By Paul Furiga
Ask a successful agent for the three most important words in real estate, and you’ll get the answer: “location, location and location.”

Ask a successful communicator for the three most important words in public relations, and you should get the answer: “repetition, repetition and repetition.”

Just as the geographic landscape is littered with properties that suffer for their poor location (especially in today’s market), the communication landscape is littered with public relations efforts that fail to leverage repetition to engage important audiences successfully.

Whether the goal is to sell products, mobilize employees or build a reputation, the need for repetition is constant. A fundamental related principle, of course, must be that the story is authentic, told by fluent storytellers, and measured for maximum effectiveness by continually reading the audience. You can’t be selling the communications equivalent of swampland if you expect to succeed.

Yet even smart communicators who understand “location, location, location” fail to appreciate the benefits of consistent (and repetitive) communication. Here are five reasons why repetition is the key element to successful, authentic public relations:

1. It’s noisy in here! Whether you are trying to engage a dozen employees, or a public of hundreds of millions, cultural “noise” bombards us. Chirping cell phones, chiming e-mail, the TweetStream on your iPhone, traffic, billboards, street noise, and hundreds of other demands on our attention act as communication speed bumps for your message. Without sophisticated and authentic repetition, your message may be heard only in part, if at all. You can’t share it just once.

2. That’s why they call it public relations! Just as a personal relationship begins with a mutual dialogue, a trying-out period in which the participants build trust, so it is with successful public relations. Whether the audience is employees, skeptical journalists, or consumers, a relationship is built through a series of interactions that establish for all parties involved that it’s OK to continue the conversation. Successful public relations cannot be achieved through a series of one-night “message” stands,press conference “drive-bys” or social media gimmicks.

3. We shall honor no reputation before its time. For a company and its products, a reputation is built over time, not in a week or a month. That’s why sustainable PR activities — news on hires, promotions, product success stories, executive speeches, community initiatives, etc. help build reputation and educate audiences about an organization’s values and commitments, as well as the benefits of its products or services.

4. Don’t take my word for it, ask Oprah. Our skeptical culture is not only cluttered with information, but burdened by a complete breakdown in the old means of determining which information is important. We need guides to help us cut through the morass of messages. That’s why credible, respected figures such as Oprah Winfrey carry such clout. Though many seem to think reading is on the decline in this country, the truth is we are publishing and reading more books than ever before (when you consider how much reading all of us do electronically, the literacy we aspire to is truly staggering). Even with all that information out there, it’s impossible to figure out which books deserve our attention. That’s why Oprah’s book club is so successful — we hunger for guidance we can trust and we look to opinion leaders we respect to provide it. Successful public relations engages trusted opinion leaders as advocates, to lend credibility to important communications.

5. The weight of the evidence is compelling. In our cluttered culture, with competition for attention and a skeptical distrust of many messengers, audiences intuitively seek confirmation of what they hear and see from multiple sources. If a CEO says he’s committed his company to the environment, that’s not good enough for most audiences (including employees). But if the company wins an environmental award, is praised by the leader of an independent environmental group, and is the subject of a fair but positive profile in a national news outlet, the audience is much more likely to believe what the CEO says — the claim can easily be evaluated because there is plenty of evidence that the statement is accurate.

Is repetition the only important concept for successful public relations? Of course not. But just as breathing is essential to life, repetition is an essential element in successful public relations. Is it possible to enjoy long-term PR success without repetition? Maybe. But I wouldn’t hold my breath.
_____
Paul Furiga is president and CEO of WordWrite Communications.

By John Durante

In 1974 then rock critic Jon Landau wrote what was to become one of the most prophetic lines in 20th century entertainment journalism.  Emerging from a set of concerts held in dimly lit clubs on the Eastern seaboard, he penned for Boston’s long-defunct Real Paper (not Rolling Stone) the following: “I saw rock and roll’s future, and its name is Bruce Springsteen.”

While debate has long raged about Landau’s prediction and the degree to which he foresaw the future, there is wide agreement that he was the first to latch onto a formidable music and social force whose power and influence in now reaching a third generation. The Boss and his compatriots from the E Street band have blown ‘em away on six continents for a long, long time, and in the process have made Landau nearly as legendary as the band itself.

