sponsorship and related marketing and advertising efforts. That's more than the company spends on either the Super Bowl or the Olympics."

However, with such an unprecedented investment by a company used to spending kegs worth of its marketing dollars, someone might have anticipated a backwash in Bavaria.

"'It's Spuelwasser!' cried Robert Paustian, 32, from another table in the boisterous beer hall, using the German word for dishwater. Chat rooms for German soccer fans have been flooded with complaints about the prospect of having to replace a local pilsner with a Budweiser draft."

I would think the A-B folks are now playing catch-up to deal with this brewing story.

PR Budweiser public relations Anheuser-Busch World Cup Germany beer marketing

On the plane back from Texas last night (no I wasn't at the ranch), I finally finished reading Scoble and Israel's Naked Conversations, which is a must-read for those grappling with how to (and how not to) apply digital media tools to an enterprise's public relations, marketing, community relations, CRM, crisis communications, and other constituency and brand-building endeavors.

The book is filled with many good examples that advocate for the two-way exchange of information for building trust and esteem...versus the command-and-control ways of the past(and present). In reading the book, I couldn't help but sense some of the idealism that permeated the counterculture movement of the sixties. I guess John Markoff's book is my next stop on the summer reading list.

Anyway, no sooner had the plane landed, I received a voice-message from my friend, neighbor and sometimes collaborator Andy Plesser whose beet.tv video weblog is gaining all kinds of attention these days. Andy was over the moon. It was Beet.tv that broke the news of Scoble's imminent departure from Microsoft. The fledgling vlog not only broke the story, but it got credit for it in established outlets like the Journal, ZD-Net and Reuters.

Way to go, Andy! Now let's hope Mr. Scoble's new venture, PodTech, for which Microsoft's soon-to-be former Geek Blogger will serve as "vice president of content in charge of creating shows for the new medium in which computer users watch television-like interviews over the Web," doesn't muscle-in on your territory.

PR digital video video weblogs public relations beet.tv Robert Scoble PodTech Microsoft

I have written frequently about PETA's sophistication in the use of PR to garner headlines. Some of its tactics were a bit over the top, but few can argue with their effectiveness. The organization also has successfully used celebrities to advocate on its behalf -- from Pamela Lee Anderson to the former Mrs. McCartney, Heather Mills.

Late yesterday, one of the most venerable names in the world of fashion (no not Anna Wintour) issued a press release announcing that it would completely eliminate the use of fur in its clothing lines. The release from Ralph Lauren Clothes prominently acknowledged PETA, and in so doing, served as a coronation of sorts for the once-fringe NGO:

"We are publicly announcing this decision because the use of fur has been under review internally and we feel that the time is right to take this action," the company said in its bland statement.

The PETA folks, in true fashion, jumped on the bandwagon to declare victory as a result of this most auspicious piece of news.

"This is one of the biggest victories in the fur campaign," said Dan Mathews, vice president at PETA.

The BusinessWeek.com piece actually quoted two PETA people (but no one by name from Ralph Lauren):

"Ralph Lauren clothes have always been elegant, but now you can feel comfortable inside and out knowing that the company has made this compassionate decision," said Ingrid Newkirk, president of PETA.

As for Ralph Lauren, there's little PR downside though a spokesperson refused to say "how much cancelled fur orders would cost them financially." For PETA, however, there's nothing bigger in their world to bolster its own legitimacy.

PR Ralph Lauren PETA media NGO fur

Apparently Ann Coulter's rant to Matt Lauer on NBC "Today" cause quite a firestorm in the blogosphere. In the contentious segment, Ms. Coulter reiterated her ill-conceived assertion, as postulated in her latest tome, that 9/11 widows were basking in their new found celebrity.

Citizen journalists surely responded (via the typical scenario of mainstream media catalyzing the blogosphere). As a result, Ms. Coulter vaulted to the top of Technorati's "What's Happening Now" listing of topical subjects (with 19,341 English language postings and counting).

What she said was bad enough, but who am I to cast aspersions on her hateful (and un-Christian) diatribe. Rather, it was how she acted during her TV interview that raised a few eyebrows. Some media trainers will give this type-A idealogue high marks for being so assertive in making her point. My opinion, however, is less adultory. Frankly, she came off as shrill and crass as she tried to out-maneuver Mr. Lauer (who's no doubt accustomed to "media-trained" guests).

Again, some media training pundits encourage their clients to drown out whomever detracts from the core messaging -- especially in a live interview scenario where what you say is what viewers get. Still, Ms. Coulter's confrontational demeanor ended up detracting from her message (and credibility).

The success of her performance had less to do with what she had to say, as much as how she said it. My two cents, Ms Coulter: take a long look at the segment and re-calibrate. (While you're at it, re-think your messaging.)

PR Matt Lauer public relations media Ann Coulter media training

Aggressive investigative journalists in any news medium can test the mettle of even the most savvy PR professionals. More often than not, these reporters or producers usually surface unexpectedly with their stories already written or produced.

Their goal: to secure from you, the gatekeeper to the newsmaker, permission to probe your charge to elicit an attributable quote or sound bite that bolsters their pre-conceived (and often immovable) story premises.

You, on the other hand, have to determine a) how far along is the journalist with the piece, e.g., beyond balancing, b) what is the catalyst for the story and who else has been interviewed, and c) whether cooperation will make it better or worse, i.e., will the journalist listen to facts that may water down or even nullify the story's raison d'etre.

Some on the receiving end of these calls immediately knee jerk their way to the general counsel's office to request a letter threatening a lawsuit based solely on the tenor of the interview request. Others decline the interview, but proceed to wordsmith (again with legal counsel) a written response as means to achieve balance.

