Posts Tagged ‘Tweets’
Sunday, August 5th, 2012
Watching NASA’s live coverage of Curiosity’s landing on Mars brought me back to my own mission regarding the Red Planet.
In 2007, I traveled to Florida to cover the launch of the Phoenix Mars Lander. The University of Arizona was in charge of the mission and the school was the first public university to lead a mission to Mars. The following May, I went to Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) in Pasadena to cover the landing. I remember seeing journalists from the BBC and Irish TV. On a wet, chilly day, a model of the Phoenix Mars Lander sat under a big white tent.
The statistics mesmerized me. The spacecraft was supposed to get up to 12,700 miles an hour, then JPL had seven minutes to slow it down to zero. There were no second chances.
The questions were gigantic: Can anything live on Mars?
The University of Arizona reached out to the Red Planet. But I remember concerns that aiming for Mars might change because of the budget. Scientists worried if the flow of Mars money slowed, it could devastate the jobs and economy related to space exploration.
I also remember hearing some similar phrases I heard during Curiosity’s landing. “7 minutes of terror” and “the spacecraft is feeling the pull of Martian gravity.” In fact, some of the moments seemed so similar, I didn’t feel as amazed as others by the concept of landing a machine on Mars or seeing its first pictures. But nevertheless, I ensured I saw this landing, too.
Every newsroom probably includes at least one person who feels obligated to question every decision. I remember that particular person questioning why our newsroom invested time and money in sending me and others to cover the launch and landing. But of the countless TV stories I covered, my journey from Tucson to Florida to Pasadena involved a series of stories that certainly stand out from the rest. And if you watched NASA’s live feed on Curiosity or followed the Tweets commenting on her every move, space exploration simply fascinates us as we stretch to the outskirts of existence.
The Phoenix Mars Lander was considered a stepping stone toward future missions. And now here we are … four years later … still curious.
Tags: Arizona, Communications, jet propulsion laboratory, journalist, journalists, jpl, Media Relations, mission to mars, nasa, newsroom, Phoenix, phoenix mars lander, PR, red planet, space exploration, Tweet, Tweets, university of arizona
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Saturday, August 4th, 2012
This time of year, I often see Tweets and TV commercials hailing the new football season as if it is an annual religious experience. Many fans simply appreciate the Xs and Os of the game, while others fool themselves into believing their favorite cast of characters will find the perfect combination to reach the Super Bowl. Most fanatics, even in early August, can devise a calculation of what-ifs that convince them a Super Bowl run is realistic. How silly this is considering even when last season’s NFL playoffs began, I heard few people pick the Giants as the obvious team to hoist the trophy.
I once was a football fool until I grew up. I am a former Miami Dolphins season ticket holder, a fan in their corner the last 30 seasons. (That’s me in high school, not to be confused with my dog Molly, an obvious fan.) And I say with disappointment that eight victories this season will pleasantly surprise me. A football fool would instead argue that players in their mid-30s will recapture past glory or a rookie quarterback will grab lightning. But chances are the Hollywood underdog story will not unfold on the field.
I still approach football with excitement because fans find interest in even a mediocre product. But the days of 
passing a stack of money over to Sunday Ticket are over. For me, Twitter notifications from South Florida sports writers are an economically responsible way of following my favorite team. I still haven’t persuaded myself to buy a ticket to watch the Dolphins in their visit here in the desert. I enjoyed attending their last trip to Arizona, but my end-zone seats left me spending most the game attempting to determine the line of scrimmage.
But I really fear for my friend the Bears fan. After his team traded for our Pro Bowl wide receiver, he legitimately believes his team has put the pieces in place for another Super Bowl shuffle. For his sake, I hope he’s right considering the Cubs, which he insists will be good soon. But countless other teams also potentially have pieces in place and their fans also are texting about a clear path to the promised land.
So all hail football season! For most of you, the season will shockingly end in disappointment. Enjoy the honeymoon of disillusion. There’s nothing wrong with living a football fairy tale. But don’t hate me for learning my lesson. I’ve come to understand enjoying the game is as much about the personalities and the story lines than it is about winning. My Sundays won’t glue me to a TV set, but my phone will be all-abuzz will bings and dings of updates. Call this my virtual reality. And if the Fins eek out more than eight wins, I’ll try to be the first to Tweet it.
Tags: Arizona, Communications, cubs, dolphins, Hollywood, media, miami dolphins, nfl playoffs, PR, Social Media, South Florida, south florida sports, super bowl, super bowl shuffle, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Social Media | No Comments »
Thursday, July 26th, 2012
Several services offer to schedule your social media updates at times people are most likely to see them. This intrigues many businesses who worry their followers are missing important content.
I’ve tried several of these services. Some social media experts praise them often. Scheduling content for the following day has its benefits when you won’t have time to post in real time. But can a website actually provide me precise insight on the best times to Tweet?
People study this like a science and you can sign up for webinars to learn the secrets. However, many of the experts explaining the benefits of scheduling social media are in the social media industry. Don’t they benefit by convincing businesses that social media is not an exercise in randomness?
One service recommended I Tweet at times that most people, if they had to guess, would select anyway. The times were when most people get to work, eat lunch and start preparing to head home. Loren tried the same service, which provided her times similar to mine. Do our followers behave so similarly?
Another service indicated I should Tweet during normal business hours on weekdays. Is that truly insightful? The same service indicated what time of day I receive the most replies to my Tweets. But don’t I significantly determine when followers reply by when I Tweet to them?
Another site scheduled all my Tweets within a few hours of each other. For example, if I scheduled the Tweets late in the evening, the site scheduled all my Tweets within a few hours the next morning. Is this optimized Tweeting?
Maybe I don’t appreciate and fully understand algorithms. Maybe I don’t fully understand how these sites work, although I typically try them out after someone writes how easy they are for people to use.
Then there’s common sense. I don’t check Facebook and Twitter the same time every day. I doubt anyone could find a social media trend on me. I think the times I’m logged on are random.
It makes sense many people may check Facebook and Twitter at lunch. But if everyone posts at lunch, what are the chances followers will cut through the crap and click on your links? Is lunch really an optimized time?
I don’t doubt smart people have devised algorithms. But I’m not convinced the algorithms are telling us much more than we can figure out on our own with a pencil and paper. To me, strategically scheduling social media presents too many shades of grey.
But I’m not a curmudgeon. I’m opened minded and willing to continue to try websites with super insight. It’s unfair for people to miss our amazing blogs. I would love to know when most of my followers are checking their smart phones while ignoring their friends and family. We won’t stop believin’.
Tags: AZ, Communications, Facebook, media, media experts, PR, Scottsdale, Social Media, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Social Media | No Comments »
Tuesday, July 10th, 2012
To celebrate the holiday, Loren booked a room at the Fairmont Scottsdale Princess. She booked the room through the hotel and not Expedia because the hotel offered a $50 food and beverage credit. At least that was our understanding.
When Loren checked in, the front desk told her the $50 credit was only good for a two-night stay. We were staying one night. I checked our email confirmation and, in what I consider small print, I read the two-day requirement.
The woman who booked our room didn’t mention the two-day requirement.
I Tweeted: ”Woman who booked room at @fairmonthotels didn’t mention I needed to stay 2 nights for $50 F&B credit. I missed the fine print. Disappointed.”
Fairmont Hotels responded with its own Tweet. Impressive. They responded in two minutes. More impressive.
Fairmont Hotels responded: ”@keithyaskin Can you email us a bit more on the situation Keith? twitterfhr@fairmont.com Would like to help with this if possible.”
Then someone quoted my Tweet: “happened to me last yr! RT “@keithyaskin: @fairmonthotels didn’t mention needed to stay 2 nights for $50 F&B credit. Disappointed.””
While I composed an email to Fairmont Hotels, Loren called Fairmont Hotels from the room. The first person indicated to Loren she wasn’t the first guest affected by this situation. But a supervisor told Loren the hotel couldn’t remedy the situation because Loren booked the room through a AAA promotion. Loren was flabbergasted the supervisor couldn’t just offer her a $50 credit. The supervisor simply began to repeat how the AAA promotion prevented her from helping. The supervisor said she could fill out some paperwork, but the situation might not be resolved for a few days. Loren indicated she was ready to pack up her bags. After putting Loren on hold, the supervisor then offered to sign her up for the “Fairmont President’s Club” which would offer two $25 credits. The supervisor explained the “club” membership would take about 30 minutes to become active.
I Tweeted: ”Frustrating and confusing conversation with @fairmonthotels supervisor in trying to resolve dispute over $50 food and beverage credit.”
Someone later called back Loren, explained how someone entered the wrong “code” and that we would be receiving our original $50 credit.
I Tweeted: ”@fairmonthotels resolves dispute & gives us $50 food and beverage credit. Thank you.”
Fairmont Hotels later replied: ”@keithyaskin Email received, but it sounds like you’ve since resolved the situation on-site. ?”
Maybe my Tweets played no role in resolving this dispute. I’m happy Fairmont Hotels resolved it, although if I were the supervisor, I would have made the resolution less difficult to achieve. But even if we hadn’t solved this on-site, Twitter allowed me to check in publicly with someone at a much higher level.
That’s an option I didn’t have years ago. That’s an option businesses didn’t have to deal with years ago.
