February 3, 2012
This week’s news regarding the Susan G. Komen Foundation and Planned Parenthood sent shock waves around the world. Regardless of where you stand on the issue, this has been an important lesson in the power of social media and individuals to affect a decision.
This has affected me, and many of my friends and colleagues, in a variety of ways:
- As a communications professional I have read many posts analyzing the communication strategies of both organizations. There will undoubtedly be many more.
- The situation also puts the spotlight on the research smart corporations should complete before selecting community partners.
- As an individual, there are also obvious implications for personal funding choices.
The need for this research doesn’t change because the issue changes. Research and a strategic focus should always be part of a giving strategy.
I don’t want to get into who’s right and who’s wrong here but instead provide a guide to choosing nonprofits you support – as an individual or as a corporation. If we haven’t seen anything else this week, we’ve certainly seen the power social media has in swaying public opinion.
I’m sure you’d agree you want to know where your hard-earned dollars are going. It’s not that time consuming to make sure the vast majority of your check will go to direct services. Merriam Webster defines these as:
“active service on cases and work with patients as distinguished from staff functions”
While I understand completely the need for administrative costs, it’s important to understand the details behind those numbers. Here’s a portion of my post from January 20, 2010 detailing the research you can do before writing that check:
In talking with my children about the importance of giving and the school’s drive, we’ve also had to teach them a bit about what unfortunately might be called the seamier side of fundraising. As we saw after 9/11 and the 2005 tsunami, there are unscrupulous fundraisers who are more than happy to take your hard-earned dollars. It’s important to take a few minutes to make sure your money goes where you want it to go. Make sure you give to organizations you trust, or that your friends trust.
Guidestar and Charity Navigator both offer services that help you learn about nonprofits. United Way of America is another organization that thoroughly screens their partners before providing them funds. And, of course, there are any number of blogs and experts out there to tell you what to do as well. One of my favorite public relations people, Shonali Burke, offered her thoughts about the aftershocks on fundraising.
If you have the time, an organization’s IRS Form 990 is a great source of information. Pay close attention to the percentages of funds that go to “program services” as compared to administrative costs. Program services funds are actually getting to those the organization helps while administrative costs are generally overhead. Personally, organizations I like to support keep their overhead to no more than 10% of expenses.
November 29, 2011
This phrase from Sir Walter Scott (Scottish author & novelist, 1771 – 1832) has been coming to mind a lot lately as we learn of communicators practicing in deceiving manners. It’s very frustrating for the thousands of professionals who practice with ethical standards and commitment. It doesn’t seem that hard to me to observe the tenets of the professional Code of Ethics.
The basic tenets that guide my personal life also guide my professional life. I wouldn’t have it any other way:
I pledge to conduct myself professionally, with truth, accuracy, fairness, and responsibility to the public; to improve my individual competence and advance the knowledge and proficiency of the profession through continuing research and education.
While the basic premise of the PRSA Code might seem fairly easy to understand and abide by, it seems some in the profession, and also many in the media, are hell-bent on showing what unethical professionals we are.
Take a few of the most recent examples. In each of these cases, professionalism, honesty, fairness and responsibility were overtaken by greed and ego. Additionally, once uncovered the perpetrators really didn’t seem to understand what they had done was wrong.
- Utah Mayor Mike Winder created a fake identity and provided his local newspaper with articles about his town…quoting the Mayor. He also used a guy’s photo found on Google Images as his alter ego.
He says he just used a different name to get the publicity his city deserved. But he had to lie to get it so did his city really win in this case? I don’t think so.
- LA-based Coglan Consulting Group created fake news sites for their clients so it looked like their clients were getting more news coverage. Gini Dietrich covered this quite well last week on SpinSucks as did PR pro Denis Wolcott when the story first broke in September.
In this case, I can’t really find a statement from either Coglan or their clients, namely the Central Basin Water District. So…no apology? No commitment to make changes in how you do business? Unbelievable.
