Tuesday, September 22, 2015

Nature Conservancy Shows Good Visual PR (But Caution About Ads)

The Nature Conservancy has a project that is a good example of employing visual PR, i.e. video, to reach audiences in a compelling and educational way.

Their video collection of Michigan preserves caught my eye recently. I have worked with various environmental organizations in the past and know that it can be a challenge to educate a mass public about what a preserve is, how they are arranged, and why people should care. This is one case where visual communication is compelling and I would imagine effective to show rather than merely tell in this case.

I was alerted to the video series in an online article on MLive, this one focusing on the video about the headwaters of the Grand River, which flows from near Jackson to Lake Michigan at Grand Haven, thus meandering through many MLive readership markets. So the Nature Conservancy has the videos and is doing the media relations to get the word out about them. Kudos for that.

I did notice one thing that provides a cautionary tale about PR pros using online video across sites and platforms. While the videos hosted on the Nature Conservancy site simply play from the beginning, on MLive I was served up a pre-roll ad before the video played. No huge problem there--MLive is a media company and like any business needs to make a profit. But this particular ad was advocating that tracking or shale oil drilling can be done safely. I will not get into the pros/cons of that particular issue. But the point is that such an ad may conflict with the Nature Conservancy's mission and brand, and they don't have control over which ads run as a preface to its own video.

What do do? Organizations can hope that viewers will make the distinction between ad message and their own content. Or they can restrict views of videos to proprietary sites without ads. Or media companies could start paying more attention to not just content but sentiment of ads and try to offer some compatibility, such as we have seen in print over the years with some human judgment about ad placement relative to editorial content.

No comments: