Over the last few years, however, the rate at which we receive the news has been accelerating and, believe it or not, promises to become even more immediate. Some news organizations are applying extreme and sometimes controversial business practices to keep up with this increasing pace and to survive in the highly competitive online news space.

With more pressure to deliver content to their followers, organizations like Politico and Gawker are helping to ratchet up the intensity to an even higher level when it comes to reporting the news. Pre-dawn start times at agencies along with bonuses tied to the number of pageviews a reporter’s story garners are adding to the sense of urgency in which a story is posted online. Tracking how many people view articles online is becoming a higher priority not only at new media, but old media as well – creating an environment to see who can post the most exclusive stories the fastest.

As a result, when a major national story is in the midst of breaking news, the rules of engagement sometimes become a bit blurred, with more outlets favoring “cut and paste reporting” over actual journalism. Last month Rolling Stone magazine was about to post the General McChrystal story in which he and his aids were critical of the White House – first sending an advanced copy of the story to the Associated Press (customary for magazines trying to promote a story) with some restrictions. But before Rolling Stone had a chance to publish the story on their website, on their scheduled date, two major websites (Politico and Times.com) decided to post a PDF of the entire story to their respective sites.  

Although it was seen by some as a breach of copyright and professional best practices, both companies explained that they posted the story as it was unfolding. Since Rolling Stone didn’t immediately post the article itself they decided to move forward on their own.  Eric Bates, executive editor of Rolling Stone, didn’t see it that way. Voicing his concern not only from his magazine’s perspective but from an industry perspective, he called it a “transitional moment,” adding, “What these two media organizations did was off the charts. They took something that was in pre-published form, sent to other media organizations with specific restrictions, and just put it up.”

However, the exhausting pace of online news isn’t just taking its toll on the media organizations themselves. It is also coming at a price to the individuals supplying the content. The longer hours and added pressure to constantly come up with exclusive stories has contributed to an increased turnover of staff at online news organizations with more journalists facing burnout at a younger age. A dozen reporters recently left Politico in the first half of this year and it’s very common for an editor to leave Gawker after just one year.

While some may debate the future of the media, one thing is certain: The online media race is on.  I’m just not sure if slow and steady wins this one.

Do you think that the media and their audiences, are biting off more news than they can chew?  As a public relations professional, what do you think about news organizations bending the rules of engagement to keep up with today’s frenetic pace of news and how does this impact the way you conduct media relations? If you’re a journalist or blogger, how are you handling the added pressure of constantly having to deliver? Please share your thoughts with me and the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

Flickr Image: kbaird; Original Image: Charlie Riedel / AP

British Petroleum has been making front page news since April 22^nd as approximately 800,000 gallons of oil poured into the Gulf of Mexico each day. BP was once an organization thought to be a “friendly brand in the oil business” – despite its previous disasters. But as the oil continues to spill into the summer months, and according to government officials into the fall, BP is being scrutinized now more than ever.

One might assume that companies that specialize in goods/services, particularly those that could potentially wreak havoc on the safety of the world’s inhabitants, would have a well prepared protocol for crisis situations. Furthermore, if the company had a predecessor that experienced a similar crisis (i.e., Exxon Valdez, 1989) they would sculpt this protocol by learning from the mistakes previously made. It’s highly doubtful that BP did not have a crisis communication procedure in place, but was and is it a good one?

According to Chris Lehane, Newsweek’s master of disaster, “One of the rules of thumb of crisis management is that you can never put the genie back in the bottle in terms of what the underlying issue is. People evaluate you in terms of how you handle things going forward. And obviously doing everything to be open, transparent, accessible is the type of thing that the public does look for from a corporate entity in this type of situation.”

 As the situation in the Gulf continues to unfold, BP has promised one solution after another with no success – in other words, they over promised and under delivered, a cardinal “no-no” in business or any crisis resolution. Lehane states, “If you tell people what you are going to do, and you suggest it’s going to be successful, you need to be successful. Because once you create those expectations and you don’t fulfill them, when you already have a significant credibility problem, it further degrades your credibility.”

BP’s inability to implement a successful solution to fix the spill isn’t the only thing affecting its credibility. BP came under fire during the U.S. Congressional hearings when executives from BP, Transocean, and Halliburton took turns blaming each other for the incident coined “the worst environmental disaster in U.S. history.” And BP’s executives continue to make one public relations faux-pas after another:

• According to the Daily Finance, Randy Prescott, BP rep, said: “Louisiana isn’t the only place that has shrimp” in response to someone’s question about rising seafood prices and the impact on local restaurants. Although the remark was reportedly only covered by one outlet, The Lens, and allegedly taken out of context, it was enough to spark a viral campaign that included phone calls and emails to Prescott.
• BP CEO, Tony Hayward has caught flack for a number of comments, including one in which he said: “I want my life back,” later apologizing on the company’s Facebook fan page for his remark, as well as taking a yachting trip.
• More recently the company’s chairman, Carl-Henric Svanberg, remarked about “the small people,” stating: “I hear comments sometimes that large oil companies are greedy companies or don’t care. But that is not the case with BP. We care about the small people.”  
• Other spokespeople continue to downplay the oil spill, insisting that it is having only “a modest impact” on the environment and economy and will be “down to a trickle.” Still others seem uncertain about “who is really in charge.”

And the list goes on…

In fact, there are so many remarks and actions that seemingly go against “public relations sense” and best practice – with more to follow – that outlets have begun to rank them according to “the 10 worst BP gaffes.” Though BP has done its best to cleanup search engines, buying keywords and pay-per click ads, in an effort to control some of the damage and off-set some of the negative publicity.

In the age of “authenticity” and media relations 2.0, we’re often told not to script our spokespeople, rather to let their personalities shine through and to empower them to adequately convey our key messages. Does the same apply for crisis communications? Are BP’s gaffes the result of poor media training or a sign of a larger issue?

If you were BP’s PR or media relations professional or in charge of communications for any other company facing a similar maelstrom in the media, what would you do differently?

Do you think that BP’s communication so far during this crisis is a lesson on what to do or what not to do? If you, your client, company or brand have been called into “crisis management mode” how was the situation handled? What would you have done differently in retrospect? Please share your thoughts with me and the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

***

*Bio: Soon after graduating from the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, in 2006 with a B.A. in communication and a B.S. in business/marketing, I joined the BurrellesLuce client services team. In 2008, I completed my master’s degree in corporate and organizational communications and now work as the supervisor of BurrellesLuce Express client services. I am passionate about researching and understanding the role of email in shaping relationships from a client relation/service standpoint as well as how miscommunication occurs within email, which was the topic of my thesis. Through my posts on Fresh Ideas, I hope to educate and stimulate thoughtful discussions about corporate communications and client relations, further my own knowledge on this subject area, as well as continue to hone my skills as a communicator. Twitter: @_LaurenShapiro_ LinkedIn: laurenrshapiro Facebook: BurrellesLuce

In ancient China, soldiers would warn against impending attacks by sending smoke signals from tower to tower up to 300 miles away within just a few hours; In 1775, Paul Revere used his vocal chords and a horse on his “midnight ride” to warn of the British invasion and in the 1800’s Samuel Morse used a type of character encoding system to send 20 words per minute via radio.

Today, in just a few typed lines and a few clicks, stories are being spread around the world through social networking sites circling the globe in a matter of seconds. And the vivid details from personal accounts through citizen journalism and the proliferation of camera phones are adding more truth and authenticity to these stories. In some cases the immediacy and extra scrutiny can lead to positive things (e.g., shedding light on last summer’s Iranian protests). In others, it can be

devastating for the main character or brand – causing irreparable harm to their reputations. The BP oil spill in the Gulf, the English goalies blunder against the U.S. team in the opening round of this year’s  World Cup, or any Lindsey Lohan story these days are just a few stories that go against the old PR adage, “Any publicity is good publicity as long as you spell my name right.”   

Celebrities have been putting up with this type of scrutiny, to some degree, for years with paparazzi constantly photographing unsuspecting beach goers wearing unflattering bathing suits or in compromising positions. But when it happens to our politicians, business leaders, corporations, athletes or just everyday people, how does one cope with the instant barrage of viral videos, bloggers, or tweeters, and the repercussions that follow? At least bad weather would force the ancient smoke signalers to take a break every now and then. Barring a colossal Internet crash, today’s perpetual flow of information continues to tarnish reputations worldwide (and many times rightfully so).

 Today crisis communications is becoming increasingly difficult with public relations and marketing people scrambling to keep up with today’s technology.  One lesson that Southwest Airlines taught the PR community back in February is to always keep a close eye on what the media, especially social media, is saying about your company. When movie director Kevin Smith was kicked off a Southwest Flight on Feb 18, 2010, essentially for being too fat, he tweeted about the episode and the next day the story was all over the Internet. However, Southwest wasted no time and offered an apology to Smith via Twitter and posted an explanation of their policy on its own blog before the story started to trend.

Maybe there should be an island for all the victims of negative social media fall out, where they can live in solitude and where there are no computers, web access, or mobile devices until their names are mercifully pushed down the search engine results list.  Even then, it probably wouldn’t take long before helicopters were swirling overhead taking video and instantly downloading the footage online.  A more practical approach would be to prevent the crisis from spreading further by paying close attention to what is being said in all forms of media and to who’s saying it.

The “who are you with attitude?” is old school now. So how are you preparing your clients and executives for “the every one is a reporter mentality?” Please share your thoughts with me and the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

Image Courtesy of DC Comics

It would be hard to imagine the fictional newspaper men (and women) of the past like Perry White of the “Daily Planet” (Superman) hollering for their first quarter numbers of “unique visitors per month” or boasting about their ranking for “most-linked-to-news-outlets” or even deliberating about putting their content behind a “pay-wall.” Today these are just some of the relatively new terms being used to describe the various metrics and business models newspapers are exploring during this transitional period in which the entire industry finds itself. 

For the last several years the forecasts for news organizations have been filled with doom and gloom. However the news about the news industry has been much rosier as of late. For starters, newspaper website’s traffic continues to grow. As highlighted in this Media Post article, online newspaper operations from the top 25 media outlets reached 83.7 million unique visitors in April, up 10 percent from March, 12 percent from February and 15 percent from January of this year, according to comscore figures released by the Newspaper National Network. And according to Nielsen, 74.4 million unique visitors per month in the first quarter of 2010 were a record – up from 72 million from the first quarter of 2009. These increases were actually higher than competitors like CNN and The Huffington post who came in at 43.4 million (flat) and 22.2 million (a 3 percent drop) respectively.

(For a list of the top 100 daily newspapers, 25 consumer magazines, 25 blogs, and the 20 social networks in the U.S., check out the updated 2010 Top Media List from BurrellesLuce.)

It is obvious from these figures that, as Google’s CEO, Eric Schmidt was recently quoted as saying, “Newspapers don’t have a demand problem they have a business model problem.”

As various business models continue to be tested, measured and debated within the industry, a silver bullet has yet to emerge. So far, it appears that several viable solutions are taking shape and depending on who you ask you’ll get a justification for each of them. According to this article on CNN.com, “Last year Rupert Murdoch, chairman and CEO of The Wall Street Journal’s parent company News Corp., said ‘The current free access business model favored by most content providers was flawed and contributed to a fall in newspapers’ revenues.’” The WSJ is currently behind a pay-wall and “he also claimed the Wall Street Journal had proved that charging for content could be made to work pointing out that 360,000 people had downloaded an iPhone WSJ application in three weeks and that users would soon be made to pay “handsomely” for accessing WSJ content.”

Alternatively, The New Times plans to use a metered system (EZ Pass approach) starting January 2011, where a certain number of articles would be free before demanding payment (similar to what Financial Times is currently using). This may solve their monetization challenge, but it will no doubt affect their “most-linked-to-news-outlets” rank, a measure used to track the amount of people who actually clicked-through to the original news organizations website via a blog or third party source. This could significantly impact results, with 99 percent of the stories bloggers include as links coming from traditional mainstream media sources. Interestingly enough, 80 percent of the stories linked to in online and social media come from only four news outlets: The New York Times (20 percent), BBC news (23 percent), CNN.com (21 percent), and the Washington Post (16 percent). The Wall Street Journal has twice the print circulation as the New York Times, but  is not on this short list. 

Some pay-wall advocates would argue that the majority of these visitors are merely “drive by users” who come in once through an aggregator and don’t really engage with the product. The counter argument claims more traffic directed to a newspaper’s online site would ultimately translate into higher advertising dollars.

If the numbers prove the demand for news content is there, let’s hope for the news industry’s sake the revenue will follow. In my opinion credible news journalism still trumps all. As long as it’s being distributed through the device of choice, engaged by the readers, and monetized in a way that generates revenue without isolating readers – it doesn’t matter whether it’s done through pay-walls, online advertising, or possibly something we haven’t thought of yet. (After all necessity is the mother of all inventions.) A tall order for the news industry for sure, but the future suddenly looks a whole lot brighter. There’s no doubt the identity of the news industry will change, but a reinvented news organization is still better than none at all.