This bit of history has been heavy on my mind because in some indescribable cosmic way I think it links to a parallel prediction that needs to be made. I am trying mightily to sort through the cacophony of current PR and business communication practices and learn what sustaining value we communicators are set to offer in post-consumer America.  Like much of contemporary social, economic, political and cultural America, PR and marcom practitioners are at a crossroads.  What we want to be on the back end of these current shifting sands requires some thought, some vision, and maybe even a prediction (bold, silly or otherwise).  And my Boss-fueled professional instincts tell me that unless we recast our professional value in a different form, our professional fortunes will go the way of Chrysler execs.

So minus the hubris that certainly must have stoked Mr. Landau — but with the same urgency to suggest something “big” is in our midst, I hereby proclaim that I have seen the future of PR and business communication and it’s called the high context, authentic story. I know this because:

1.     The hyperbolic bombast of PR convention has grown weary and awkward.  Too often communications utility is lacking and the messages are uninspired.  Borrowing a page from Clara Peller, audiences are increasingly asking “where’s the beef?”  And in response, conventional PR types keep banging with the same passé approaches, reducing the whole enterprise to a sorry string of carnival barker or infomercial contests.

2.     The virtues of “new media” are insufficiently sturdy to carry the day-to-day water of high-value business communication.  While many in PR and marcom are absolutely rapturous about the characteristics of a super-segmented, digitized message world, too often they find the Holy Grail in merely ensuring broad message distribution and access.  Those who have yet to froth know this is silly and that a poor message or story buried on the bottom of page eight in a long list of comments on a Twitter feed is made no more effective or compelling simply because so many more people can see it on so many different media platforms!

3.     Users of the media culture are yearning for something real.  Messengers have been widely jumping the shark for a while and in the process have left but a hair’s width between what’s “real” and “fake.” Complex times call for clarity as a means to enhance understanding, not for an endless blurring of what is “real.”  The most fundamental way to drive clarity is to be authentic. And as professional communicators, our authenticity needs to be attached to our indigenous medium. 

What medium you ask?  Well it’s not print, TV, digital, canvas, web or even skywriting.  The medium in which we need to be authentic is the one we have always used — the story. You know, that sequence of interrelated communication that has a beginning, middle, and an end?  To not adapt the story — and to not do it with authenticity — means our profession will have chosen cacophony over clarity, salaciousness over utility and the superficial over context.  And that’s not going to happen.  It won’t happen because our audiences demand more from us, our clients deserve more and out of self-interest, we will stop our lemming behavior before we fling ourselves off a beachside cliff.  After all, just because Springsteen and Landau began their symbiotic relationship on the Jersey shore doesn’t mean our profession has to end there.

_____
John Durante is senior marketing associate for WordWrite Communications.

By Paul Furiga

This excellent post by Brian Solis at Social Media Today got me thinking about this topic again, and so I’ve decided to repost something I wrote about the poor quality of press releases a few years ago. To quote social media guru Dave Nelsen, a good friend of mine (hey I’m a PR guy, I love my third-party validation) this post is both timely and timeless.

Among those write them and those who read them, there’s a great clamor today to eradicate press releases. The sentiments run deep, but this is the wrong solution.

The real question is: Why are press releases so bad? The answer: Despite their name, bad “press” releases are not written for the “press.” What? How can this be? And what can be done about?

First, let’s clear up a misconception: Press releases do not represent the sum total of public relations any more than a four-seam fastball represents the totality of baseball. Press releases are merely one tool in PR. However, like fastballs that miss the strike zone, they are grossly misused so often that it’s easy to see why many want to euthanize them rather than deal with the underlying conditions that make them horrible.

Here are three reasons why press releases are so bad:

1. Too many are not written for journalists. The writing process for even a simple product press release often involves a committee. And the release reads like it. Worse, the committee writes for itself – and not for journalists. With unintentional and self-defeating good works, members keep adding words, acronyms, concepts and catch phrases to satisfy their internal political considerations. It’s nearly impossible for such a group to write in a way that improves the understanding of journalists, who have only seconds to devote to their release before determining if it is worthy of coverage.

2. Too many of those who determine the content aren’t communicators. The professional qualifications of those who edit press releases are often impressive: lawyers, human resource professionals, accountants, engineers. But most of these professionals have no experience parsing English to entice journalists. Instead, they lengthen phrases and sentences, obfuscate meaning, seriously reducing media pick-up of good stories.

