Kenneth Cole obviously did not realize how far-reaching a tweet is. There are all sorts of anonymous parody accounts that tweet similar tweets and people find funny. The only difference is that their twitter handle isn't connected to a image or brand.
The joke was obviously insensitive to the situation overseas. I think the best way to go about tweets from companies is to avoid controversial situations or any situation where people are being harmed or oppressed.
Commenting on pop culture and current events can be a great marketing strategy. When a team wins the Superbowl, you could use a play on words about the winning team as a funny tweet. But when people are suffering, it's not best to try to increase profits using their agony.
In the future I would advise Mr. Cole to follow the guidelines I have outlined before this. Mostly he should think before he tweets. That's just a simple rule for life. Think before you tweet (speak).
If anyone can be hurt by your message, then it should automatically be trashed.
Monday, November 9, 2015
Playing "Chicken" With Gay Marriage
I remember when this controversy was going on. I thought it was pretty silly how it caused an internet war. The CEO got lucky that, with his statements, the situation wasn't a complete disaster. If it wasn't for Mike Huckabee, there probably wouldn't have been a Chic-Fil-A appreciation day, and instead a long boycott by protesters.
Whether you agree with gay marriage or not, it is not relevant. He is running a business to serve food, not changing public policy. Some may say that corporations have a social responsibility to shape public policy and be a voice in the public forum, but gay marriage isn't an area that businesses should be diving into.
His remarks basically say, "Here at Chic-Fil-A we discriminate against the gay community." How is that a good marketing message than saying nothing?
If I was advising Mr. Dan Cathy, I would suggest keeping personal beliefs to myself and focusing my interviews on the business side of things. His interviews should promote the companies benefits for communities and employees. There are times to talk about public matters, but that was not one of them. For example, if it was 2001 and they asked Mr. Cathy how 9/11 affected him, he could give an honest response.
Dan Cathy may have thought the target market for the magazine would like to hear that particular response, but those words carried over to everybody. I think a lot of CEO's or spokespersons want to give the best interview possible, so sometimes they are loose with their tongues.
Whether you agree with gay marriage or not, it is not relevant. He is running a business to serve food, not changing public policy. Some may say that corporations have a social responsibility to shape public policy and be a voice in the public forum, but gay marriage isn't an area that businesses should be diving into.
His remarks basically say, "Here at Chic-Fil-A we discriminate against the gay community." How is that a good marketing message than saying nothing?
If I was advising Mr. Dan Cathy, I would suggest keeping personal beliefs to myself and focusing my interviews on the business side of things. His interviews should promote the companies benefits for communities and employees. There are times to talk about public matters, but that was not one of them. For example, if it was 2001 and they asked Mr. Cathy how 9/11 affected him, he could give an honest response.
Dan Cathy may have thought the target market for the magazine would like to hear that particular response, but those words carried over to everybody. I think a lot of CEO's or spokespersons want to give the best interview possible, so sometimes they are loose with their tongues.
Monday, October 19, 2015
Drowning Out The Drone Attacks
I think the drone industry should focus their message more on keeping men and women out of harm's way and the good that can come by using the unmanned flying vehicles. Their comparison to cars causing 35,000 deaths is an absurd comparison. Cars are made for the purpose of transportation, while drones can have multiple purpose, one of which is isolated missile strikes. Their goal should be educating people on how drones work and the usefulness that can come from them.
I would add, to the PR approach, more plans for the future of drones. They had a good start with their examples of forest fires and missing persons. Who knows, it may become pizza delivery drones. I can't personally give great future examples because I do not work for the industry. Maybe even talk about future regulations regarding drones that would make citizens feel safer.
Whether hobbyist should be able to own a drone is a whole other monster.
I would add, to the PR approach, more plans for the future of drones. They had a good start with their examples of forest fires and missing persons. Who knows, it may become pizza delivery drones. I can't personally give great future examples because I do not work for the industry. Maybe even talk about future regulations regarding drones that would make citizens feel safer.
Whether hobbyist should be able to own a drone is a whole other monster.
I Hate You, I'm Leaving, Where's My Check?
It seems pretty convenient that Greg Smith allowed Goldman Sachs to pay him nearly three quarters of a million dollars and then splits on them. If Smith had such a problem with the company and how it handled external affairs, then he should have taken it up with upper management, human resources, or any communications director. There is nothing wrong with whistle-blowers. I have a problem with the people who make tons of money from an organization and then get out and talk bad about them.
I think Goldman's response was appropriate. If Smith was the executive director and head of the firm's United States equity derivatives business in Europe, Middle East, and Africa, you would think that would give him a little bit of clout. Directions and goals cannot be changed or altered if you stay quiet and let the business continue their "toxic and destructive" behavior.
The PR team for Goldman Sachs needs to conduct better internal research. They should find out their employees attitudes about how the company is living up to it's mission statement, so that similar events don't happen like this one.
I think Goldman's response was appropriate. If Smith was the executive director and head of the firm's United States equity derivatives business in Europe, Middle East, and Africa, you would think that would give him a little bit of clout. Directions and goals cannot be changed or altered if you stay quiet and let the business continue their "toxic and destructive" behavior.
The PR team for Goldman Sachs needs to conduct better internal research. They should find out their employees attitudes about how the company is living up to it's mission statement, so that similar events don't happen like this one.
