A Salute to Navy Public Affairs

I still recall many years ago, when I was still in high school, and a Navy recruiter came to talk to me at the dining room table of my parents' home. It was odd that he laid out a scenario that had me on an aircraft carrier, doing reports for the ship's newspaper and on-board TV station as part of my Navy role. I could study journalism and communications and get my college degree in port and on ship. I would get the degree debt free. But I would have to serve the Navy four years after getting my degree as part of the deal.

It was tempting. I could get a college degree for free and see the world in the process. But I thought long and hard about the commitment afterwards, and ultimately settled on attending a state university to study journalism.

But I always wondered what might have been.

Last week I had a chance to see first hand what might have been. A former student of mine, Jennifer Cunningham, who now works as a Navy Reserves public affairs officer for NAVCO (Navy Office of Community Outreach) and also works full time as community outreach coordinator for Navy Region Northwest, based in Bangor, Washington. She nominated me for a program the Navy has called "Leaders to Sea," which allows civilians a VIP and intimate tour of a Navy ship. I went to San Diego and embarked to the USS Ronald Reagan, an aircraft carrier about 30-40 miles off the California coast.

"Leaders to Sea is a program through which key leaders from all sectors--corporate, civic, government, education, nonprofit, service--embark on a Navy warship at sea," Cunningham explains. Those nominated  to go on the program pay their own way, including airfare to the port city, hotel before departure, and even cash for food aboard the ship. "Even though the embark does not cost the Navy anything, we get a great deal from it. By educating leaders, especially those in non-fleet areas who may not know as much about the Navy,  we are able to reach a broader audience and teach them about their Navy."

They sure did that. Notice how Jennifer said "their" Navy. That message was loud and clear consistently, in briefs with the rear admiral, captain, and senior aviator. In conversations with sailors, from chief petty officers to anyone we talked to, and especially the public affairs team that led us around for two days, we were constantly reminded that the Reagan was our ship, and that the Navy serves us.

My group of 14 civilians, which included a community college  president, a group from an insurance company, a group from the Kansas state legislature, and several business owners, were uniformly impressed. Access to top leaders of the ship and up close views of many operations on this virtual floating city was public relations at its finest. Conventional tactics are nice, but face to face conversations and personal experience are the most enlightening and persuasive.

I'll never forget standing 20 feet from F-18s on the flight deck as they made arrested landings with tail hook or took off via catapult. I and the group of civilians did the same, in a C2 Greyhound, also called a COD (Carrier Onboard Delivery), catching a wire to land and going from 120 miles per hour to zero in 2 seconds, and then catapulting off the ship a day later going from zero to 130 in 3 seconds. I've always had a positive view and respect for the Navy and all armed services, but now I have a deeper and personal understanding of all that they do. Seeing a ship at port or a decommissioned ship serving as a museum is one thing, but an active ship in full operations is much more educational.

The public affairs team was impressive too. Not only were they gracious and knowledgeable, they had as healthy an understanding of PR as they did of the ship. Two of them plan to get their master's degree in a special program San Diego State University has for Navy officers. One of them also plans to earn the APR-M, the new accreditation in military communications from PRSA. When we returned to the base in San Diego after two days aboard, they left us with a folder containing a DVD video of our landing on the ship, bios of the officers, informational brochures about the ship, and several of the Navy's publications.

If you're interested in seeing some of this yourself, you can check out http://www.navy.mil where you can see photos, videos, publications, and links to various social media sites, for the Navy overall as well as individual ships. It won't be the same as flying out to a ship, but if you are in public relations you'll be tempted to salute the men and women who are active in our profession in OUR Navy. At least this video should get your heart beating faster:

APR Promotion Long Overdue

I received an email from the Public Relations Society of America PRSA yesterday that announced a new effort to promote the value of the Accreditation in Public Relations (APR) designation. Information about the 'Enhancing the APR" effort is also available online.

The timing of this announcement is interesting to me personally. Just last week in my spring Fundamentals of Public Relations course I explained the APR in a lecture about ethics. I discussed the background and pros and cons of licensing public relations professionals, and why accreditation emerged as another option. I explained how a PR professional gains the APR accreditation, how they maintain it, and why they might want to do so.