Flickr Image: Boris Veldhuijzen van Zanten

Melanie James, a communications academic at the University of Newcastle, whom I have gotten to know through #PRStudChat, recently tweeted: “Interesting to note who @BP_America follows…” At the time of Melanie’s tweet @BP_America had 2,500 followers, but was only following nine. (At the time of this posting, they have 2,855 followers and are only following 17). As news of the oil spill spread, the @BP_America Twitter handle was updated regularly to offer information. A sample of tweets included:

Video of BP CEO touring coffer dam construction.

Doug Suttles met with MS Gov Barbour & others showing Safety Training Classes for local population around Venice, LA.

Hayward applauds President’s statement on oil spill

The BP Community Support Team has set up a hotline for those who would like to help with the gulf coast recovery efforts: 866-448-5816

While the information certainly helped to broadcast valuable messages, elsewhere on Twitter conversation regarding the oil spill was happening with as many as 20 tweets a day directed specifically to @BP_America. Between April 30^th and the morning of May 6^th, whathashtag.com indicated that there were more than 19,838 tweets from more than 8,284 competitors discussing the #oilspill.

The lesson: Online discussions are happening whether companies choose to engage or not. (I know, the sky is blue, right?) But we must also recognize that each company needs to assess their own resources and determine when, where, how, and which conversations they should participate in.

In order to minimize some of the public frustration and ease some of the concerns companies may have about engaging in times of crisis, one practice I recommend is that organizations automatically follow back those who choose to follow them (the exception, of course, being spammers). By following the customers and individuals who have elected to follow your organization, you acknowledge their value, and most importantly you offer the public an easy way to voice their opinions privately (via a DM), rather than in a public forum which may further fan the flames.

Free online tools like, socialoomph.com, make it easy to follow back. However, before doing so be sure to have the resources to respond in a timely manner to those who do make an effort to reach you privately.

What Twitter best practices do you recommend for companies in times of crisis? How would you instruct your clients and/or business to use social media for public relations outreach and crisis management? Please share your thoughts with me and the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

Image: Collider.com

On a recent trip to Colombia (South America), after a long day of sightseeing, I thought I’d switch on the TV with the hope of maybe catching an American baseball game … Instead, I found an episode of MTV Network’s “Jersey Shore.” As if it wasn’t surprising enough that this show recently became a television phenomenon in the states, I found out it was also number one on pay television in Colombia amongst 18-24 year olds, as well as in Mexico.

American television companies are penetrating international markets at a rapid pace and are leveraging multiple platforms, turning their creations into global brands or “multi platform franchises.” “Transmedia storytelling,” where multiple platforms are used to create varying entry points to the story while sticking to the main narrative, is a huge contributing factor in expanding these franchises. Additional revenue, created by linking video and computer games, mobile devices, and websites to the show, in turn helps entertainment companies offset high production costs. “Once people fall in love with a brand they want to interact with it in all sorts of ways,” says Tony Cohen, the head of Fremantle Media.

Transmedia storytelling is nothing new to entertainment – movie studios have used it for years making Spider-Man and Harry Potter as recognizable worldwide as Coke or McDonald’s. Avatar, Hollywood’s biggest blockbuster hit of 2009, grossed $747 million in the states and a whopping $2.7 billion worldwide, surpassing Titanic’s overseas box office record.

McDonald’s created Internet- based games and a sweepstakes around Avatar that included a private screening of the film among other prizes. “They’re realizing that the demographic they’re targeting isn’t using traditional media as much as they used to,” said Jeff Farmer, an analyst at Jefferies & Co. in Boston.

As the Vice President of media and entertainment at BurrellesLuce I follow the television and movie industries very closely. A little break while traveling abroad would be nice, however, “Hollywood” seems to be everywhere these days.

What do you think? Is Hollywood and U.S. television over saturating the digital space? Are you using “transmedia” to engage and connect with your audience? What industry beyond entertainment do you think has crossed over with an effective use of transmedia public relations, marketing or advertising?

The iPad was released last Saturday. Until last week coverage of the iPad was limited by Apple’s press embargo, which restricted the potential

Flickr Image: lighthack

consumer’s access to both imagery and analysis. For the online Apple enthusiasts, this may have been an unavoidable hindrance, but it did little to quell the enthusiasm for all postings iPad-related. While social media circles were abuzz for weeks prior in anticipation of the April 3^rd release, the coverage in the traditional (print) media was more subdued in the buildup.

The first images of Apple’s tablet computer were revealed, along with its name, in late January. Outside of tech circles, the public (online or offline) saw precious little imagery of the product in action until the release weekend. And again, for that dedicated market segment, that was of minor impart as their purchasing decision was set. But for another segment of the populace the coverage of the iPad by the traditional media in that crucial introductory weekend window would be their introduction to Apple’s revolutionary platform. What did the readership see of the iPad in their weekend newspapers? What did or didn’t they encounter if they happened to read that self-same article online?

Analysis of the coverage drawn from 60 major U.S .newspapers, for the release weekend of April 3-5, reveals a familiar pattern of content and coverage that we have seen in previous postings.

April 3
Out of 45 iPad-related articles which ran that day – the day of the iPad’s release – 33 were accompanied by an image of the product. The majority of these graphics were reproductions of the official release photo of the iPad. When compared with their corresponding web versions, only eight articles published the original image. The remainder consisted only of text. Only one out of a dozen syndicated articles could be located online.

April 4
Sunday sees a doubling of articles and imagery as the focus shrifts to local iPad frenzy. Newspapers in all major markets published a combination of syndicated and original content typically datelined from an Apple retail showroom. Photos of campout lines and of the lucky first purchaser accounted for nearly 100 images found in print that day. While some corresponding sites did contain a wealth of extras, such as video and interviews, the overall ratio was only slightly higher than from the previous day. Only 44 of those valuable images transitioned from print to web.

April 5
Less than 40 of the major papers ran an iPad article in their Monday editions. Many of them took a business news angle, reporting sales figures from the previous weekend. And, quite interestingly, only half of those were accompanied by a graphic of either an original or syndicated flavor. While this may have been related to either the news cycle or typical Monday space limitations in print, on the web-side a mere 10 of the 40 ran with graphics.

The release of the iPad was a huge event and not only for Apple. Application providers and traditional media outlets are betting on the iPad for the delivery of multiple layers of content and increased revenue. Thus, more than a few industry watchers have commented that the iPad’s release was simply “too big to fail.” Even with all of these factors in its favor, though, there was a considerable loss in content for the iPad’s coverage when transitioning from print to corresponding web coverage.

I’ve heard it said that “some people will read your story and some people will read part of your story, but EVERYONE will look at the picture.” If this is the case the accompanying image is vital to measuring impact. If the picture isn’t there could you be losing a prospective buying audience? If you aren’t evaluating the whole story with pictures, where they are included, is your marketing team able to properly evaluate the impact of your brand? This study again leaves me with a lot of questions and one answer: the image is a powerful component to have in your PR and communications arsenal.