Wednesday, October 14, 2015
Blogger Backlash Crushes ConAgra Conclave
I've always seen the commercials, like McDonalds, using the bait-and-switch to advertise their product. I've never thought of it from the perspective that maybe the people don't want their processed food.
I think Ketchum's research methods should have been better. Find out who their target audiences were and invited those people. I imagine the people who were not thrilled with their experiment were either health conscience people, food critics, mothers who would like nutritional meals, and etc.
Also, the bloggers who made the trip probably had to pay airfare and lodging fees, while only the dinner was free. No one wants to pay for a trip to get tricked out of what was actually promised for them. Of course, I am speculating and could be totally of base.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a way to structure the invitation to bloggers without receiving seamlessly the same result. Perhaps pay airfare/lodging and provide an event other than the dinner. Make it seem like the trip to New York and free event are the reward for participating in the test dinner. Of course this only makes sense if their grievances were what I stated before.
I think these are learning experiences for all PR practitioners. Mistakes like the one Ketchum made can teach everyone in PR what-not-to-do.
I think Ketchum's research methods should have been better. Find out who their target audiences were and invited those people. I imagine the people who were not thrilled with their experiment were either health conscience people, food critics, mothers who would like nutritional meals, and etc.
Also, the bloggers who made the trip probably had to pay airfare and lodging fees, while only the dinner was free. No one wants to pay for a trip to get tricked out of what was actually promised for them. Of course, I am speculating and could be totally of base.
I'm having a hard time thinking of a way to structure the invitation to bloggers without receiving seamlessly the same result. Perhaps pay airfare/lodging and provide an event other than the dinner. Make it seem like the trip to New York and free event are the reward for participating in the test dinner. Of course this only makes sense if their grievances were what I stated before.
I think these are learning experiences for all PR practitioners. Mistakes like the one Ketchum made can teach everyone in PR what-not-to-do.
MSNBC Cries "Wawa" with Made-Up Romney Gaffe
I believe MSNBC handled the story poorly. The only reason this moment was a story was because MSNBC took the snip out of context in order to make Romney look ignorant. MSNBC is not the only news station guilty of this, I have seen it on Fox and CNN as well.
The media relies on sensationalism to boost ratings and keep viewers. It's a vicious cycle, really. They bring viewers in with these dramatic stories and then the viewers expect that nightly. If the networks went back to their "boring stories" for too long ratings would drop. So reporters are always looking for the next big thing and sometimes when they have nothing, they'll make something out of nothing.
Who is to blame for it though? Is it the network's corporate greed for ratings, which eventually mean profits? Or is it the viewers desire for a scandalous or shocking story?
I would personally like to hear 100% accurate news all the time, but the networks need to cater to the majority. I'll stick to National Public Radio for now. Terry Gross and crew seem to be the more unbiased talk radio/news that I've listened to.
The media relies on sensationalism to boost ratings and keep viewers. It's a vicious cycle, really. They bring viewers in with these dramatic stories and then the viewers expect that nightly. If the networks went back to their "boring stories" for too long ratings would drop. So reporters are always looking for the next big thing and sometimes when they have nothing, they'll make something out of nothing.
Who is to blame for it though? Is it the network's corporate greed for ratings, which eventually mean profits? Or is it the viewers desire for a scandalous or shocking story?
I would personally like to hear 100% accurate news all the time, but the networks need to cater to the majority. I'll stick to National Public Radio for now. Terry Gross and crew seem to be the more unbiased talk radio/news that I've listened to.
Sunday, October 4, 2015
Sleep-Deprived Research
This research is laughable, along with a lot of research you see posted around on Facebook. The statistics wouldn't convince me to buy a better mattress. If I had seen that the professions that received the least amount of sleep and the profession that received the most were only about 30 minutes apart, I would assume that everyone got around the same amount of sleep. That thinking wouldn't make a mattress purchase a top priority. If enough people thought the same way I did, then that would make the publishing of the ad a waste of money and resources.
Research can be tricky. It can be used effectively to persuade people to do things like make a purchase, help decisions in court cases, or provide information for legislation. But it can also be used to manipulate people. I saw some research recently that opposed the Black Lives Matter movement. The research showed numbers indicating more white people are killed by police officers than black people. What the statistics didn't include was that there are six times as many white citizens in the United States than black citizens. So if the numbers were to be even, there theoretically should have been six times the amount of white people killed by police officers. Another example of bad statistics can be found in a Bill Burr stand-up, where he jokes that research shows that gun owners are more likely to get shot if they own a gun. He explains that is logical because you are more likely to drown if someone owns a pool.
The sleep research was poorly conducted by the mattress chain, but also should have been counter checked by The New York Times. The newspaper has a reputation to uphold that most definitely means more than Sleepy's does.
Research can be tricky. It can be used effectively to persuade people to do things like make a purchase, help decisions in court cases, or provide information for legislation. But it can also be used to manipulate people. I saw some research recently that opposed the Black Lives Matter movement. The research showed numbers indicating more white people are killed by police officers than black people. What the statistics didn't include was that there are six times as many white citizens in the United States than black citizens. So if the numbers were to be even, there theoretically should have been six times the amount of white people killed by police officers. Another example of bad statistics can be found in a Bill Burr stand-up, where he jokes that research shows that gun owners are more likely to get shot if they own a gun. He explains that is logical because you are more likely to drown if someone owns a pool.
The sleep research was poorly conducted by the mattress chain, but also should have been counter checked by The New York Times. The newspaper has a reputation to uphold that most definitely means more than Sleepy's does.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)