But I was also honest. I pointed out that the same week I had once again renewed my APR credential. I filled out the requisite form to demonstrate I had earned the points needed in the past three years to remain worthy of the professional distinction. I sent in my $50 with the form. But I also wondered, why do I do this?

As I told my students, the value of the APR is mostly personal. It has intrinsic value. In other words, as young professionals it can be a way to prove to themselves that they possess a broad understanding of a field that is very broad in the numerous specific jobs that PR professionals undertake these days. To earn the APR is to show to yourself that you care about the profession, that you possess contextual awareness of the role of PR in organizations and in society that goes beyond mere technical skills.

I also told my students that earning and maintaining the APR might help them within the PR profession. In other words, some PR agencies or departments may include professionals who have earned accreditation themselves, or through membership in PRSA, they may value it  and give an edge when hiring to those who have APR behind their name. However, there are also those even among PR professionals who are unaware of or unimpressed by APR.

I said the same things to local professions a decade ago when I was president of the West Michigan PRSA chapter and when I was coach for the APR exam preparation class.

Beyond that, the legions of people outside the profession have little or no knowledge of what APR is or why it should matter to them. I have both PhD and APR behind my name on my business cards, and when I do PR consulting and hand over my freelance consulting card, I almost always get asked "what is APR?" I recently published a book and my father-in-law looked at the book jacket and my bio and asked me about APR. I am editing a new annual report for the School of Communications at the university where I teach and the director of the school, a colleague but who does not teach public relations, highlighted the APR behind my name on the masthead and asked "is this some sort of professional designation?

In other words, the promotion of APR and its value to an audience outside the profession is long overdue.

I was surprised to learn in the PRSA materials on this subject that APR is as old as I am--it will be 50 years old in 2014. I earned my own APR more than a decade ago, and remember standing as a delegate  from West Michigan to the national PRSA conference standing and urging the national committee to promote the value of APR not just to members but to those who may be our bosses, clients and co-workers. My remarks received applause, not because of my great oratory skills, but because back then the issue resonated with professionals who had worked to earn and maintain APR and wanted to have more than the intrinsic value I mentioned above.

I am one of a handful of PR professors who has been asked to do some research about the APR based on feedback from professionals who have earned it. I am now more inspired to do such research. In the meantime, I eagerly await hearing more  from PRSA in August about the plan to "enhance the profile and prestige of the APR credential."

I am often dismayed when bad practice gives all of us in public relations a bad name. Many times the person or persons responsible for bad practice are not in public relations, or if they are they did not receive a degree in the field. It is my belief that instances of bad strategy, execution or ethics are even more  rare among those with APR.

I also cringe when PR is shown not as bad practice, but just as a limited profession. For example, when popular journalists are hired by organizations as PR professionals because of their quasi-celebrity status and ability to speak well versus an actual broad knowledge of public relations in its many facets beyond media relations. It would be nice if employers would know and respect the field, and give preference in job descriptions for those with degrees in and accreditation in public relations.

It would also be nice if one day when there is a large scale PR blunder, the public and media would not respond by calling it a "PR nightmare" or a "PR stunt" or worst of all "just PR." That's insulting and intellectually dishonest, to equate one episode with an entire profession. Rather, it would be refreshing to point the blame at the person and not the profession, to explain the misdeeds by noting that the person responsible was "posing" as a PR professional without any background, to refer to incidents as BAD practice of PR and not examples of what all PR people do.

Making public the APR credential would be a step in this direction.

Bad Instruction on Crisis Communications

A faculty colleague of mine shared an email she received  from one of our students who was taking a sports marketing class in a different department. The good news is that our student immediately recognized with horror the bad instruction this professor was giving on crisis communication situations in the sporting industry, as evidenced by a screen shot of a class lecture slide she shared:

Yes, this professor is actually teaching student to lie and avoid responsibility and accountability. 

We can only hope--and we do suspect--that whomever is teaching this class is an adjunct completely ignorant of proper  crisis communications theory and practice. I would bet this professor has never in their own past taken a bonafide public relations course or mingled with public relations professionals at a Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) meeting.