If the release was for a lesser known product or a launch of a new brand, what kind of impact do you think the lack of consistent translation from print to online coverage or lack of image would have on reception? Please share your thoughts with me and the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

***

*Bio: A native of Mesa, Arizona, I graduated from the University of Arizona with a major in Near Eastern Studies. I began my career with BurrellesLuce in 1997 as a reader. As with most readers, I developed a special relationship with my assigned papers – those small town dailies and weeklies of the same flavor that my family had been employed in for two generations. Currently, I hold the position of quality assurance specialist, troubleshooting daily production issues. Outside interests include woodworking, and keeping my wife and dog happy. Twitter: BurrellesLuce; Facebook: BurrellesLuce

Razzle.com

We all rely on mainstream media to tell us what is going on in the world. We trust the credibility of traditional news as an authority and we expect that at least 95 percent of what they report is the truth. It’s also no secret that the bulk of social media relies on traditional media as the source of its content as well. (Citizen journalism, in the form of breaking world events, is the exception not the rule, but even that often overlaps with traditional media.) I have to admit that I use social media during the day to get a quick glimpse of headlines from the traditional media outlets that I follow – and I am sure that I am not alone.

So, why are more traditional media outlets getting their “news” from social media lately? Social Media is fast and cuts to the chase (only 140 characters), but most of the time we have to wonder if what we are reading is even true (assuming we’re reading what we’re about to tweet or repost in the first place). And with the media landscape changing, it is understandable that mainstream media would want to remain the go-to source. But at what price?

Last Thursday was everyone’s favorite holiday, the one day that you can call your parents and tell them you got married in Vegas, “Aprils Fool’s Day.” We saw many large, well-known organizations joining in with their own pranks, such as Google, changing its name to Topeka, and McDonald’s, going along with a post by Grist, an environmental news website…

Grist announced that McDonald’s would no longer continue its worldwide composting initiatives after a University of California-Berkeley scientist discovered that none of the items on the menu would compost – complete with a photo seemingly depicting a year old “Happy Meal” still relatively fresh. What makes this story interesting is that the news began to spread across social media as if it was legitimate. All of this began with a blog post on March 3^rd by Joann Bruso, wishing her “Happy Meal” a “Happy Birthday” and that lead to Grist’s April Fool’s prank. The question is how or why did a New York Times writer tweet the story?  (Check out a recent Fast Company article to see how the story plays out.)

In an effort to keep up with the ever-changing media landscape, do you think traditional media outlets are cutting corners and not checking their facts? Or are they just trying to stay hip – proving they’re in on the joke? It is funny how six months ago studies showed that people tweeting and updating in social media were using content from mainstream media sources and I still find that true. But are we all becoming so gullible and wrapped up in the “I want it now” lifestyle that we are making short-cuts in order to be the first to report?

I am sure you all remember the breaking news last July that actor Jeff Goldblum was dead. Many popular news organizations actually printed, and ran with the story for a couple of hours even though they found it online and the reports weren’t confirmed. I place a lot of trust in traditional media, as I am sure most of you do, and I always will; accidents happen and people post without understanding the repercussions and without scrutinizing the facts. No matter if we are a major news journalist or a back office tweeter, can we ever know that something on the Internet or printed in the paper is completely true? Not unless we are willing to get the hard-facts, do the research, and spend hours verifying every source.

As major news organizations, journalist, and mainstream bloggers they are trusted by their publics and their credibility depends on “getting the facts right” and producing quality stories. And as news consumer don’t we have an obligation to educate ourselves and help ensure accuracy before passing the information along? Shouldn’t the media and its audiences work together to create a certain standard of news and then hold each other accountable when it isn’t met? Then again, perhaps, “quick and easy” and “check the facts later” are the acceptable standards.

So, do you think mainstream media is trying to keep up with the fast-paced world of Twitter, Facebook, and other forms of social media by using content they find on the web?  Do you rely on traditional news outlets for the truth? Share your thoughts with the readers with BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

*Bio: After graduating from East Carolina University with a Marketing degree in 2005, Crystal DeGoede moved to New Jersey. In her four years as a member of the BurrellesLuce marketing team and through her interaction with peers and clients she has learned what is important or what it takes to develop a career when you are just starting out. She is passionate about continuing to learn about the industry in which we serve and about her career path. By engaging readers on Fresh Ideas Crystal hopes to further develop her social media skills and inspire other “millennials” who are just out of college and/or working in the field of marketing and public relations. Twitter: @cldegoede LinkedIn: Crystal DeGoede Facebook: BurrellesLuce

In that spirit, we are looking to replace the BurrellesLuce blogroll – which is compiled by our contributors – with content driven by you, our readers and fans.

So, tell us:

• What are your go-to online media sources?
• Which industry-related blogs top your RSS feed?
• What online media can’t you wait to dig-into first thing in the morning?

We’ll tally up your responses and feature the top resources in a new section called, “Peer Media.”

Perhaps you prefer the online edition of the New York Times. Maybe it is the Huffington Post. Whatever your preferences, we want to know. Leave a comment below or connect with us on Facebook or Twitter. And be sure to look for an update soon, revealing what your peers had to say.

No one said it’s fair but your appearance at work can give you a lot more than a complimentary coffee at Starbucks. What you wear and how you look can be beneficial or detrimental to your advancement, both in status and in salary. Physical appearance is one of the first non-verbal cues that we exude. How the recipient subconsciously or sometimes consciously interprets our outward appearance determines how we are perceived as workers, clients, bosses, etc.

Many researchers have begun to delve into the obscure world of physical attractiveness in correlation to societal benefits. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder; however, certain characteristics stand out as key players in “Darwinizing” the workplace, some of which include weight, youthfulness, and overall perceived attractiveness.

Deemed the Physical Attractiveness Phenomenon, the allocation of perceived characteristics to an individual based on how they look is something that happens every day. Dr. Gordon L. Patzer, explains that appearance acts as an informational cue (via nonverbal communication). As the nonverbal cues are interpreted by our bosses, coworkers, etc, information is inferred and assumptions, expectations, and/or attitudes are triggered – resulting in effects that are more positive for individuals with a higher physical attractiveness.

According to a Work & Power Survey conducted by Elle/MSNBC.com, bosses who were perceived as attractive were found to be more competent, collaborative, and better delegators. “Perception is key,” explains Ken Siegel in this Forbes.com article. Favorable qualities are assigned to individuals we find attractive and unfavorable qualities to those who we find unattractive.