3. Press releases are often not press releases, but political manifestos. A committee writing a press release unintentionally complicates it. But many organizations intentionally issue manifestos that appear to be press releases but are no such thing. These organizations can be quite happy about it, even if journalists consider their work poor excuses for press releases. These manifestos, blogged, burped and “texted” across the ever-expanding ether of electronic communications are not news at all. They are opinion. They may be worthy opinion (or not), depending upon factors that have nothing to do with the judgment process journalists use to sort, sift and identify “news.” Unfortunately, however, the organizations issuing these manifestos hope journalists lump them into the same category as “real” press releases. This never happens, and only poisons the well for those with legitimate news.

So what can be done about the horrible state of press releases, which, despite all the talk, are a bedrock tool of public relations? Here are three solutions:

1. Remember who we’re writing for. Sometimes, a release written by committee is unavoidable. But a good process with a strong team captain can make sure that the press release is something that its intended audience (journalists) will actually read, and that its content is something journalists will use (news).

2. Involve communicators in the communicating. The views of professionals involved in the news behind a press release are essential. But lawyers, accountants and engineers shouldn’t drive the writing and editing of press releases any more than patients should guide the knife during their surgeries.

3. Learn to separate news and opinion for better results. Just because you have an opinion doesn’t mean it’s news. News belongs in press releases; opinions can appear in many, many places, from blogs to opinion articles and statements and interviews. But stamping the words “press release” on a document that has little resemblance to what most journalists consider “news” only worsens the situation for the organization issuing this kind of document — and the rest of us who have real news to share.

Are these the only problems with press releases? Are these the only solutions? Hardly. But I offer them as a start in what should be a vigorous debate among PR professionals and those they work with about the proper use of press releases.

Press releases aren’t going away any more than the four-seam fastball is going to disappear from the repertoire of hard-throwing major league pitchers. That’s all the more reason why we should focus on the underlying problems of bad press releases, so that we can make sure that more of them hit the strike zone the first time they’re pitched.
_____
Paul Furiga is president and CEO of WordWrite Communications.

By Paul Furiga

It happened again yesterday. Yet another client asked the question that I hate, the same one that is the headline for this post. This gives me the opportunity to resurrect what I wrote on this topic a few years ago. They say no good deed goes unpunished; on the Internet, no previously published thinking goes to waste — if you are diligent about it. So let me share my thinking here on our blog, in an easy-to-find location. And for future reference. As in, the next time I am asked this question, I can say, “read my blog post on this topic.”

There’s a common joke in marketing agencies, which — if you are a client of agencies — you have probably not heard:

Far too many client-agency conversations begin with the client saying: “We need a brochure.” The joke (or rather, the painful punch line) is that few clients who ask for a brochure actually need one. Of course, far too many agencies know this, but are only too happy to charge the client for a brochure that’s unneeded.

So how can you tell if your business really does “need a brochure?” Here are five guidelines we use with our clients:

1. I know my audience, and how they make decisions. This is the fundamental question in marketing. If the goal is to empower clients (and prospects) to select your product or service, do you know what they need to say “yes” to you? Too often, clients assume they need a brochure because their competitors have one, or because that’s what they think every business should have. Not necessarily.

2. My audience is large enough to justify the mass production of documents. Just because “everyone else” seems to have a brochure doesn’t mean one is right for your business. Not long ago, a wealthy investor hired us to evaluate the marketing of a subsidiary as he decided whether to dump it. The gentleman running this highly technical business needed four to five $10,000 to $50,000 clients to make his year. We reviewed his marketing options. He chose a brochure. Unfortunately for him, 2,000 copies of a brochure is not an effective investment to find four or five five-figure clients. However, he did have a neighbor in the next office suite who “did brochures” and “everybody has a brochure,” right? No, not really. But if you do have a large audience to reach and you have effectively answered question #1 by determining that brochures are essential tools in your prospect’s decision making, then the design and printing costs typically involved in mass producing brochures are probably a worthwhile investment. But there are other questions to answer before you say, “I need a brochure.”

