Friday, May 16, 2014
Saturday, May 3, 2014
Saturday, December 28, 2013
Which proves that many of today's communications approaches we hold up as new, someone somewhere has tried before.
(Source - Johnson:The Path to Power by Robert Caro.)
Saturday, November 16, 2013
Tuesday, October 22, 2013
Despite challenges, Craig gave government agencies a tick of approval.
Friday, August 9, 2013
They must be scratching their heads and cursing the backroom operatives who dreamed up this campaign to 'win votes rather than stop boats'
For several weeks ads like this have been appearing in Australian newspapers and broadcast on radio.
Sunday, August 4, 2013
So keep a mouse ready and eye out to see how the two candidates use these new channels in their bids to win high office.
Among the things that would indicate the candidates are serious about social, are their:
- Frequency of using social media to get their Election messages out.
- Level of interaction with followers and fans or do they stick with one way conversation?
- Cross linking to others' commentary such as media and third party endorsements to portray credibility.
- Ability to persuade voters to donate money or volunteer their time.
- Use of imagery to bring emotion into messaging and cut through the clutter.
- Willingness to bypass traditional media and use social to break news.
- Capacity to inspire others to produce and share favourable content.
...and of course look out for novel or unusual online tactics as the campaign unfolds.
Sunday, November 4, 2012
Monday, September 6, 2010
Monday, June 28, 2010
Sunday, August 30, 2009
We were half way through it when we both realised that we were each talking about a completely different issue. No wonder the conversation was not going very far.
In recent months I have been involved with two organisations where the same thing has happened. Senior managers assumed the people they wanted to reach knew what they were talking about. In both cases the intended audiences knew little if anything about the subject.
Both organisations exhibited self referential communications: a symptom which runs along the lines of I know what I mean therefore everyone else must know what I mean.
As communicators it is very easy assume because we have invested time and effort in producing key messages, designing brochures, distributing media releases etc, that people - apart from us - know what we are on about.
There must be some high sounding term in the science of communications to describe this effect. I'm not sure what it is so I simply describe it as the assumption effect and it has probably been the root cause of countless failed PR and marketing campaigns.
Never assume the people you want to reach know what you are talking about until they demonstrate that knowledge. That sounds simple but I wonder how many times your personal or organisational communications have been de-railed by making false assumptions at the outset.
That's why it always pay to market research your audiences, and if the data or observation are not there, never assume they either know or care about what you want to communicate.
Saturday, June 20, 2009
The same friend has "lent" Mr Rudd a utility truck (ute) which he uses as a mobile billboard in his Brisbane electorate.
The Opposition leader Malcolm Turnbull sees this a a flagrant abuse of Prime Ministerial power while Mr Rudd denies the accusations. An Auditor General's investigation into the matter kicks off shortly but right now it's a case of he said she said.
One PR outcome is certain. Either the Prime Minister or the Opposition Leader is likely to emerge with damage to his personal brand.
Mr Rudd has consistently advocated for open and transparent government. If the accusation is proven the Prime Minister's credibility and reputation will take a hit. He will be seen as failing to walk the talk on ministerial accountability and broken a key PR commandment: you can't say one thing then do another.
In the end if Mr Turnbull's charges fail he will be criticised for misleading the public. And many people will wonder why he chose to divert the national attention to a trivial matter and way from key issues such as climate change and an uncertain economy.
Meanwhile the rest of us will watch this issue unfold - mostly in the media - as both men go all out to prove their communications credibility. It's likely to prove a fascinating case study in media relations, reputation management perhaps even crisis communications.
Thursday, February 26, 2009
Wednesday, February 4, 2009
Or is it social media spam?
Sunday, December 7, 2008
US viral marketer Jalali Hartman looks at Obama online, and concludes that by dominating the Internet Obama's message carried further and faster than his rival's John McCain.
Hartman's statistics tell it all. Obama had 5.5 million visitors to his website each month. McCain had 2.5m visitors. There were 442 000 Obama Youtube videos compared to 221 300 items featuring McCain. Obama had over 3 million friends on Facebook while McCain registered just over half a million supporters.
Obama's online campaign used three strategies others could use to promote their own issues and causes.
- Share content Obama campaign managers had a no hassle copyright policy. They willingly shared the candidate's speeches, images, official logos etc with online supporters and encouraged them to re-purpose it for their own needs. Supporters could also download official campaign signs, literature and guidelines and receive up to date news of events.
- Connect Facebook and other social networking sites connected supporters . Both Obama and wife Michelle had their own pages and friends created their own affiliated groups. The campaign also used Twitter (the micro blogging application) to keep followers informed about campaign developments such as appearances and speeches.
- Make it easy to create community The official campaign website was structured to allow individuals to organise within their communities by offering tools, contacts and opportunities to share their own stories.
Obama's mastery of the online world contrasts sharply with the efforts of Australia's political parties in the 2007 Federal Election. A March 2008 report by the Australian Centre for Public Communication showed use of new media by Australian politicians remains low.
Monday, September 22, 2008
And compared with internet marketing in the US Election our local parties are stone age when it comes to the on-line age.
The US Election is running at the same time as our local race but the approach is completely different. Obama and McCain are all over the Internet, on Facebook, MySpace, YouTube and other on-line platforms. They are cleverly using blogs, video, sound files, downloadable programs, computer games and other social media tools to reach Americans.
As the Canberra Times reported we believe there is a 1998 approach to the Internet in the local 2008 campaign. And the ACT parties are failing to reach voters through their keyboards.
A few parties have ventured into new media territory in an effort to woo younger voters. But they show they just don't get the youth-oriented culture of social media when they disable the comments section on their YouTube videos and their Facebook ads feature candidates in collar and tie.
It's a shame ACT politicians are not fully using the new internet tools. Besides being cheap to use, they would allow more two way conversations between candidates and voters beyond the traditional door knock and mall meetings on Saturday morning.
Tuesday, September 16, 2008
He used a colloquial term‘lipstick on a pig’ which is a colourful way of saying you can’t make something attractive if it plainly isn’t.
The Republicans took this as a criticism of their Vice Presidential candidate, Sarah Palin, who the week before had used a lipstick reference in her acceptance speech.
The media picked up on the ‘he said she said’ verbal seesawing that followed between the two parties. The air turned thick with claim and counter claim about lipstick, pigs and personal attacks.
What a waste of precious time and energy that all was. Especially when global warming, terrorism, the state of the US economy and other key issues call for immediate attention.
The Public Relations Society of America was the only group to emerge looking good. On behalf of its 32 000 members the Society called on both the Democrat and Republic campaign managers to commit to the highest standards of ethical practice in their campaign communications and forgo innuendo, incomplete information, surrogate messaging and character attacks.
It asked both campaign managers to sign pledges to this effect but have yet to hear back from either. The Society also started up a Facebook group, “Clean & Fair Campaign 2008,” as a quasi petition to support their stand on honest and open communications in the Elections.
For years I have belonged to the Public Relations Institute of Australia, the Australian Marketing Institute and the International Association of Business Communicators. Yet I can’t recall those professional bodies saying anything in public about honesty in public communications.
Well done PRSA for taking the lead.