How you are perceived in the workplace is entirely up to you. According to Sandy Dumont of Image Architect, “You never have the advantage when dressed casually. You look like you’re careless or have careless attitude.” Another suggestion to improving your in-office image is taking care of your hair, skin, nails and teeth.

Here are some interesting stats as they relate to perceived attractiveness and professional advancement:

• A study by Cornell University revealed that white women who gained up to 64 pounds experienced wage decreases up to 9 percent
• U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics noted that obese individuals can experience wage losses up to 12 percent. While individuals who were deemed “attractive” made up to 10 percent more annually
• A study by the American Society of Plastic Surgeons found that 73 percent of females felt youth (or looking youthful) significantly affected them getting a job, being promoted, or keeping a client

Do you think perceived “attractiveness” can affect the dynamics of a relationship between a PR professional and their client? Are you more or less likely to sign a contract with an “attractive” sales rep? In your personal experience, have you observed the effects of the Physical Attractiveness Phenomenon?

*Bio: Soon after graduating from the Richard Stockton College of New Jersey, in 2006 with a B.A. in communication and a B.S. in business/marketing, I joined the BurrellesLuce client services team. In 2008, I completed my master’s degree in corporate and organizational communications and now work as the supervisor of BurrellesLuce Express client services. I am passionate about researching and understanding the role of email in shaping relationships from a client relation/service standpoint as well as how miscommunication occurs within email, which was the topic of my thesis. Through my posts on Fresh Ideas, I hope to educate and stimulate thoughtful discussions about corporate communications and client relations, further my own knowledge on this subject area, as well as continue to hone my skills as a communicator. Twitter: @_LaurenShapiro_ LinkedIn: laurenrshapiro Facebook: BurrellesLuce

As readers of the BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas blog are already well aware, search engine giant Google is no longer making the Associated Press’ content available through its search results.  And while there are a multitude of other news aggregators and distributors available on the Internet, no others can match the reach that the AP has in the traditional media.

Those in the PR industry who are relying simply on Google Alerts to track theirs and their client’s influence are at a distinct disadvantage, as access to hundreds of daily and weekly newspapers has effectively disappeared.  Some AP content is still appearing in fresh searches, but it seems to be limited to a couple of newspapers. And those may soon disappear if an updated licensing agreement is not reached between the two by month’s end.

Which returns us to the thesis of my previous postings “Can relying on other internet search engines, paid or unpaid, fulfill your monitoring needs?”  Just how much distributed content is even available on newspaper’s websites, much less through Google Alerts?

To address that question, I examined the availability of a recent AP article spotlighting (ironically) the introduction of Google’s Nexus One phone.  The article, authored by AP business writer Michael Liedtke, ran on January 6^th and was published in dozens of daily newspapers throughout the U.S.  This information came from our own available archives of scanned hard copy publications.

Twenty-five publications, with an average circulation of 50,000, were sampled.  A simple string of “Google Phone” was used to mirror any likely Boolean spidering phrases and the websites searched.

• Fifteen of the 25 newspaper websites did not return a result for the article.
• Thus, 60 percent of the print coverage was lost for this small exercise

Separate queries were entered on the major search sites that constituted more involved filtering and human interaction.

• Google Search: “Google Phone Liedtke” did result in a number of legitimate newspaper website articles, but none from the original sampling.
• Bing Search: “Google Phone Liedtke” in the News tab resulted in two incorrect articles, while a general web search returned mostly local TV sites which contain AP material.  Very few newspapers were offered and those that were, duplicated the Google results.
• Yahoo! News Search:  “Google Phone Liedtke” yielded more website coverage, but nothing mirroring the hard copy coverage.  None of the 15 sites which I located were represented in the search results.

This is only one example of how Google’s non-coverage of AP content could potentially affect public relations and marketing professionals who rely solely on “free” content. Expand that to other industry interests or areas relevant to you and your client – and how much are you willing to pay for free? How are you making adjustments given Google’s change in practice?

*Bio: A native of Mesa, Arizona, I graduated from the University of Arizona with a major in Near Eastern Studies. I began my career with BurrellesLuce in 1997 as a reader. As with most readers, I developed a special relationship with my assigned papers – those small town dailies and weeklies of the same flavor that my family had been employed in for two generations. Currently, I hold the position of quality assurance specialist, troubleshooting daily production issues. Outside interests include woodworking, and keeping my wife and dog happy. Twitter: BurrellesLuce; Facebook: BurrellesLuce

Sometimes I picture Biz Stone sitting at a bar with his friends laughing about how millions of people have adopted words like Twitter, tweet and TweetUp into their everyday vocabulary. Like many of you, I spent last year attending forums, webinars, and even conferences exploring how social media is relevant to our perspective businesses. It’s undeniable that social platforms such as Twitter have changed the way our clients communicate with us. Individuals now have a digital soapbox that can be used to praise or defame in a matter of seconds.

I wouldn’t deem myself a social media expert, but I do know that using social media to connect with my clients has proven to be very helpful. Are you familiar with the saying, “The squeaky wheel gets all the attention?” In the world of client service, we all know our squeaky wheels and naturally they take up a large portion of our time trying to remedy them. But what about the clients you never hear from?

Generally, it’s a good idea to “let the sleeping dogs lie.” However, this can be disastrous in account management. I know plenty of account managers who have thought to themselves, “If only I knew!” The majority of the time there is an easy solution to an issue the client may be facing. Yet, there are several reasons that can keep a client from expressing a need or frustration. The most common is time. The client may seem to be sleeping on your end, but that doesn’t mean they aren’t barking up someone else’s tree. Now with social media, it is easier than ever to find out what your client’s think about your product or service. Simply log on!

Engaging in the booming world of social media will allow you to find the clients that may not contact you directly. By monitoring and engaging social media, you can join your client’s in the living room of their digital house. The client can receive help without doing anything outside of their normal routine. This helps you to not only meet a client’s need; it also saves them time. A long list of companies have reportedly benefited from creating a social media presence to monitor and engage their customer base (Zappos, Best Buy, Bank of America, and of course us here at BurrellesLuce, just to name a few.) You may think monitoring your client’s social media activity seems too much like Big Brother. In the end, however, it simply shows the client you care and that you are listening. This year I’ll continue to scour my client’s digital soapboxes to ensure I don’t have any ticking time bombs out there. Check out this post from Mashable.com on how to integrate social media into your current practices.

Do you think companies should use social media to service and manage clientele? What victories or pitfalls do you think companies will experience?