Such instruction saddens me for several reasons. In the first place, it is wrong ethically. Secondly, it is wrong strategically, as many studies show honesty in crises maintains and increases positive reputation. Third this "professor" (I put the word in quotes because I'm tempted to call this ignorant sleazeball some terms that the FCC still does not allow to be broadcast) perpetuates the myth that public relations is about intentional deception, lies and spin. The fact that the word spin is actually used as an advocated  option sickens me: I insist with my students that "spin" is a four-letter  word that should never be spoken or practiced.

Here we have a root of the ongoing problem of the perception of the public relations industry. What this rent-a-prof is proposing is not even close to the educated, ethical and strategic practice that people who know what they are  talking about would teach. In other words, it is NOT public relations. But if the public witnesses denial, silence or "spin" they will call it PR even if done by a person whose job title and education background has nothing to do with public relations.

Again, the only good news to come out of this is evidence that one of our PR students learned well, so well that she identified the obviously ignorant instruction and shared her horror  with us. The next step is for all PR pros, even current students and recent grads, to speak truth to power and say NO!--PR is not about spin!

PR and Social Media Measurement

I get a lot of questions about measurement of social media. One of those questions came in response to a recent post on my 'PR  and Media' blog on GRBJ.com.

So I followed up with another post about the evaluation and measurement of social media efforts by organizations. Keep in mind that many professionals in a recent survey said they do no measurement at all, and others only a routine count of "friends" and "followers." The reason for that may have something to do with how busy people are, but others simply say they don't know where to begin.

Read my follow-up post on social media measurement on GRBJ.com.

How Do West Michigan Organizations Use Social Media?

While professionals in businesses and nonprofits are using social media more often on behalf of their organization, there could be more to "like" about why and how they do so. 

A recent study I completed, along with Mike Yoder of LinkedUpGR and Jeff Gartner of Gartner and Associates, shows that West Michigan is not unusual when comparing our local study results with some national studies about social media use. It's also interesting to note that college degree, job description and authority in an organization are associated with using social media for conversations as opposed to mere promotion.

You can learn more about the study in my PR & Media Blog on grbj.com. 

Or, you can come Monday March 4 to a LinkedUpGR event at 6 p.m. at the Ramada Plaza Grand Rapids to see a presentation of the study and participate in a discussion of the implications. The event is free, but please RSVP.

There's a Reason They Call It Earned Media--Why Proposal to Pay Journalists is Wrong

I got a tweet today from Mark Sanchez (@masanche),  Senior Writer for MiBiz, asking me for comments on a PR man offering to provide articles to a journalist, who could then apply his own byline. This dandy was reported in Jim Romenesko's blog.

Basically, a PR guy points out that with media contraction it is hard to get good content. So why doesn't he offer prepared articles to the journalist that could be used edited or not with the journalist's byline on them. PR guy gets publicity, journalist gets content, everyone's happy. So he says.

Here are my thoughts:

• History always informs modern public relations. Ivy Lee is considered to be one of the fathers of modern public relations and the inventor of the first press release. He wrote articles and even laid them out in newspaper columns so journalists in the early 1900s could literally "cut and paste" his handouts verbatim for use in their newspapers. I have an example from a PR history book I show my classes. A bit of foreshadowing is that the title on top of these handouts was "public relations." Here's an account of one of the first verbatim articles supplied to media, and it's actually in a crisis situation.
• The notion of PR people providing content which journalists use is called "information subsidy" since a 1982 book by Oscar Gandy. It has been debatable whether this is a bad thing or not. On the one hand, journalists being spoonfed is poor journalism, if not unethical. But on the other hand, many news reports would not see the light of day were it not for a PR person alerting journalists to the idea or helping facilitate interviews and other information for stories. It's not to uncommon for media to occasionally use news releases verbatim. In fact, I wrote a blog post on this before.
• There is no doubt that economic pressure has journalists today doing more "aggregating" and "curating" of other people's content and less original reporting. This comes in the form of newswire, shared content from other journalists, and inviting content from non-journalist sources. Locally in West Michigan, one example would be the Sunday Grand Rapids Press health section, where representatives from local hospitals are given space to hold forth on health issues. Another example is me blogging for free about PR and media issues for the Grand Rapids Business Journal. In both cases, the publication gets free  content and the guest writers get name recognition, brand building, and the opportunity to establish themselves as a thought leader or community servant on a relevant subject.
• Ethics is always debated. In Nigeria and some other countries it is expected that a PR person will pay a journalist to run a story, in the same way a waitress here expects a tip for serving food. The situation in the Romenesko blog does not involve paying a journalist, but it is unethical because the public is not fully or honestly informed of authorship. It's not about the money, it's about the ability to make informed decisions. If readers read an article with a well-known journalist's byline, there is an expectancy that the journalist investigated, verified, examined alternative views, and finally wrote an article that was fair and representative of multiple perspectives. If that article was supplied by someone with their own interest in mind--or even if you argue that the content is in the public service--denying the public the ability to know the actual authorship is deceptive and therefore unethical.
• If I remember correctly, bylines were first used by TIME Magazine in the era of tabloid and sensationalistic journalism, in an effort to give their articles more credibility, legitimacy, and accountability. It is ironic that nearly 100 years later someone is trying to use the byline for opposite purposes.
• Bad ethics ultimately hurts everyone. The reader is misinformed, as I noted above. Journalists will in time only corrode their own brand and the value they provide readers. And PR people will only be seen to be sneaky manipulators, as opposed  to honest professionals who balance the interests of their clients with the public interest and seek to work in an honest, transparent fashion. That's what Lee stressed in his "Declaration of Principles" way back at the time of the first press release. That's a theme of the PRSA Code of Ethics. It's what I teach my students. Its the way the West Michigan PR pros I know practice. 
• The reader does  decide. In time people will know that articles are supplied and not original and legitimate news. The articles will then lose value and be seen with the same consumer skepticism as ads. The whole point of publicity, and why it's called "earned media," is that skeptical journalists and editors weigh information carefully and then decide whether and how it should be published. The value is the third party credibility when information is presented, not merely getting it out there at any cost.

I'm disappointed to read about this "indecent proposal" from a PR person. But I'm glad Romenesko exposed him, to prevent other unsavory idiots from trying the same to the ruin of us all.

The Danger of Assumed Ubiquity in Social Media

I was talking to my graduate communication management class  earlier this week about deciding on if and how to use various communication technologies. A text we were discussing stressed the importance of weighing the difference between benefits  and costs  to determine the value of a communication technology.

One point I made to them was to beware of assuming that because something is popular with you and your friends, or seems to be getting a lot of buzz in the tech media, that it is the best medium to reach your intended publics, be they employees, customers, investors, B-to-B partners or others. I called this "the danger of assumed ubiquity." In other words, just because a bunch of public relations people are raving about the latest social media platform, don't assume that it is everywhere, that everyone uses it, or more importantly, that the specifically segmented public you want to reach (you DO segment your publics, right?) is using it.

The day after that class  met, Pew released a new study on the demographics of social media use by Americans. The study is useful to see  which platforms appeal to which demographics, such as gender, age, college  education, and race.

But what is also interesting is the fact that overall use of even the most popular and established social media sites is quite low as a percentage  of overall population. Two-thirds (67%) of Americans say  they have used Facebook, especially  women and the 18-29 age group. But other social media platforms are  not as popular as those of us who use them like to think:

• Twitter -- 16%
• Pinterest -- 15%
• Instagram -- 13%
• Tumblr -- 6%

Generally speaking, your tweet may often fall in the woods when no one is there. Also, keep in the mind that the study doesn't get into frequency or purpose of use. So we don't know how often this small minority  of people are using certain sites, or why they are there (i.e. are they just socializing with friends, or do they really follow brands?) I know from other studies that engaging with organizations via social media is happening, but the reality is there are not a lot of people there to begin with, they are not there often, and they don't go there to keep up with your company or nonprofit organization.

I still think PR pros absolutely have to have a social media presence, because the study shows upward  trend lines from 2010 to 2012 in use. But there are several lessons learned:

• Don't use social media for mass reach, use it for interaction with specific segments;
• Remember that social media supplements, and does not replace, other traditional forms of owned, earned, and paid media;
• Your content has to be conversational, not promotional. Think engage, not just inform;
• Keep monitoring for which platforms are growing, which are useful for your targeted public segments, and which are best for meeting your organizational objectives.

And of course, don't assume ubiquity of any medium.