Tags: fairmont hotels, fairmont scottsdale princess, PR, press, Scottsdale, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Public Relations | No Comments »
Thursday, June 28th, 2012
In the film American Pie, the character Jim gets excited too soon during his romantic rendezvous with Nadia. The scene is accidentally broadcast to his entire school, ending as an embarrassing live shot. If only he more properly evaluated the situation and wasn’t in such a rush. Comparison complete.
A news director once told me it’s sometimes better to be first than right. Yes, you read that correctly. Maybe he had more influence than I imagined. And maybe some TV executives should create apology templates the night before a big day of breaking news.
After the U.S. Supreme Court released its ruling on healthcare, certain members of the media offered us yet another sequel to a bad script. Call this showing “American Eats Humble Pie.” Let’s go to some Tweets from others I read in my timeline to see how some of the confusion unfolded on Twitter.
7:08am: “BREAKING — Individual mandate struck down. More to come”
7:08am: “Breaking: @CNN reporting #SCOTUS has ruled that the individual mandate for health care is unconstitutional.”
7:09am: “Wait: AP and CNN just reported opposite outcomes.”
7:10am: “Not Twitter’s finest moment here. #scotus”
7:10am: “So does the mandate survive or is it struck down? Oh Twitter, your confusion is so much fun…”
7:11am: “Lots of tweets about #SCOTUS striking down mandate… yet @Scotusblog reporting that it is upheld.”
7:13am: “Conflicting reports from media on Supreme Ct. mandate. Tune in to KTAR for LIVE breaking news, analysis.”
7:13am: “Wait, you mean TV news reporters dont take the time to get something right, preferring first? wow! #scotus”
7:16am: “Chaos outside of #SCOTUS. Hearing several things waiting for my copy of the written opinion.”
7:21am: “***Correction*** The Supreme Court upholds Affordable Health Care Act”
7:31am: “CNN makes a disastrous Supreme Court screw-up”
7:38am: “Reaction to CNN’s erroneous Supreme Court healthcare ruling”
7:48am: “Drama at CNN. I would love to be a fly on Wolf Blizter’s beard. #SCOTUS”
8:03am: “Twitter reacts to #SCOTUS health-care ruling with confusion over conflicting early headlines, jokes.”
8:32am: “Who is having a worse day Republicans, Ann Curry or CNN?”
11:03am: “Update #2: CNN colleagues defend Kate Bolduan; say veteran producer misinformed her.”
Tags: affordable health care, breaking news, CNN, health care act, health-care, healthcare, media, news director, PR, reporter, reporters, scotus, supreme ct, tv executives, tv news, tv news reporters, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Monday, June 25th, 2012
A few months after arriving as a TV reporter in Phoenix, I was working the nightshift when the U.S. Supreme Court announced in the evening its decision on Bush v. Gore. Someone assigned me to do a newsroom live shot explaining one of the country’s biggest judicial decisions ever. I’m proud of my education, but I am not a legal scholar. I spent the first few months at the station covering crime and weather. My prior assignments there involved stories such as chasing dust storms or pointing live on TV to trees swaying in the weather. Those reports did not help prepare me for this story.
Before my live shot, I watched national correspondents discuss the ruling and read the AP wire. I needed to hear their insight to ensure I said something logical when I hit the air with my own assessment. I learned this: The experts on the national level were even struggling to properly discern the court’s ruling on such short notice.
I once remember watching a reporter on national television fumbling through a court’s decision in her hands, trying to report its meaning before anyone gave her a chance to significantly look through it. The problem is this: When the U.S. Supreme Court releases a landmark decision, few media outlets are going to report “The Court has released its decision. We will report that decision once we have a moment to make heads or tails of it.” Media are eager to report the Court either upheld or struck down the law. And as the Supreme Court’s decision on Arizona’s SB 1070 again reminded us, rulings are not sports games. Decisions don’t always offer a clear winner or loser.
I followed news of the decision on Twitter:
At 7:22am, A Tweet from The Associated Press stated the court “strikes down most of the crackdown on illegal immigrants.”
At 7:26am, the Los Angeles Times referred to it as a “split decision.”
At 7:27am, the BBC Tweeted the Court “upholds some” of the law.
At 7:30am, a local reporter wrote the Court “upholds key portion …”
At 8:30am, a Tweet from The New York Times’ stated “High Court Rejects Part of Arizona Immigration Law.”
You always can quibble with wording. Tweets using words such as “strikes down” and “rejects” probably led some of the law’s critics to believe the Court agreed with them. Tweets using the words “uphold” likely led some of the law’s supporters to assume the Court agreed with them. But overall, credit these media outlets, or in some cases these individual reporters, with realizing under strict deadlines that this decision is not a slam-dunk victory for either side. I’m sure someone can find examples of poor reporting I’m unaware of. But the rush to cover other big stories in the past has left behind bad examples of making factual or misleading mistakes in a quest to make the news first.