- Facebook hired Burson-Marsteller to smear Google in the press. Then, when exposed, the agency deleted Facebook posts on its page about the incident. Burson really didn’t do a great job of cleaning up the mess.
This one hit especially hard because Burson is one of the oldest and most respected agencies in the US. It was founded by Hal Burson, one of the fathers of modern public relations. The agency apologized (called lukewarm by many) and promised to make sure their employees understand more about the code of ethics.
- Reverb Communication wrote fake product reviews for their software customers about a year ago. The FTC cited them but many media put all PR pros in this bucket.
In this case, Reverb said there were no rules against what they did. I was reminded of my Mom who would regularly ask us…if he asked you to jump off a bridge would you do that too? The answer, of course, was a sheepish no.
What’s missing from each of these stories is someone to say – hey don’t do that. It’s wrong. But also, what were the leaders at each company, client, agency or organization saying? For that matter, where were all the employees involved? It’s hard to believe it got this far without someone raising a flag. But I think it takes some guts to raise the flag today, when jobs are tight. However, one still has to feel good about going to work.
We need to feel okay in our jobs when we question a decision, especially when it’s a question based on honesty, transparency and decency.
One that’s so far from what we were taught as children we know it’s wrong. And, as senior leaders, we need to provide an environment where that line of questioning is allowed and even supported. We need to listen respectfully and promise to change. In fact, we need to teach ethical practices, demonstrate what high standards are, and reward those who support the ethical practice of public relations.
August 9, 2011
I was in a meeting recently with a group of seasoned professional communicators. As seems to regularly happen, someone was lamenting the fact they don’t have a seat at the decision making table within their organization. Through the course of the conversation I began to wonder if we bring this on ourselves?
- Do we understand what senior management wants from the communications team?
- Do we offer insight into the stakeholders they don’t get from other sources?
- Do we understand the customer in a way senior management doesn’t but should?
- Can we articulate a strategy that shows we understand what they need?
And…do we offer insight regularly and in a way they want to hear it. Not that we need to say what they want to hear. But we do need to speak in language they understand.
- Do we know enough about the activities of competitors and stakeholders that we can answer questions on the spot?
- Do we appreciate and understand management’s goals or are we always trying to sell our own?
And, my favorite…
Are we offering more than media relations? Public relations today is about much more than sending out a press release.
Instead, it’s a complex series of multi-disciplinary strategies that require analysis and understanding before use. In fact, it’s often advisable to offer management a series of options where they could select from different options.
As professionals, we need to be able to demonstrate the numerous tools in the public relations tool box. It’s not that imperative the senior manager/executive understand how to use these tools, or really even use them. However, they must know that their communications professionals do.
If we don’t understand the perspective and vision of senior management; we can’t expect to have that seat. Because, quite frankly, we aren’t helping them.
I would suggest that these questions, and likely many more, should be front and center before we consider requesting that seat. In addition, find ways to gain some understanding of the language of business. It will make it easier to speak management’s language.
Have you gotten a seat at the table? What did you do to get it? What advice do you have for professional communicators still angling for a way in?
November 10, 2010
Note: This is the second in a series of election posts.
This familiar phrase came to mind several times during this year’s political season. So does the image of Pinocchio’s nose growing in the famous children’s story. Candidates and their supporters often proclaimed outrageous statements without first checking facts. It seems the desire to make noise and create negative attention for an opponent was often more important than accuracy.
All this does is further erode trust in our public officials and the electoral process. Voters want to know why TO vote for someone, or what the person can OFFER. They tire easily when things get negative and especially sensational. Strong political campaigns and candidates tell a story about why the person or initiative will help the audience.
Research shows negative campaigning does work so that’s likely why it’s continuing but it doesn’t really explain why the untruthful campaigning continues. What I don’t think works is lying or embellishing. This is also becoming more of an issue resulting in the growth of websites such as factcheck.org.
