It’s Thursday, and my last class is on Friday. As I write this I have one presentation to deliver, one assignment to assemble and hand in (having done all the actual work) and then it’s off to my field placement. I will bid goodbye to school forever (or at least until the next time I get it in my head that I need to go back to school).

I’ve made some good friends, and I’ve learned a lot. I’m devoting this farewell post to sharing some of the friends and resources that I’ve found.

So, without further adieu, here are some awesome websites for PR pros and PR students to follow:

Ragan’s PR Daily

The Toronto Star

The Globe and Mail

Brandchannel

Mashable

Gawker

The Virtual Voyeur

The PR Voyeur

See Them Play

Tiny Noise

HeatherMacD.tumblr

Cool Things the Internet Did

The Fashionist

Every one of these web resources is either useful for PR pros or written by PR pros. If you are just entering the industry, or if you want to see what other people in the biz are up to, I would strongly recommend reading the pages on this list.

Note: Newspapers are Toronto-centric, but then I live in Toronto so there’s that. If you live somewhere else read another couple of newspapers instead.

The General

The general is the safeguard of the state.

If the safeguard is complete, the state is surely strong.

If the safeguard is flawed, the state is surely weak.

We are returning again to the idea of the communicator as general. When we represent an organization we are safeguarding one of their most valuable assets: their reputation. This is a powerful responsibility. After all, it is easy to see the damage a fumbled PR campaign can cause. And there are so many fumbled PR campaigns.

In the case of the Invisible Children fiasco, the failures have been hashed over already. In short:

  • Invisible Children was insufficiently aware of the thoughts and needs of the population they purported to support.
  • Invisible Children retained too much of the funds they raised for internal efforts rather than supporting their population.
  • Invisible Children was viewed as acting in a neo-colonial manner through the placement of Jason Russell as the protagonist of the Kony 2012 narrative.

It doesn’t matter that Russell was a high-ranking member of the Invisible Children organization. He was effectively acting as a communicator and, in this capacity, he failed completely. We can, however, learn from his failure. One of the key lessons: a communicator should show humility. When we frame the narrative around ourselves rather than the publics we want to reach out to, we are failing to communicate well.

Of course, not every campaign is a failure.

By being creative, and engaging our publics we can enhance the reputation of our organizations. Canadian Tire’s tree powered by Christmas wishes might have been a little bit on the gimmicky side, but by combining genuineness, creativity and an engaged model they managed to enhance the reputation of the venerable Canadian brand at a time 0f year absolutely crucial to consumer retail.

Enter the C-Suite

The general being capable and the ruler not interfering is victory.

If the professional communicator is a general then the executives and directors the communicator reports to are the “feudal lords,” the kings and emperors generals reported to.

It’s crucially important that a communicator gain the trust of the executives within his organization. After all, it doesn’t matter how skilled a PR professional is if the c-suite nixes all his ideas.

As much as we might feel the urge we can’t work around cautious executives, nor can we ignore them. The reasons for this should be obvious:

  • It will get you fired.
  • It’s unethical.
  • It’s counter-productive.

In other words, it’s just not an option. Instead it’s necessary to  build a relationship with these executives which makes us somebody they will listen to.

There are a few things we can do to achieve this:

  1. Learn the corporate culture. Understand what is expected of the c-suite’s trusted advisers. Be flexible and accommodate the organization’s way of doing things.
  2. Get to know your bosses. If they know you they are more likely to trust you.
  3. Be proactive. If you are getting things done before they blow up the executives will come to appreciate you.
  4. Succeed consistently. Any organization worth working for will reward success with additional trust and responsibility. If you want to be able to convince the c-suite to go along with your big ideas show them you are worthy of trust with the details.

A break from the Sunzi PR project for a moment to reflect on what I’ve learned about social media and corporate communications over the last year. I’d say that there are three lessons that, more than anything else, have impacted my perspective on social media communications in specific, and corporate communications in general.

1: Be Genuine!

