10 Presidential Debate Lessons For Business Leaders

September 26th, 2016

debate

  1. Tell the truth. Fact checkers will share with us which statements from the presidential candidates were exaggerations, misleading and lies. While political candidates often survive their tall tales, business leaders and their companies are generally more vulnerable when the media point out their untruthful statements.
  2. Speak with passion. Both Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump spoke with passion. A business leader’s key messages might perfectly strike target audiences, but sharing words robotically or without enthusiasm, even under uncomfortable circumstances, are quick ways to lose people’s interest.
  3. Don’t deviate too much from talking points: When answering questions, presidential candidates often end up talking about whatever issues they prefer. This is why politicians often face a reputation of dodging questions. Dodging questions generally reflects poorly on business leaders in the eyes of clients and employees.
  4. Get ready. The media have analyzed different approaches Hillary Clinton and Donald Trump apparently took to prepare for their first presidential debate. Whichever approach you prefer, be prepared to discuss the topic at hand or be prepared how to handle questions when you don’t know the answers. News media interviews offer business leaders an opportunity to position themselves as industry experts. Take advantage of such occasions.
  5. Watch the adrenaline. Both presidential candidates showed spirit. Don’t mistake crazy adrenaline for spirit. People won’t listen if your tone turns them off first.
  6. Don’t overload us with information. Almost all presidential candidates at times lose their audiences with details most of us don’t understand. The media provide business leaders far less time to clearly explain themselves. Unless your audience is industry savvy, explain yourself and connect the dots assuming people don’t know much about what you do.
  7. Prepare great sound bites and quotes. Our guess is most media will repeatedly show us the same sound bites from the debates. Presidential candidates don’t generally provide such words by chance. They look for opportunities to deliver their clever sentences. Business leaders don’t need to play it deviously. However, considering sound bites that might sum up complex topics can be strategically important.
  8. Beware of body language. We don’t recommend adopting Trump’s body language. It may work for him and every rule has its exemptions. Business leaders may consider body language superficial, but we’ve watched too many executives lose the war of words by not what they say … but how they say it and how they look.
  9. Realize traditional media are only one part of the story. If you’re handling a crisis, trying to persuade public opinion or simply attempting to extend your reach, not strategically considering social media is the equivalent of a head football coach claiming special teams won’t play a role in determining victory or defeat.
  10. Don’t blame the media. Your fans and supporters may love blaming the media, but your goal is building business, bringing in more clients or increasing support for important causes. Blaming the messenger for your troubles won’t resonate with outsiders giving you and your team initial consideration.

10 Media Training Myths

September 20th, 2016

  1. Media training is not about attempting to memorize a script of lines you may or may not believe in.
  2. It’s not about stifling your opinions. 
  3. It’s not about cleverly sidestepping questions, which most people realize you’re doing anyway. 
  4. It’s not about hammering your critics with hyperbole and overused cliches. 
  5. It’s not about analyzing your body language to the extent you move robotically. 
  6. It’s not about asking reporters to review their questions beforehand.
  7. It’s not about blaming the media. 
  8. Media training is not about stating you don’t know information you clearly should. 
  9. It’s not about pretending to understand or rationalize the reasoning of someone who made a decision you clearly believe is ridiculous. 
  10. Media training is not for people afraid to tell the truth at every turn because they want to perpetuate an illusion that everything is always awesome. 

13 Reasons To Hate Social Media

September 2nd, 2016

angry emoji

Social media can play an influential role raising your profile. However, the relationship with such marketing tools can feel like a rocky one.

  1. Social media reminds you of birthdays for people you don’t know or care about.
  2. It reinforces nobody cares about something you think is funny or interesting.
  3. You infer someone behind the social media curtain is stifling your engagement to persuade you to purchase an ad.
  4. You conclude some of the social media statistics are genuinely B.S.
  5. Checking your social media apps in public makes you feel you have relinquished yourself to a futuristic world of mind control.
  6. You wonder if most of your company page’s fans are in your age bracket because they are actually family and friends instead of loyal customers.
  7. You bristle in frustration when no one likes your awesome photo but others receive tremendous attention for routine images that bore you.
  8. You don’t read other people’s posts because you fear coming across faces who are the opposite of friends.
  9. Social media is exhausting because your better judgement leads you to delete your most edgy (and interesting) updates before sharing them.
  10. You resent those who laughed at your social media efforts in the early days but now view social media marketing as indispensable.
  11. You want to show the strength to quit social media altogether but are too darn scared you’ll miss out on something that would change everything.
  12. You force yourself to pretend your number of followers isn’t important to you.
  13. Nobody actually looks as good as their profile picture.