Additionally, the tremendous growth in social media since the 2008 campaign means that virtually anyone can call themselves a journalist. Bloggers, candidates or individuals with some influence could send a message that was passed around social media circles in rapid-fire fashion without regard to the truth. As you can imagine, this could be quickly damaging to a candidate.
One of the roles I had on Senator Lisa Murkowski’s campaign was to monitor Twitter and Facebook. It quickly became apparent that individuals outside Alaska were attempting to influence the election through their accusations. One, especially, was so outrageous I won’t give it credence here. However, it was retweeted hundreds of times by the end of the day since the writer was “influential” among a group of conservative voters.
The challenge was in deciding which rumors merited a response taking us away from our strategy and message. Throughout the day, our team monitored traditional and social media to determine if changes in messaging strategy were needed. Interestingly, supporters addressed the vast majority of challenges on our Facebook page while the majority of untruths/rumors on Twitter did not reach most Alaskans.
As a result, we were able to stay mostly on message. What we did do, however, was modify emphasis based on feedback from research, more than from the social media universe. This allowed us to respond to what OUR audience wanted rather than the background noise.
I do feel, however, this may change over time as even more professional journalists turn to social media for information and sources. Just as professional journalists abide by a code of ethics, so should bloggers. Many rules are yet to be written for the free-wheeling community but I don’t believe this means slanderous writings should be left unchallenged. What do you think?
If you just cant’ get enough, check out these references for more midterm lies.
Coming next: Your Mother Would Be Ashamed if She Knew You Said That
January 20, 2010
Today’s fundraising has come a long way from yesterday’s penny drives.
Like many of you, I am shocked by the devastation in Haiti. The people there have struggled so long and worked to improve their lives and now are faced with starting over again as the result of Mother Nature’s 7.0 strike. It seems unimaginable but we all see the pictures and hear the stories throughout the day.
I am also struck by the generosity of individual people and governments around the world to give of their time, their talents and their money to help the people of Haiti. Earlier today, Geoff Livingston wrote about five social media lessons learned from the quake and they really show how far we’ve come in the past 5-10 years.
Social media tools and the news media have quickly become carriers of messages from those in need as well as ways to give money. Cell phone carriers are passing through donations based on text messaging raising more than $20 million at last report. It’s incredible to watch and is certainly a long way from the penny drives we had when I was in grade school.
Since my children (14 and 17) were born, they’ve learned the importance of giving to others in need. I am really gratified they have been listening to their parents. Together, they have given more than $100 of their own money to the Haitian fund drive at their high school. Mind you there’s an incentive for the class that raises the most money but still, $100 from a child’s pocket is a lot of cash. One class raised more than $500 today, all part of a Model UN project at the school, the result of these children seeing a real need and having the desire to participate.
In talking with my children about the importance of giving and the school’s drive, we’ve also had to teach them a bit about what unfortunately might be called the seamier side of fundraising. As we saw after 9/11 and the 2005 tsunami, there are unscrupulous fundraisers who are more than happy to take your hard-earned dollars. It’s important to take a few minutes to make sure your money goes where you want it to go. Make sure you give to organizations you trust, or that your friends trust.
Guidestar and Charity Navigator both offer services that help you learn about nonprofits. United Way of America is another organization that thoroughly screens their partners before providing them funds. And, of course, there are any number of blogs and experts out there to tell you what to do as well. One of my favorite public relations people, Shonali Burke, offered her thoughts about the aftershocks on fundraising.
If you have the time, an organization’s IRS Form 990 is a great source of information. Pay close attention to the percentages of funds that go to “program services” as compared to administrative costs. Program services funds are actually getting to those the organization helps while administrative costs are generally overhead. Personally, organizations I like to support keep their overhead to no more than 10% of expenses.
In the end, what’s most important is that we help the people of Haiti recover from this crisis and give generously. We most certainly know that they need it more than we do.
Photo credit: r-z