Honestly, of all the things I learned in this program this is the thing that came of the greatest surprise to me. After all, everybody’s heard of the disingenuous PR flack, right? But one thing we’ve been told time and again in the CCPR program is that, to be effective as a public relations professional it’s not enough that we be honest, although our codes of conduct require honesty, beyond that we have to be genuine.

This means choosing our clients with enough care that we don’t have to bite our tongues and swallow our bile when we go to represent them. This means being truly interested and truly passionate about our clients and about the things they say and do.

2: Be creative!

This was less of a surprise than my discovery about genuineness but it was no less important. A boring PR campaign won’t go anywhere. If we want  to engage our audiences, and not just push messages out to them we have to be creative.

Sometimes this can be difficult. There are certainly regulatory restrictions, for instance, on being overly creative with your annual reports. Notwithstanding such ethical and legal constraints though, a successful communicator is one who uses some creativity.

This is especially true in digital spaces. Social media is ephemeral, and a boring tweet is fast forgotten. If we want to engage our audiences we need to grab their attention. This means we must use all the pencils in the box.

3: Be conversational

This is, in some ways, the hardest of all. When writing a book the conversation is entirely one way. The author says things and the audience, for their part, take in what the author says. This is also true in visual art. The photographer or painter creates a message and the audience receives the message. Coming from a background in visual arts and writing, it is sometimes too easy for me to try and push a message.

But this doesn’t fly in social media. It doesn’t fly in any corporate communication really. It doesn’t matter how genuinely you communicate your message. It doesn’t matter how creatively you frame it. If you are pushing the message without engaging in conversation you won’t get far.

A successful communicator must be genuine, creative and conversational. Although I learned a lot about planning, about strategic communication and about the minutiae of writing SMRs, press releases, copy and proposals, I would say that these three concepts are ultimately the truly important lessons.

Forward

Two small notes before we begin. First, an apology for the lateness of this post. I’ve had a couple of personal problems in the last two weeks that have pushed blogging to the back of my priority list. Happily these problems are mostly resolved at this time and so I’ll be returning to my regular schedule. Look for another blog post this Friday as usual.

Second Chapter 3 of the Sunzi is a core chapter to the entire work. It is a lengthy chapter and covers a lot of ground. Because of this I will be splitting Chapter three into two sections. The Friday post will be the conclusion.

Taking Whole

Taking a state whole is superior.

Destroying it is inferior to this.

The concept of “taking whole” is one of the key ideas within the Sunzi. In short the concept is that it is better to capture than to destroy. This was certainly the case in classical period warfare. If you were to raze a city, destroy a people and salt the earth you couldn’t then grow crops or tax the people who lived there.

When a communicator has a strategic objective he should strive to the same goal. This may seem an intuitively evident idea, and yet, there have been instances where communicators have not behaved in accordance with this principle.

It’s fully possible that Kardashian’s publicist had very good reason for his grievances. A 72 hour marriage which included an $18,000,000 pay day seems like a publicity stunt. It’s possible Jaxson disagreed about going in a direction like that. It’s also possible he felt cheated if he expected to share in the profits of the stunt. Regardless of whether his motives were noble or not though, by airing his grievance in the media he was not taking whole – he was attempting an act of petty destruction.

And I’m willing to bet it will have hurt him.

After all, think about the number of celebrities who depend on publicity stunts to remain in the public eye. If the Kardashian wedding was a particularly egregious example of this behaviour, compared to Gaga’s outlandish outfits or Colbert’s abortive presidential campaigns, it is still an action in keeping with a certain class of celebrity. Considering that Jaxson’s distaste for that stunt, however motivated, led to him attempting to sabotage his former client, what is the likelihood that other clients will trust him?

Don’t battle

Therefore, one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the most skilful.

Subduing the other’s military without battle is the most skilful.

In the last chapter, we talked about keeping battles short and about avoiding hard targets. Now I will go one step further. It is true that conflict will sometimes happen in a communicator’s career, but it is crucial that a communicator learn early on only to engage a conflict when it is necessary. It is much better to succeed in your objectives without conflict altogether.