*Bio: Emily Mouyeos joined the BurrellesLuce account management team with a background in nonprofit communication and development. Her background and current experience with BurrellesLuce allows her to effectively address client needs and consolidate feedback for senior management. To Emily, nothing feels better than helping others achieve their goal, whether it’s professionally or personally.  By focusing on client management through the Fresh Ideas blog, she hopes to evaluate new client management trends, as well as provide insight to the pros and cons of current practices. She looks forward to connecting with the readers of Fresh Ideas for new perspectives and dialogue on issues that affect overall success. LinkedIn: Emily Mouyeos Twitter: @BurrellesLuce Facebook: BurrellesLuce

Flickr Image: bunchofpants

If you don’t know what day your birthday is for 33 years what else may you not know? I was talking to my friend Frankie and he was relaying the story about how he celebrates his birthday on both January 14^th and 15^th. I’m in favor of stretching out a celebration, but it was the reason he gave that I share with you today. Frankie’s parents told him his birthday was on January 15, 1954. One day, while going through important family documents, he ran across his birth certificate and to his (and his mom’s) surprise his stated date of birth read January 14, 1954. When he asked his mom about the contradiction, she told him that he was born close to midnight so she “thought” it was the 15^th and she just never looked that close.

In a BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas post last year I addressed Google and the Associated Press (AP)  “Google Alert Users: Are You Getting What Google’s Not Paying For?” and it appears the other shoe has finally dropped. In Softpedia’s article there’s speculation and rumor about why Google is no longer updating AP content, including a quote from Google that leaves more questions than answers. My concern is the impact on public relations practitioners who rely solely on free content. The “why” is equaled in importance by “what” the impact will be to media measurement reporting? Just yesterday Linda Vandevrede announced  a special “Meet the Associated Press in Phoenix” event on the Valley PR Blog. Perhaps one of the attendees can ask the AP their thoughts on the Google issue. More importantly I hope the pr pros planning to attend are also making arrangements on how to best monitor the coverage their new contacts are going to help them get for their clients.

If you rely solely on Google alerts and have AP media relationships how will you now monitor, report, and analyze the impact of your news coverage? Do you even know the full extent to which this can compromise your existing reporting benchmark? A prime example of the importance of AP stories is “Two health-care proposals may get boot, Dems say” . If you’re in Healthcare PR how do you explain to the C-Suite why you didn’t know about this story? How much will “There was no Google alert for the story so I didn’t know” cost your organization?

While Frankie has never missed a birthday, in fact the last 23 years he’s celebrated two days per year, he did have to go back and change all of his other documentation to match his legal birthday. PR pros will not escape so easily from the impact of this decision by Google. The only cost to Frankie was a few hours at the Department of Motor Vehicles, updating other government documents and work information, but what do you have at risk by not having confirmed data sources, specifically the AP content?

How will you manage year-over-year expectations of clients when your coverage declines? How will you gauge the impact of key messages and campaigns if you can’t access the information via Google? Is it important enough to make an investment?

Image: AdWeek

As Oprah tearfully announced that her upcoming 25^th season would be her last, a flurry of tweets began flying before the credits even started rolling. The question on everyone’s lips (or tweets): “Who would be next?” Oprah, a towering icon of television talk, leaves behind a unique brand and some sizeable shoes to fill. As the voice that launched a thousand small businesses, authors, celebrities and lately, politicians, she has harnessed the power of her daytime audience in a way that no competitor has. Where other shows are more specialized, the Big “O” packs a punch in terms of variety, serving up everything from celebrity interviews to self-help, confessionals to contests, all with a side of fashion and fanfare. This broad base has made Oprah into a holy grail of public relations, the golden ring for communications professionals and clients to strive for.

So, who is next? Where will we turn when we have a new book to promote? An expert on multiple personality disorders to pitch? Or a golf pro ensnared in a PR-tsunami with a big apology to make? Already names are being tossed around.

Funny girl, Ellen DeGeneres seems to be the natural heir to Oprah’s talk queen crown. Her appeal is broad, although she only commands less than half of Oprah’s estimated seven million viewers. This fall has seen the two together on the cover of O, The Oprah Magazine and appearing on each other’s shows, leading many to believe that Ellen’s succession could be a natural one. Still, it’s hard to imagine her hi-jinks and dancing paired with a tell-all from Whitney Houston, much less Sarah Palin, both of whom appeared on Oprah this fall.

Rumors also suggest a Katie Couric daytime program following the end of Couric’s contract with CBS in 2011, but Couric’s image, as a sophisticated girlfriend, does not have quite the same warm, likeability of Oprah’s mentoring presence. Other names like Tyra Banks, Whoopi Goldberg, Paula Abdul and even Sarah Palin are floating around as potential daytime divas. Morning shows like Good Morning America and the Today Show offer a similar variety to Oprah’s programming, but still cannot match her numbers. And then, of course, there are the prime time and late night outlets. Leno, Letterman, and Conan remain strongholds for celebrities while Colbert and Stewart offer politicos, authors, economists and other thought leaders.

Perhaps Oprah leaves behind her a void that no one show can fill. Fans of her self-help segments may gravitate towards spin-offs Dr. Phil and Dr. Oz. Viewers interested in celebrity will stick with Ellen or Tyra. Lifestyle audiences could turn to Martha Stewart, the Oprah-launched, Rachel Ray or a rumored new program for Oprah regular, home improvement/design guru Nate Berkus.

So where does this leave PR professionals? The end of Oprah could be just another step towards the increasing hyper-fragmentation of the media as niche outlets multiply on and offline. The result: continued need for greater targeting efforts, heightened listening, and connecting with audiences where they are by PR. Does this require more work than one big push for the golden Oprah standard? Probably, but the outlets for exposure expand drastically as do the opportunities for meaningful interaction. Building buzz from the bottom up is daunting and without the ultimate “stamp of approval,” individual influencers need to be discovered at every level of communications. They might look a little different than Oprah and come in the form of mommy-bloggers or local anchors, but perhaps their reach will be even more personal and their audience even more engaged.

Between now and the end of Oprah’s reign supreme, there will be undoubtedly hundreds of potential candidates to take her place. Of course, there’s still one candidate that might be the best replacement for Oprah, and that’s Oprah herself. Although the full details of her next venture have yet to be released, or even developed, what’s brewing is a network that uses Oprah’s successful show as a jumping off point, promising dozens of new programs to pitch. So, as we enter into the end of an era, how will you be tailoring your PR efforts? Who will be your big get?

Please share your thoughts with myself and the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

And toy retailers are actively integrating the toys, found on the more popular lists, into their seasonal in-store marketing campaigns. In a recent interview for Playthings.com, Nancy Stanek, the owner of Illinois-based Toys Etcetera, observed:

Draw attention to the “best toys” by creating a special display that shoppers can identify quickly. If shoppers have heard about the list through your advertising, on your website, in newspaper articles, or through Mommy blogs, make it easy and obvious for them to find what they came for.