Which ones did we forget?

Handling A Reporter’s Mistakes and Inaccuracy

August 31st, 2016

Public Relations

A media outlet’s writer contacted us, thanking us for helping with one of our clients’ stories. She said the number of companies attempting to include their products in the story got competitive and congratulated us for making the cut.

We thanked her for including our client in the story. However, we asked her if she wanted an opportunity to correct information in the story about our client before we posted the story on social media. The mistakes included:

  • typos
  • incorrectly referring to a product by the company name itself
  • a capitalization problem with the product’s name

When I worked as a television reporter, I learned reporters, companies and PR pros can misunderstand each other despite their best efforts. Companies and PR pros often speak an industry lingo. Reporters without regular beats are attempting to understand an industry they aren’t particularly familiar with. Because of this, I, after an interview, often double checked a story’s most important facts with a company or its representative. Most reporters don’t take this step just prior to sharing their stories with producers and editors. Some reporters may misinterpret later checking the facts with sources as censorship. However, I simply checked facts. I didn’t allow sources an opportunity to sugar coat their words and take out important information.

We recommend companies, after providing media interviews, send a follow-up email to reporters which politely reviews the key points discussed. This is our attempt to help improve reporter accuracy, which too often is absent from journalism. It is not uncommon for us to ask reporters to correct their mistakes after their outlets publish stories. We aren’t referring to subjective corrections that would place our clients in a more positive light. We are referring to clearly incorrect information such as wrong job titles or mistakes about someone’s education.

People may assume reporters are loathe to acknowledge mistakes and take steps to then correct them. However, we believe every reporter we contacted about mistakes moved forward and corrected them. In our latest example, we needed to email the writer twice before hearing back about our request for corrections. And correcting the mistakes included about 12 emails back and forth. Ultimately, most reporters don’t want errors to sully their reputations, especially if those mistakes might indicate a lack of attention to detail. And we infer clients appreciate a PR pro’s efforts to a greater extent when the final piece isn’t tattered with mistakes. Audiences may not recognize these types of errors. But for clients, every word often counts. We can’t always expect objectivity. However, we should expect accuracy.

Client News: USA TODAY

August 5th, 2016

Opportunities To Peer Into The Future

July 21st, 2016

In 2006, Keith and Loren visiting Keith's grandmother, affectionately known as "Grandma One."

In 2006, Keith and Loren visiting Keith’s grandmother, affectionately known as “Grandma One.”

During editorial meetings, when I pitched stories impacting senior citizens, producers and managers often dismissed me like the elite might turn away from a commoner who walked into the wrong room. Someone might sarcastically snap back, “We know. Everyone has a grandmother,” a snarky rebuttal to previous arguments that younger viewers actually care about older people.

I inferred sales, and in turn the newsroom, obsessed over stories that might pique the interest of younger viewers, the ones advertisers reach for like a crowd fighting to snatch the last blockbuster sale item on the morning of Black Friday. However, managers, despite their desires for minion disciples, never persuaded me to buy into their positions about seniors. It seemed to me, especially during the Great Recession, that Baby Boomers carried more disposable wealth for the upgraded items younger generations never considered purchasing. During a station meeting, I once asked the general manager if we needed to shift our traditional thinking about demographics. His answer seemed to mostly reflect surprise that one of the minions actually tried to ask a substantive question.

Watching a brief moment of Bernie Sanders endorsing Hillary Clinton reminded me again of those managers and producers mockingly responding to my senior citizen story pitches. How could an old man fascinate whippersnappers? How could grandpa persuade millennials to stray away from their smartphones and pay attention to politics? You don’t need to endorse Sanders’ views to acknowledge he connected with the very demographic which supposedly wouldn’t want to watch a story about those of elder generations.