Of course, at the most basic level this means: avoid picking fights. If you are not engaged in a situation of conflict with a competitor it is best to keep communication involving the competitor cordial at best.  In fact, many business sites suggest that it is best business practice to build relationships with friendly competitors. In fact, professional organizations, and business associations are effectively  networks of friendly competition.

So if you can succeed in an objective without getting into a conflict why waste the time, the energy and the danger to your reputation that this entails. Be nice to your competitors. Be kind to your clients. It’s just sound business.

Whether for-profit or non-profit, any organization will have competitors. These competitors may be organizations that compete for funds or for market share. They could be people who oppose the practices of the organization.

Where there is competition there is conflict. Professional communicators will frequently be front-and-centre in these conflicts. We do this when we manage damage to our image. We do this when we promote our organization.

Considering this, it’s important to know how to handle these conflicts.

Walled cities

Attacking walled cities, one’s strength is diminished.

When we find ourselves in a position of conflict with rival organizations or hostile publics it’s best not to go at them directly. This should be self-evident, and yet people often engage in communications campaigns based around trying to tear down a rival. The problem with a campaign based around attacking a rival is that, even if successful, it is an exhausting process, likely to produce a pyrrhic victory.

In the McLibel case, the damage to McDonald’s reputation far outweighed any benefit the conclusion of the case brought them. It has been more than 15 years since Steel and Morris were ordered to pay McDonald’s £40,000 in damages and yet the phrase McLibel still conjures the image of two impoverished activists fighting a powerful and faceless corporation.

The McLibel example also points out another issue that matters when we, as communicators, enter into conflict with others.

Keep it short

One has heard of foolish speed but has not observed skillful prolonging.

There is nothing to be gained by letting a conflict drag on. It’s true that it is certainly possible to act too hastily. But while well planned, timely action can allow somebody to resolve a conflict with minimal trouble, letting a dispute linger will do nothing good for you at all. 

This was evident in the McLibel case. McDonald’s took the offensive to protect its reputation over environmental practices of the 1980s. The case began in 1990 and carried on for more than half a decade before the previously mentioned pyrrhic victory for McDonald’s in 1996. In 2000, fallout from the trial was still being discussed, frequently in sources as influential as Naomi Klein’s book, No Logo.

By the 10th anniversary of the McLibel trial, it was clear that despite losing in court, Steel and Morris had done more to forward their communications objectives through the trial than McDonald’s had.

If McDonald’s hadn’t dug in on the court case, if the organization hadn’t allowed a communications issue to devolve into a six-year legal battle, Steel and Morris’ anti-McDonald’s book would probably have been long-since forgotten.

Time is Money

When they are distant there is distant transport.

When they are distant and there is distant transport, the hundred clans are impoverished.

When soldiers are near things sell dearly.

When things sell dearly, wealth is exhausted.

The McLibel trial cost McDonald’s £10,000,000. It was awarded £40,000 and was not awarded costs. Communicators have to operate within fixed budgets. If we let issues drag on, if we try to resolve conflicts by tearing down the walls of our opponents we drain the coffers of our parent organizations. This isn’t good business.

This is the first in a series of blog posts that will look at the Sunzi, widely known as the Art of War, in the context of public relations.

The first chapter of the Sunzi is titled Appraisals. It serves as an introduction to the work and focuses on two key issues. The first issue is why the subject matters; the second is a discussion on the qualities of a great general. In this introductory entry I will address the same issues: why the Sunzi is relevant to public relations and why the qualities the Sunzi ascribed to a general are of value to a PR professional.

A War of Ideas

The military is a great matter of the state.

It is the ground of death and life.

The Tao of survival or extinction.

One cannot but examine it.

The use of the word “Tao” is key here. In this context the word means a way in a formal sense – a codified method. The Sunzi is not addressing “the military” as a collection of people but rather as a collection of ideas. This is valuable, because systems of ideas can be translated to new settings without losing their inherent value.