In this case, much of the media, in how they initially portrayed the ruling, appear to have made the right decision about the decision.
What do you think of that story’s reporting? Did you see errors I didn’t?
Tags: ap wire, Arizona, Associated Press, correspondents, landmark decision, los angeles times, media, media outlets, national correspondents, national television, news, newsroom, Phoenix, PR, press, reporters, television, The New York Times, tv reporter, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Media Relations | No Comments »
Monday, June 18th, 2012
When interviewing people, red flags popped up on my reporter’s notepad when someone went overboard trying to impress me. To me, “speak softly, and carry a big stick” means your work speaks for itself, so you don’t have to. But instead of teasing great content by allowing the content to speak for itself, some of those posting Tweets are falling back on gimmicks to convince us to click their links. I assume the man who jacks up his truck and then slaps on some Godzilla wheels is overcompensating. And I assume when a Tweet includes one of the following words or phrases, the content might just suck.
Wow! - This also appears as “WOW!” because the lowercase version is something not sufficient. If I’m about to shout “wow!” at your content, you don’t need to say it for me. A Tweet that instead more artfully previews what I’m about to see should suffice.
Amazing! - A substitute for “wow!” when someone exhausts their “wow!” quota for the week.
You won’t believe - Shamefully stolen from the local news. When I watched a local news story an anchor told me “I wouldn’t believe,” I usually ended up believing it. We don’t often hear this phrase, see the content and then stumble back into a corner dazed and mumbling “I don’t believe it! That can’t be true!”
? - Stolen from cable news, which too often instead of confirming a story, simply asks a question so two talking heads help fill up 24-hour coverage. “Could this rock be a source of nutrition?” “Were some of us born on Mars?” You could Tweet any ridiculousness and simply add a question mark to spark a discussion.
Must read - You have no idea what I must read. Cut it out. I don’t click these links simply as my way of offering up a social media middle finger.
Must have - See above.
INCREDIBLE - See our first two entries. Don’t turn Twitter into a late-night, lame product commercial with some guy yelling at me.
a WHAT? - He said WHAT? She gave him a WHAT? Nice try, but I know WHAT you’re up to.
You’re missing out - Just shut up. You sound like my mother.
Shocking - An old local TV news stand-by. Oh, I’m shocked! Your content is so shocking, I dropped my phone. Wow! I never believed this amazing content would be an incredible must-read after seeing exactly what he said. Will this information change the world as we know it? The answer might shock you … or not.
Tags: AZ, interview, local news, local tv, media, news story, PR, press, reporter, Social Media, tv news, Tweet, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Social Media | No Comments »
Tuesday, May 24th, 2011
When Keith pitches a story idea in a morning news meeting, it’s as if he’s staring into a countdown timer with big red numbers and everyone around the table is slowly drifting into their own worlds. If he doesn’t grab their cynical attention spans within the first few words and seconds, he will quickly lose his audience and hear himself cut off by the next great idea.
This is what marketing and media have in common. We all have a brief window to pitch our ideas and pitch them well. But Keith recently received an email pitch 7 paragraphs, 456 words long. The next one was 17 paragraphs, 718 words long. This is not a high school English class in which you don’t know the material well but hope to sound smart and interesting by being longwinded. This is not a debate in which you hope to win your argument by wearing down your opponent with a speech that builds its case over time.
Reporters are not asking the PR world to do anything they don’t do themselves. In fact, reporters might face a tougher assignment. They typically present their ideas verbally amid distractions without the advantage of relying on a carefully crafted email that can hide the fact they’re having a bad morning.
Practice your pitches in three lines. Consider it a headline, not an essay. Reporters and producers more likely will read it. (Opening an email to see 17 paragraphs is immediately tiring on the eyes.) Twitter is great practice. Twitter forces Keith and me to make our point, seriously or in jest, in 140 characters. So consider your pitches sophisticated Tweets. If you’re good at it, a reporter will always want to know more.
Here’s another way to look at it when trying to pitch a sexy story: Show them just enough leg to grab their attention and get them wanting more. And in this art of seduction, shorter is better.
We want to hear from you. What are some of the best and worse pitches you’ve seen?
Subscribe via email to our blog, join us on Facebook & follow us on Twitter.
Tags: Arizona communications consulting, Arizona public relations agency, Arizona small business marketing, branding, communication consulting, employee communications, Internal Communications, Keith Yaskin, marketing strategy, media interview, media pitch, media training, Phoenix communication consulting, Phoenix public relations agency, PR, Public Relations, reporter, small business strategy, The Flip Side Communications, TV interview, tv news, Tweets, Twitter
Posted in Media Relations, Public Relations | No Comments »