For the general public, those aunts and uncles, who are looking for the perfect gift for little Poindexter, but just aren’t privy to his ever-changing wish list – these placements are a great starting point.  And what could be a better place to start that quest than in the pages of their local newspaper?   

As we have observed in previous postings, pictures are invaluable to driving product recognition especially when the shelves are crowded with so many toys competing for the buyer’s attention.  (Remember the thrill of Christmas catalogs in those days long ago?)

So, in terms of graphics, how do toy list articles fare in the jump from print to web? (I must note, that while we are supplying the URLs to the online articles, we are unable to reproduce the original printed pages for comparison and posting to Fresh Ideas due to copyright restrictions. For a more in-depth discussion on copyright, check out this BurrellesLuce white paper.)

Here are just a few instances where the web doesn’t reflect the original print.

• FamilyFun magazine recently announced its 18^th annual T.O.Y. (toy of the year) Award winners.  While a number of newspapers picked up the release, publishing a nice array of the accompanying photos alongside, only the Online Athens (Athens Banner-Herald) fully transitioned the article to its website.  
• Another example is from the Chicago Tribune whose Internet version of the article, “Not the Zhu Zhu Pets: 5 more hot toys this holiday season” has none of “the five hot toy” photos that that readers received in the print edition. 
• Even original material can see a loss of content. A full-page article about teaching toys, from the print edition of the Detroit Free Press lost over half of its graphics on the journey to the web.  And the Internet version of this article, appearing on ArizonaCenteral.com, listing “The Best in Tech Toys” gets no pictures whatsoever.

As I’ve stated in prior posts, if you’re not seeing both your print and online coverage than you’re not seeing the full picture – quite literally. For those in the retail industry or in public relations who are trying to reach clients and perspective consumers, the effects of missing graphics could be detrimental.

*Bio: A native of Mesa, Arizona, I graduated from the University of Arizona with a major in Near Eastern Studies. I began my career with BurrellesLuce in 1997 as a reader. As with most readers, I developed a special relationship with my assigned papers – those small town dailies and weeklies of the same flavor that my family had been employed in for two generations. Currently, I hold the position of quality assurance specialist, troubleshooting daily production issues. Outside interests include woodworking, and keeping my wife and dog happy. Twitter: BurrellesLuce; Facebook: BurrellesLuce

Image: www.ev1.pair.com

As a kid I remember hearing the voice-over announcement, that would precede NBC color television shows, “The following is brought to you in Living Color on NBC,” and watching the peacock spread its colorful feathers, thinking wow this is pretty cool. 

This week the first step was taken into a new era of television. When Comcast and General Electric (GE) finalize their deal that will give Comcast a controlling 51 percent stake in NBC Universal (NBCU), it will spawn a media behemoth. As reported in the New York Times, Comcast is agreeing to pay GE $6.5 billion in cash and contribute its own cable channels, such as E! and Style, estimated at $7.25 billion for a total of $13.75 Billion. The new joint venture will be headed up by the current head of NBCU, Jeffrey Zucker.

The significance of this deal lies in the potential derived from combining a TV and movie content creator with a media distributor. Comcast will now offer its extensive customer base to cable channels such as Oxygen and Bravo, NBCU’s movie studio Universal Pictures and the NBC Network.

The integration of Comcast’s internet, mobile phones, and cable with their shiny new toy box filled with NBCU’s extensive library of movies and TV shows is unprecedented.

“In the next five years, more people will be seeing ‘The Tonight Show’ online than on their television sets,” says Paul Levinson, a media analyst at Fordham University in New York. “The convergence will be so extensive that in 10 or 15 years, we won’t be talking television screen versus online because they’ll all be the same screens.”

This deal still has several hurdles ahead; a long regulatory review by the FCC and anti-trust regulators is expected. Several unanswered questions remain, particularly “How does Comcast intend to provide their ‘exclusive’ content to its competitors, like Verizon and Dish Network.

How will this deal affect network TV from a consumer standpoint? Will this mark the beginning of the end of “free TV”? While we wait to see, one thing is certain though: the peacock is once again spreading its wings, only this time it’s to an audience of about 45 million Comcast customers.

Please share your thoughts with the readers of BurrellesLuce Fresh Ideas.

Flickr Image: RonAlmog

by Carol Holden*
Like most people, I start my business day by checking the BurrellesLuce morning news briefing to see what’s up with the competition and the industry as a whole.

Recently, I found two bright spots regarding the health of the traditional media industry.

As reported in Editor & Publisher, in a study recently released by Scarborough Research, data analysis indicates that newspapers are still read in print or online by a critical mass of adults in the U.S. on a daily and weekly basis. “While our data does show that print newspaper readership is slowly declining, it also illustrates that reports about the pending death of the newspaper industry are not supported by audience data,” said Gary Meo, Scarborough Research’s senior vice president of print and digital media services. “Given the fragmentation of media choices, printed newspapers are holding onto their audiences relatively well and this is refreshing news.”

This is certainly refreshing to me as the person directing the BurrellesLuce Media Measurement service as well as being a former employee of a small town newspaper.

The report went on to list the following statistics:

In an average week –

• 79 percent of adults employed in white collar positions read a newspaper in print or online
• 82 percent of adults with household incomes of $100,000 or more read a printed newspaper in print or online
• 84 percent of adults who are college graduates or who have advanced degrees read a printed newspaper in print or online

 Secondly, as reported in Bulldog Reporter’s Daily Dog, a new survey from the Boston Consulting Group asserts that the average news consumer would likely be willing to pay for news online, but respondents insist on unique news stories worthy of buying. “The good news is that, contrary to conventional wisdom, consumers are willing to pay for meaningful content,” said John Rose, senior partner at Boston Consulting Group who leads the firm’s global media sector. “The bad news is that they are not willing to pay much. But cumulatively, these payments could help offset one to three years of anticipated declines in advertising revenue.”

This change carries a lot of implications. Top of my mind is the impact on how Google will search for news and, depending on the sources and the charges, it will likely influence my own RSS options. How will you advise your clients to navigate the new terrain? How will paid content change your online sources for news?

*Bio: I’ve been in the media business all of my adult life, first in newspapers before going full circle and joining BurrellesLuce, where I now direct the Media Measurement department. I’ve always enjoyed meeting and especially listening to the needs of our customers and others in the public relations and communications fields; I welcome sharing ideas through the Fresh Ideas blog. One of my professional passions is providing the type of service to a client that makes them respond, “atta girl” – inspiring our entire team to keep striving to be the best. Although I have been lucky enough to travel through much of Asia and most major U.S. cities for business or pleasure, my free time is now spent with my daughter, visiting family/friends, and of course the Jersey shore. Twitter: @domeasurement LinkedIn: Carol Holden Facebook: BurrellesLuce

Flickr Image: Laura Burlton

by Stephen Lawrence*
In previous postings, I’ve discussed the disparity between newspapers and their web equivalents.  We’ve learned that one-to-one equivalency rarely occurs and that loss of valuable content accompanies such instances when the digital doesn’t equal the print.  This posting covers some of those examples where printed photos don’t make it to the web.