This is the value of the Sunzi. On the surface it is a book about warfare. In fact, the Denma translation group suggests that Warfighting, one of the key military manuals of the US Marine Corps, owes a great debt to the Sunzi. And yet, one need not be a soldier to derive value from the Sunzi.
This is, in part, because the Sunzi has very little to do with tactics. Instead the Sunzi provides a way of viewing the world. This lense, which the Denma translation group calls “taking whole” is easily communicable to any walk of life. Public Relations, along with many management professions, is a very strong fit for this way of being.

The Communicator as General

The general is knowledge, trustworthiness, courage and strictness.
The merit of a leader who can display these qualities is clear enough in most settings. It is important to understand that it isn’t that a general shows these qualities. It isn’t even sufficient for a general to live by these qualities.
Instead, the key to understanding this principle lies in the understanding that the general is these things. They are fundamental to his nature.
Each of these qualities is fundamental to a successful communicator.

Knowledge

A communicator who acts without knowledge is doomed to failure. Before we act, we research. Afterward we evaluate. What separates the professional communicator from the flack, more than anything else, is our commitment to knowledge. A great communicator, like a great general, lives and dies by what she knows.

Trustworthiness

Trustworthiness is built upon truthfulness. Ivy Lee, the “father of PR,” understood this, and it has remained a fundamental component of our profession ever since. A good communicator must be trusted by his audiences, by his clients and by the journalists with whom he works. In order for us to communicate the messages we want with a minimum of cynicism this is fundamentally important.

Courage

A communicator must not be afraid to tell her client an uncomfortable truth. She must never be unable to manage a crisis for fear of a misstep. We navigate perilous seas in our chosen profession. Fear could cripple us. As Frank Herbert said:

Fear is the mind-killer. Fear is the little-death that brings total obliteration. I will face my fear.

And so must we. When you fear but you face that fear and act in a way that must be done, this is true courage.

Strictness

In some ways strictness seems, to people in our culture, somehow less fundamentally virtuous than knowledge, trustworthiness or courage. And yet, for a communicator, it is no less important. At the very least a talented communicator is strict with himself. Deadlines must be met. Standards must be followed. Details must be observed and critical paths adhered to. In this sense, at the very least, strictness is as much a virtue for a communicator as any of the others.

On December 8, Claire McWatt said: “3 mins is nowhere near enough time 2 make an argument re:cuts AND offer solutions… It would appear being informed isn’t a priority.” She was expressing a view commonly held by quite a few deputants, city hall bloggers and regular tweeters on the #topoli hashtag. Evidence would support that three minutes was not enough time. Many deputants were cut off before they were able to finish their deputations due to time constraints. The problem was not limited to any single deputant; it was widespread.

Even so I must respectfully disagree with Claire.

Frankly the issues faced by City Hall are contentious ones and a lot of people in Toronto have strongly held opinions regarding what must be protected from cuts. Every one of those people should have the opportunity to express themselves. This requires that some time constraints be put in place. I have been watching many well-meaning members of the public and representatives of valuable organizations run out of time to depute largely because they didn’t cut to the heart of their concerns. Instead they repeated points, put supporting information up front before getting to key messages and stumbled over scripted speeches that hadn’t been timed sufficiently.

As the budget process goes forward there will undoubtedly be more deputations. For that matter, the budget committee meeting of Dec. 8 and 9 is technically not over yet. So, moving forward, when opportunities come up for people to depute again, whether on the budget or on future issues facing City Hall, there are a few things that can be done to ensure deputations communicate what matters.

1: Decide what REALLY matters

This can be hard because to the deputant, everything in the deputation probably matters quite a lot. So the question becomes not “what matters?” but rather “what matters most?” As an example, a deputant might want to argue against cuts to TTC service. There are multiple issues here: the TTC is over crowded. TTC riders can’t afford fare hikes. Urban transit is environmentally friendly. Cars are heavily subsidized.  So which of these thoughts matters most? Let’s say you decide that what matters most is that the TTC is over crowded. This becomes your core message. Other messages fall by the wayside, or if they are included they are only there to support the key message – that there are more people using the TTC than there is capacity.