When I need advice about life, I turn to my parents. When I need advice about business, I turn to our mentor, a man in his 70s. When a realtor and grandfather wearing a hearing aid handed us his business card, I assumed his experience in years would translate into an excellent knowledge of his trade. I did not assume he stood disconnected from a contemporary world.

Those who patronize our elders with sweet, dismissive smiles are missing opportunities to peer into the future and acquire understandings we normally need decades to grasp. There’s no need to always abide by an older generation’s rules and recommendations. However, we should listen and we will more often than not learn something to at least consider.

The fool assumes he can learn nothing from those who made their living before gadgets, software and today’s technology dominated our landscape. However, every generation had gadgets and innovations in its own time. The script changes with each generation but the story of business and people generally stays the same.

Journalists, like many people, try too hard to simplify what others want and believe. If we decide to dismiss anything, then let’s dismiss conventional wisdom. 

How Had I Not Heard This Before?

July 14th, 2016

Keith and Mike

My Dad and I in the 1970s

My Dad is not a public speaker. However, you don’t need the skill of talking eloquently before crowds to ensure words carry weight and wield influence.

Many times when life’s building frustrations pushed me closer to whichever metaphorical edge that might have applied at the time, my Dad’s slower delivery of wisdom successfully provided the type of safety valve I needed when free falling. And during these very personal motivational speeches, he frequently shared a personal failure to reinforce how he can relate and the lessons he learned.

During these moments, the stories he shared from his life strike me like an unforeseen left jab I didn’t see coming and didn’t know existed. How had I not heard before of such a watershed moment in his life?

Generally, the world of stereotypes tell us men are not the strongest communicators with each other. However, I propose a lack of personal sharing also is symbolic of a generational gap.

While my generation and the one that followed might consider spilling their guts on social media more routine than risk, those who grew up before me tend to not proactively crack open their books until a moment desperately cries for crucial perspective.

Loren never successfully persuaded her grandmother to share mysteries about Loren’s grandfather. And my adventures into Ancestry.com only recently unlocked information that prior generations never cooperated to pass along.

When my Dad shares stories of personal struggle I never knew existed, I’m grateful. His stories build a bridge of understanding and strength that convince me to start stepping backward from the edge. This is when you realize your heroes are very human and faced the same darkness that only experience can help clearly explain. However, I also begin to wonder what other stories might exist and whether they will ever reveal themselves in the future. Must we wait to turn the page on another chapter before hearing the latest twist?

If my Dad proactively shared the private successes and failures that shaped him, I wonder what I might learn. TMI, too much information, is a reality. However, better and more open communication between generations, and perhaps specifically among men and fathers and sons, might help us find our path sooner and better navigate those ugly turns we didn’t see approaching.

10 Reasons You Better Not Blow Off Local News

May 10th, 2016

Local News

Some brands reach a point when their media relations expectations are more demanding. The brands value national news coverage and their marketing forecasts no longer place a priority on their region’s local media. The organizations decline to make themselves as readily available to local media that they now characterize as small potatoes. However, here are our top 10 reasons brands better not blow off interview requests from local media:

  1. Today’s local TV news producers are often your best contacts on the national level after they jump a couple of new jobs a few years down the road.
  2. Ignoring the local news is like presidential candidates ignoring their core constituencies, the people who brought you to power and will support you when times are tougher.
  3. You would rather stumble on the local news and improve before appearing before the entire country.
  4. Local news appearances allow you to build a library of media experience, which national news producers might check out before sitting you before a camera.
  5. If you can survive some of the wacky technical problems the local news presents, you can handle just about any on-air issue.
  6. You never know what big shots are visiting town, seeing you on the local news and considering how your services might help.
  7. The national news is often nothing more than identifying good local stories and retelling them with higher production value.
  8. The local news still offers one of the quickest ways to reach thousands, if not tens of thousands of people.
  9. It’s not uncommon for people who can’t get on the news to pay for one of those on-air segments that look like the news. So don’t pass up an invitation to take part in the real thing and earn some instant credibility.
  10. The reason parodies of local news, such as the one in “Horrible Bosses 2,” are so funny is because they are so spot on. So seize the day and continue to enjoy a behind-the-scenes experience even if you consider it sensational and superficial.