First, I must note, that while we are supplying the URLs to the online articles, we are unable to reproduce the original printed pages for comparison and posting to Fresh Ideas due to copyright restrictions. (For a more in-depth discussion on copyright, check out this BurrellesLuce white paper.)

If you manage public relations for authors, restaurants or fashion clients I promise you’ll find these examples very interesting:

Book Reviews
One of my guilty pleasures, back in the days when I was a reader (that’s a “fancy” term for someone on our production team who searches for articles relevant to a clients reading instructions), was perusing the book review sections of various newspaper as I read them for our clients.  Shots of the book’s cover running alongside the printed article were always handy in capturing my attention and helped make finding the relevant material all the easier. 

When conducting some quality assurance recently, I was reminded of this and found a few examples where the print and online editions of book review images don’t match up:

• The print edition of the Atlanta Journal Constitution eliminated the position of book editor back in 2007 as part of a restructuring program.  They continue to run a full page of reviews every Sunday.  But, there is no web equivalent.
• The Arizona Republic and Dallas Morning News, among others, provide only a text version of the book review.
• An article on Halloween-themed books featured cover shots of four different titles in USA Today.  Three of them were dropped in the on-line version. 

Food Sections
These pages represent valuable real estate for companies promoting new products. The photos themselves generate brand recognition in a market already bursting with crowded shelves.They don’t always make it to the online edition though.  Here’s one example of some “outta sight peanut sauce” and a drink recipe, credited to a major vodka distributor, both lost the supplied photo of its brand.

Fashion
The Financial Times recently printed its annual How to Spend It edition. This 48-page “luxury lifestyle magazine” contained dozens of high-end gift suggestions along with fashion spreads and photos. On the web, the magazine is presented as a standalone Adobe flash website with loads of original content. It’s a great site. But, it just doesn’t seem to be tagged for brand search words. The challenge for PR is while the flash  image looks good it requires a human search for accuracy

A report on fashion accessories inspired by “New Moon” in the Los Angeles Times actually presents more photos on the website than in print.  But, they’re tagged not by the products names, but by the retailer – a common occurrence in fashion pages – which renders search a bit difficult.

Even seemingly simple transitions can lose content.  The October 28^th edition of USA Today ran a nearly half-page article covering the previous night’s Avon Foundation for Women gala.  USA Today’s website picked up the photo of Reese Witherspoon on the red carpet.  Another photo of Fergie along with Courtney Cox didn’t make it, though.

Conclusion: If you’re not monitoring for both your print and online news clips, you’re missing the big picture – quite literally. Even in cases where the photos make it online, you may not be seeing them because of tagging and lack of metadata. Do you think the difference in the print and web edition is a benefit or a detriment to your client(s)?

*Bio: A native of Mesa, Arizona, I graduated from the University of Arizona with a major in Near Eastern Studies. I began my career with BurrellesLuce in 1997 as a reader. As with most readers, I developed a special relationship with my assigned papers – those small town dailies and weeklies of the same flavor that my family had been employed in for two generations. Currently, I hold the position of quality assurance specialist, troubleshooting daily production issues. Outside interests include woodworking, and keeping my wife and dog happy. Twitter: BurrellesLuce; Facebook: BurrellesLuce

Flickr Image: kevindooley

Not surprisingly, Huffington touted citizen journalism, which she believes can help make journalism better. In fact, The Huffington Post had a citizen journalism project during the election, which broke some big stories. Currently, they are asking citizen journalists to tell the stories about the economic crisis.

Some other takeaways from her keynote:

We need to look for the drama. Huffington gave the example of a story she recently wrote with the headline, “Biden Should Resign.” Had she headlined it, “The U.S. Should Pull-out of Afghanistan,” which is what the story was really about, very few people would have read it. The drama gave the story legs, and allowed her to tout it on talk shows. She also suggested using drama in communications to do good and gain support for worthy causes.

She wrapped her presentation encouraging everyone to listen. When we are not talking, we can hear what others have to say and gain knowledge from others.

What are you doing to encourage listening in your organization?

My latest project has consisted of compiling, cataloging, and comparing the Garden State’s newspapers to their respective websites.  Not in terms of content, though, only for presence.  (A discussion of the big “C” – content – will come later.)

In terms of circulation, here’s a fun fact that struck me regarding the N.J. 200. (Note:  These numbers are based primarily on the 2008 Audit

Flickr Image: erjkprunczyk

Bureau of Circulations figures.)

• 95 percent are less than 50,000
• 77 percent are less than 25,000
• 46 percent are less than 10,000

Almost half of the N.J. 200 have a circulation of around 10,000 or less.  Yes, while many of these are local editions, they’re still individually published even in these dark days for the newspaper industry.

Not so simple was the cataloging. The first lesson I learned from this project is not to trust the website address that many papers publish as part of their masthead.  Re-directs and dead links are common. Thanks to the New Jersey Press Association (http://www.njpa.org/njpa/), I was able to fill in the blanks.

Another interesting discovery: very few papers have stand-alone sites.  In fact, the vast majority are relegated to local content pages on larger sites maintained by their publishing group.  For example, the nj.com site hosts the content of a dozen New Jersey papers whose combined print circulation exceeds 1,000,000.  Northjersey.com, centraljersey.com, and southjerseylocalnews.com gather together major elements of content from their associated papers.  Then there are numerous smaller papers which are distributed out of the My Town Navigator Network (http://www.mytownnavigator.com), which is closer to a community, than a newspaper homepage. Only five percent of the NJ 200 had no locatable web presence.   

How does the print to web content ratio suffer in aggregate sites such as these?   There are some very lean sites out there; most only present the ‘above the fold’ stories. My guess is that local newspapers, such as the N.J. 200, aren’t the only ones holding back some of their content from the web.

In my next post, I will discuss the next “C” – comparison – and talk about what content is missing from newspaper sites.

*Bio: A native of Mesa, Arizona, I graduated from the University of Arizona with a major in Near Eastern Studies. I began my career with BurrellesLuce in 1997 as a reader. As with most readers, I developed a special relationship with my assigned papers – those small town dailies and weeklies of the same flavor that my family had been employed in for two generations. Currently, I hold the position of quality assurance specialist, troubleshooting daily production issues. Outside interests include woodworking, and keeping my wife and dog happy. Twitter: BurrellesLuce; Facebook: BurrellesLuce