A person passionately deputing for enhanced TTC service may feel this is somewhat of a disservice to their cause. However this could not be less true. What matters isn’t that you tell the city council everything. What matters is that the council takes away from your deputation a message that forwards your ultimate goal – in this case to protect the TTC from cuts.

2: Put the most important information up front

Lead with whatever information is most vital. Start with the basic questions: who? what? where? when? why? how? Then provide the information to support those basics. When you’ve done that, if you have any leftover time, you can fill in the background stuff. Let’s us the example of childcare this time.

First you should be saying what is needed, who needs it, where it needs to be, when it is needed, why it is needed and how it should be provided. Then you get into explaining those things. Explain why low income families need subsidized childcare, or how a reduction in subsidized childcare spaces costs the city economy, or why the city should be paying rather than the province. After that you can get into the background of your group, or testimonials from all the people you’ve helped.

Ranking your information this way will help to ensure that you won’t fail to communicate your key message. It’ll also help you identify what the most important information really is.

3: Practise, practise, practise

Most deputants are going to have plenty of time to practise before they get a chance to speak. Hopefully they also prepared their statements well in advance of the deputations. Because of this, every deputant should know precisely how long it takes for them to deliver their statement, to within a threshold of about 5-10 seconds.

If a deputant knows the deputation is too long, he or she can shorten it prior, cutting away any extraneous information, anything that doesn’t directly support the objective of the deputation. Remember that deputation is communication with purpose. If the objective isn’t supported by a statement, it’s a pointless one. I’m sorry if that sounds harsh, but it’s true.

I’d also suggest erring on the short side. Some city councillors have been known to spontaneously propose a shortening of the length of deputations. I know, it’s a dirty trick, but you can’t expect the opposition to play fair. It’s better to prepare a two minute speech and conclude your statements early than it is to find yourself abruptly cut off part way through.

4: Seek help

A lot of organizations, particularly ones depending on municipal funding can’t afford to hire media trainers but that doesn’t mean they shouldn’t seek help. A good exercise is to deliver a deputation to a willing audience. The deputant shouldn’t tell them before what the key message is. Afterward the deputant should ask them what what the key message was. If they don’t know, or if they think the message was something other than what the deputant wanted to communicate, it’s time to go back to the drawing board.

If any municipally funded organizations facing cuts are seeking assistance with developing key messaging and cannot afford professional media trainers, I am also willing to volunteer some time. Please feel free to contact me through the comments section.

A group of students in the Centennial College Corporate Communications and Public Relations class of 2012 is hosting an inaugural fundraising event for the local charity, the Children’s Book Bank. The MC for the evening will be Ontario Library Association’s book award nominated children’s and young adults’ author Robert Paul Weston. The highlight of the evening will be a “Cheater’s Trivia” game where contestants have the option to pay for answers to the questions. These questions will be on topics related to children’s literature. All funds raised this way will go directly to the Children’s Book Bank.

The event will be held at The Blake House restaurant and pub located at 449 Jarvis St. just south of Wellesley St. East on Monday, Nov. 21 at 7:00 p.m. Tickets are $20 and we are offering a $2 discount to anyone who brings an eligible children’s book donation. Trivia night teams can be between one and four people, so bring some friends. You can buy tickets at the Children’s Book Bank starting on November 7, 2011 or can contact the student team at cheatforacause@gmail.com or through facebook and twitter to arrange registration directly.

The Children’s Book Bank is a Toronto charity that provides free books and literacy support to families in the Regent Park and Cabbagetown South St. James Town neighbourhoods.

The Corporate Communications and Public Relations department is a division of Centennial College’s School of Communications, Media, and Design.

Events and the Unexpected

While I wait for word from the Denma Translation Group on how to display quote format I was fully expecting to write an article about Nuit Blanche. This annual event is described by the key sponsor as, “Toronto’s dusk-to-dawn celebration of contemporary arts and culture,” and by the popular culture tabloid, The Grid, as a “contemporary art event / creative orgy / outdoor bender.”