Ask These Questions Before Posting “Graphic” Medical Videos

April 4th, 2016

video production

A doctor, who is one of our clients, asked her co-worker to shoot video of her performing a procedure on a patient and explaining a medical device. The doctor asked us to post the video on her social media channels. However, the process of deciding how to move forward wasn’t so simple. Here are questions we considered:

  1. Did the patient sign all necessary waivers to allow the doctor to post the video publicly? The video did not reveal the patient’s name or show her face. However, we could hear the patient’s voice. Had the patient considered her voice alone might reveal her identity? In different situations, tattoos or particular pieces of jewelry can sometimes disclose a person’s identity. The doctor asked us about editing out the video’s audio. But the doctor’s narration and her bedside manner, the empathy she showed the patient in the video, were valuable for viewers to hear.
  2. Will the video posted on social media include a simple, written explanation about what viewers are watching? The doctor described the medical procedure in the video, but what if people are distracted and don’t listen closely? What if their computer or device’s volume is down? What if someone is hearing impaired? What information should you include? What is the procedure? Where did you perform the procedure? When did you perform the procedure? Why did you perform the procedure? How long did the procedure take? How can you articulate the value of sharing this video?
  3. What if someone wants additional information? More often, videos are similar to headlines, not all-encompassing, in-depth magazine articles. Will the video include a link to a website with additional information?
  4. Should the social media post include a warning that some people might find the video graphic? The video showed the doctor removing a medical device from a woman’s breast and the footage included blood. Would her audience object to seeing this? We live in Arizona, but this doctor works in another state. Her community’s perception of such a video might differ from people we interact with locally. It’s interesting that the doctor’s health care colleagues raised concerns about the video. However, friends outside health care gave her the green light.
  5. Will you get cold feet? About an hour before we posted the video on social media, the doctor texted us, indicating she was getting cold feet about the post. A friend had watched the video and literally became sick.

After considering the above questions, we posted the video. It received positive feedback and numerous people shared it with others. The video remains one of her Facebook page’s most popular posts. This experience reinforces our belief of people’s interest in seeing behind-the-scene videos, processes they normally don’t get the opportunity to watch. Sometimes, as with a previous medical video we shot, the answer is as simple as showing a wide instead of a tight view of something viewers might find too graphic. However, this most recent situation is a reminder that even a short medical video requires lengthy planning and conversation.

Video Production: How Did Marco Rubio’s Campaign Let This Happen?

February 16th, 2016
YouTube Preview Image

For a video, we sometimes need an extra shot we just don’t have. And occasionally that shot should show something outside. We attempt to take each step to shoot ourselves any video we need to tell a story. But if purchasing stock video is our last resort answer, we try to choose well. Here’s why:

Most of the country does not look like our home state, Arizona. Most homes in the United States do not look like the homes here. Most stock video depicting exterior scenes would appear out-of-place in a sequence of shots of the Grand Canyon State. However, finding the right shot under these circumstances simply takes patience, common sense and perhaps a second opinion.

Now media outlets across America are reporting a shot supposedly portraying America in an ad for presidential candidate Marco Rubio actually shows the Vancouver skyline. And we’re not referring to the city named Vancouver in the State of Washington. In fact, when viewers see the skyline shot, a narrator states, “It’s morning again in America.” This CBC News story in British Columbia quotes a Vancouver-based videographer who said he shot the video and posted it on a website sharing stock video.

Presidential candidate Ted Cruz’s campaign said it didn’t know a woman in one of its video ads had previously appeared in erotic films. We imagine much of the public can understand how that situation slipped through the cracks, although we earlier in a post pointed out the lessons organizations can learn from that case. However, how can a video ad reach the public without someone vetting the shots (In this case, the opening shot!) and asking, “What city is that?”

Or asking, “Is that the United States?”

Or did the narrator intend to relay, “It’s morning again in North America.”?