Romanesko today published a letter from a reporter for an alternative weekly newspaper in Houston whose query to an ethically challenged enterprise prompted a most unusual response.

I would only say that this approach will never merit a place on the list of best PR practices.


PR investigative journalism public relations media Romanesko

That was the reported final price on the bizarre bidding process for images from the custom photo shoot of Baby Brangelina, or "the second coming," as some have noted.

Apparently, the key photo editors were asked to gather late Saturday night at Getty's un-airconditioned downtown NY offices where they were offered the honor to peruse the pics in separate rooms. (Geesh. If you've seen one baby pic, haven't you seen them all?) Bids were due Sunday morning at 6:00. Page Six reports that TIME's Inc's People prevailed, but that's fodder for another posting.

I was actually smitten by the weird dance Angelina and Brad put these pubs through. Some will say that it's less crass than some celebrity glossy funding a wedding, since the couple will donate to charity the money paid by these sometimes journalistic enterprises.

Personally, I find it super tacky to auction your child's photos to the highest bidder for any reason - charity or otherwise. I mean doesn't the $10-15 million Angelina (and likely Brad) receive per picture more than cover their philanthropic endeavors? Maybe I'm just old fashioned. This sounds more like revenge for surviving the pesky paparazzi on whose backs these publications thrive. Hello?


PR Angelina Jolie Brad Pitt public relations parenting paparazzi

Well, so much for the folks at Conde Nast giving one of its adopted siblings the scoop on the name of its new Joanne Lipman-driven business publication. It will be called Portfolio not Quote (as I regurgitated last week).

The Times's print media beat reporter, Katharine Sealy, trumpets the news in today's (aptly targeted) Monday "Business" section (where content is always king). Ms. Lipman (defensively) added:

"This is serious business journalism -- investigative, narrative, profiles -- a commitment to long-form journalism, and telling that story with great design and art," she said. "This is not a lifestyle publication," she added. "This is a business publication."

I feel for WWD media reporter Sara James for going out on the limb and coming up short. (I guess the PR orchestrators didn't want to spoil today's exclusive in The Times.) I did get it right about the companion website, however.

On a related note, I took notice of another piece of non-synergistic news emanating from the Conde Nast -- Fairchild (parent to WWD) front. Imagine calling up an editor, or rather, the editorial director, to complain that your social event didn't receive prominent-enough coverage?

Coming from a PR person, it would be the kiss of death. However, the complainer was a Prada-wearing devil whose editorial stature rivals that of the editor on the receiving end of her vitriol. Naturally the respective PR reps were deployed to clarify matters. (Isn't this always the case?)

"She called to express her frustration with the placement of the coverage," Vogue spokesman Patrick O'Connell said by phone on May 30. "It had nothing to do with the tone of the coverage."

"We gave it substantial coverage," said Andrea Kaplan, a spokeswoman for Mr. McCarthy. "The left-hand page was the whole 'Eye' column on Wednesday, with eight photos."

Now I understand: only eight photos!

PR WWD magazines Portfolio Joanne Lipman Conde Nast The Devil Wears Prada

So next week the branded lid will finally come off the much-anticipated new business publication from the glossy folks at Conde Nast. It's a reasonable bet the magazine will be called Quote, considering the source of the news -- Conde Nast-owned WWD and half of its ace media reporting team of Sara James and Jeff Bercovic. (Sara had this one.)

At a time when ad pages are down and ad revenue flat for the biz books from a year ago*, i.e., Business Week, ad revenue down 18.1%/ad pages down 12.5%; Fortune, ad revenue up 4.4%/ ad pages down 1.5%; Forbes, ad revenue up 1.2%/ ad pages down 3.5%; The Economist ad revenue up 9.4%/ ad pages down 2.2%., many will question the wisdom of bowing yet another new biz book (and the requisite ad-driven website) in this tepid climate.

Nonetheless, the talented Joanne Lipman (pictured) was lured away from the venerable Journal with carte blanche and a mandate to make her mark with de rigeur content covering all the cool companies the conde cognascenti crave. In other words, Quote should be quotable, but with few industrial manufacturers among them.

PR WWD magazines Quote Joanne Lipman Conde Nast

* Source: PIB April 2006 versus April 2005

It's one thing to re-post on your A-list blog the actual e-mail exchange between yourself (a newsmaker) and a journalist (from The New York Times, no less), as was the case with that outspoken Cuban Maverick.

But it's quite another to take an already published newspaper profile and re-write it -- quotes and all - for posting on an established website (for which you happen to serve as editor).

The latter incident has raised all kinds of journalistic (and newsmaker) eyebrows, including those of former journo (albeit from cable TV) and current WH spokesperson Tony Snow who (surprisingly) defended the offender, President Bush's new domestic advisor. The offended newspaper, The Syracuse New Times -- threatened a lawsuit, as reported by the right-of-center New York Sun (and others).

The act of personally re-writing the first write of history has been dubbed "zinsmeistering" after Ron Zinsmeister, the man who had the audacity to take back what he said. The Washington Post offered its opinion on the matter.

From a PR perspective, wouldn't it be great to review the copy before it's published? In fact, some news organizations, as a matter of policy, will double-back with you to "check facts." It is at this time when any modification -- to your quotes or otherwise -- might take place. Otherwise, your only other recourse -- unless you're Marc Cuban who wisely conducts his interviews via e-mail -- is a request for a published correction (in the case of factual mistakes) or the submission of a letter to the editor (for additional clarification).

Of course, if you have an A-list pulpit, you have the power to "correct" the news as you see fit. "Journalism matters."

PR Ron Zinsmeister public relations journalism Marc Cuban Tony Snow American Enterprise Institute