I was fully expecting to write a piece about the wonder of a big event pulled off just right, replete with tales of vaudeville trapeze artists, pillars of fire, and brain-driven video games. And then, this happened.

There is no two ways about it. An event of the scope of Nuit Blanche will impact everything about the operation of the city. Toronto can be a wild place on any Saturday night, and, just off of Queen West, the shooting happened in the middle of one of the city’s densest Saturday night bar regions.

There was an installation for Nuit Blanche in Trinity Bellwoods Park but, as of the time of posting, there is no confirmation that the victim was even in the region for Nuit Blanche, rather than the bars in the neighbourhood.

There is no official comment on the shooting from either the City of Toronto or the Nuit Blanche webpage. The media has described the shooting as having occurred “at” Nuit Blanche, but no journalists appear to have pursued the organizers for comments.

This raises the question: how should the organizers of Nuit Blanch respond?

The 2010 Nuit Blanche generated more than $70,000,000 in economic impact for the city, and the 2011 edition is almost certainly going to be of equal significance.

It would be harmful for the city for a pall to be cast over the event by a tragic event which may or may not have even involved event participants.

But, on the other hand, how long can the organizers of the event remain silent before the media begins asking for answers?

Please share your thoughts in the comments section.

I’ll be addressing this in class tomorrow, but I thought it made an excellent subject for a first article.

There has been a notable trend, particularly among politicians, to reduce the extent to which they are available to the media. The trend seems to have started with the PMO. Stephen Harper has been careful when he issues statements, downright laconic when dealing with the press.

This trend has been continued, to varying degrees, by both Dalton McGuinty and Tim Hudak, as the provincial campaign heats up.

Perhaps, most infamously of all, Mayor Rob Ford outright refuses to speak to the Star, one of the three largest newspapers in the country. Although, as reported in the article linked above, Councillor Adam Vaughan wants to change that.

The reasons why a politician might want to limit the extent to which newspapers have contact with him are clear enough. Newspapers are often seen as politically active, and if there is a disconnect between the perceived politics of a journalist and the politics of the politician, contact can rarely end well for both sides.

In public relations, we’ve been taught that we want to create win-win situations, in which both the journalist and the spokesperson for our client are able to benefit from the interaction. When one side of that equation breaks down it can be all-too-easy to just walk away.

But, in my opinion this is the wrong course of action, and a dangerous trend.

The reason why is perfectly clear.

Refusing to speak to a journalist won’t make him go away.

For a perfect example of this, consider the recent waterfront debate. Doug Ford announced a grand vision of Ferris wheels, monorails and mega-malls, an Atlantic City style tourist site, to replace the more sedate mixed commercial and residential plans put forward by Waterfront Toronto.

This plan backfired dramatically on the Ford brothers, as many citizens, most of the local media, and ultimately all of council decided not to support this reworked plan for the Toronto Portlands. One could suggest that the refusal of the Ford team to speak to the Star may have contributed to the galvanization of public support against them, but this refusal plays a more pronounced role now.

Just this morning the Star reported of meetings between the Ford brothers and a major developer, prior to the announcement of the Ford plan. To say that the article was unfavourable would be an understatement.

The article paints a picture that hints at back-room deals and an air of subterfuge that tip-toes on the edge of scandal. Two thirds of the way down the article, the entire response of the Ford team to this situation is summed up, “Neither Doug Ford nor Remtulla answered inquiries from the Star about the meetings.”

The end result is an article which is unwaveringly critical of the Ford administration, and one in which they had no opportunity to communicate their perspective.

This isn’t a matter of whether you support the Ford vision for the Portlands (thought I don’t). The issue here, the issue that should concern communicators is that, by refusing to speak to the media, the Ford team has effectively muted themselves, giving people who are not predisposed toward kind thoughts even more reason to be critical.

This will hurt the Ford administration far more than a sound bite to the Star ever would.

Follow

Get every new post delivered to your Inbox.