3. What we do is best explained with pictures. For many companies, there’s nothing like a picture of what they do to properly explain their product or service. In these cases, a brochure may be the most essential tool. On the other hand, if there is little remarkable about your business that cries for pictures or graphics, it may be unwise to spend considerable sums on large quantities of a brochure. Consider alternatives, including customized printing of word processing documents, or PDF versions of documents, as you need them. High-quality office printers can do amazing things if you know how to use them.

4. Our clients expect a certain quality of presentation before they’ll buy. In our experience, the clients of professional services firms, especially in law or accounting, often demand a “look and feel” that quietly conveys attributes such as experience, achievement or stability. In these situations, a tasteful, full-color brochure, produced on quality paper stock, may be a necessity. But even this demand is less and less prevalent in the electronic age — PDF versions of documents, Word documents on your corporate web site, and other electronic distribution tools can frequently replace the brochure.

5. Our business and our products change infrequently. The same electronic age that makes it easy to deliver printed information electronically has also changed the speed at which clients and prospects demand current information. In most businesses, it’s no longer acceptable to say, “This brochure is outdated, but we won’t be printing a new one until next year.” This used to be an acceptable statement, perhaps in the 1970s, when “everybody” knew how much it cost to produce brochures and the hassle it often required mechanically. Few businesses today can afford to yoke themselves to a “once a year” printing of materials to justify printing and design costs, yet too many still do. I know — in the fall and winter, when I visit companies, I am often offered a closet to hang up my coat. These are not just closets — they are burial grounds for the thousands of unused brochures that no one can bear to throw away because of how much it cost to produce them, even though they are outdated or otherwise flawed.

Do you really “need a brochure?” Only you can answer that question. But if your prospects don’t read them, you can’t afford to mass produce them, you have other means to distribute printed information and your business changes frequently, the answer is most decidedly: No. And that’s no joke.
_____
Paul Furiga is president and CEO of WordWrite Communications.

By John Durante

Some areas of “new” media (or what others call “immediate media”) are widely altering how “news of the day” is followed and understood. Having made strong impact as real-time, populist, just-the-facts, eyewitness accounts, certain parts of the blogosphere are widely influential in delivering daily news.<

Some say this will revolutionize (if not eliminate) traditional journalism, public relations and marketing of all types, and general business communication. Crossing into the realm of social media is seen as a form of information democracy so strong that De Tocqueville would take note. Social media has made a big splash and is playing well in Peoria where they are all a-twitter about Twitter.

But, as ESPN’s Lee Corso frequently intones when his gang is selecting college football winners, not so fast. Social media indeed is making its mark but falls far short as the magical elixir some credit as raising our understanding of the complex world in which we live. That’s largely because how social media forms are currently used uncovers many shortcomings. I see three that stick out more than most.

First, much social media content focuses on the composer’s self-expression and thoughts and feelings in an almost stream-of consciousness form. Others respond or follow suit and soon a given message thread is more a group therapy session than topical perspective. This provides an incomplete factual understanding and prematurely moves the social media activity into what conventionally we might call “news analysis” — long before the dimensions of the “news” itself has been fully established.

Second, in all of their unbridled, jazz musician-jamming, these “message freedom” social media artists seem to pay little mind to established measures and practices of audience response that we use in any other human interaction. I could stand up in a crowded conference room and announce that I just had a lousy burrito for lunch, yet I doubt my coworkers would care. This is why most of us don’t stand up and make such inane comments. So why do so many folks use Twitter to send this kind of drivel?

While it’s true that social media messages offer an equal opportunity to all users to offer a social media response of their own, too many original message composers seem to care little for whom and how many users ponder their missive and consideration of their collective perspective in message composition.

Last, and most importantly, social media “stories” rarely provide story context. Communication in any form is about shared meaning. Researchers have long known that, as message complexity and diversity rises, story context becomes vital. The social media author is largely only a contributor on the diversity side of this equation. There’s little room for context in 140 characters, even when you are looking at entire “Tweetstream” of Tweets from a number of participants.

Building and communicating story context takes time and thought — two elements whose absence lead many to embrace social media in the first place. With such a large premium on real-time, message immediacy, how can social media ever become a vehicle that provides real context? I’d be interested in knowing what you think.

_____
John Durante is senior marketing associate for WordWrite Communications.