The Buffalo Blog

Machinegun PR

When are PR people going to realise that journalists aren’t walls to be broken down? Sending a release to 1000 ‘contacts’ and getting one hit, doesn’t mean that one journalist has finally given in.

This small victory is not a triumph of brawn over brains and it means you’ve almost certainly pissed-off the other 999 journalists. The reason one release gets printed is that one journalist, somewhere, actually finds it interesting.

"Well great, I have a 1000 contacts on my list and it only takes me a second to achieve that one bit of coverage so why not?!" a 90s PR person may say…

Chris Anderson would argue otherwise – blacklisting is the problem and it could spell the end of the fabled press release factory.

The guys at Ranier PR, conducted some research about this recently, finding that 43% of journalists have black listed at least one PR person as a direct result of poorly targeted, machine gun PR and of course, bad pitching.

To the winners in the PR world the fact that this type of PR won’t cut it in the naughties won’t come as any surprise. For consultancies still stuck in the past, now is the time to give up on this pointless pursuit of lazy and irrelevant PR activity and do something a bit more constructive

The Kindle – where’s the fire?

The internal debate at buffalo still rages over whether the electronic book reader is a vision of the future or just another mark in the bulging book of useless gadget inventions.

I’m still adamant that this device or something very similar is the future of both news and literature delivery (see 21 Sep - The Virtual World of Reading). However, I wouldn’t bank on stellar success for Amazon’s Kindle, at least not the current version. It just doesn’t seem to be shiny and ‘ooh-inspiring’ enough for the age of the iPod – rather more like something out of a Betterware catalogue.

I know this absence of a backlight and ‘digital ink’ is meant to make it more like the printed page, but it does make it look a bit crap too. The ‘naughties’ is not a place for unlit, bland-looking technology – we want glowing, slick gadgetry decadence and the Kindle just doesn’t do this for me.

NMK's Clients in the Wild - Escaping the wilderness.

I attended my first NMK event last night called ‘Clients in the Wild!’, and it turned out to be pretty useful. The discussion centred on the use of Web 2.0 in PR and what we, as PR consultants, should be doing with it…

Unfortunately we were cut off by the relatively short amount of time allotted for the evening, but some interesting topics were did arise:

The perennial need to demonstrate some kind of results from PR

The benefits of social networking, blogging and so on in terms of clients

Crisis management online (which was an interesting area but didn’t cover any new ground)

However, while a lot was talked about, too much focus was given to whether we should be using Web 2.0 for our clients without looking at core business objectives. You use Web 2.0 if your client’s objectives necessitate it – if your client’s customers are there and you can engage with them relevantly and overtly then go for it. If not, don’t bother.

Web 2.0 isn’t the death of offline PR, it is simply a complement, another PR tool – that is, if we want to make it ours. It could just as easily be taken away from under our feet by digital marketers and even advertising agencies. Just as we have done with experiential marketing, we need to seize the day and make Web 2.0 ours.

The point of being a consultant is knowing your clients’ needs, knowing their customers and devising the best way of communicating with them. So it is up to us not to just advise the use of Web 2.0 because it’s a current phenomenon, but to advise what we think will work. However, as with all PR tools, we simply have to be as good at it as possible and this means gaining experience. So, while it may not be the right time for your current batch of clients to jump on the Web 2.0 bandwagon, it’s certainly time for you to get up to speed.

Bebo TV - the future?

Bebo’s launch of an on demand TV service signals the next logical step in the life of visual content provision. As most providers have realised, the future of TV is will not be controlled by TV guides making users watch set programmes at set times.

Sky + knows what it’s doing in this area and the +1 channels (i.e. E4+1) are getting it to some extent – TV in the very near future will be completely viewer-oriented. However, it will go further than the simple added convenience offered by many current providers - it is on-demand downloads that will lead the way.

Letting users access content across the spectrum of TV entertainment to be played on any device – computer, iPod, television – is the only way to capture the changing viewing audience. BiBC, one of our clients, are driving some real success with this business model by offering back-delivery to on-demand video websites whilst re-selling content from its own branded website Boxoffice365.

Bebo is hoping to harness the power of its social networking to sell video content and it could be a great success. The sheer volume of targeting data and possible ‘word-of-mouse’ promotion to be pulled from social networking sites, makes it an excellent platform for both TV delivery and of course – advertising.

Advertising simply has to feature in a deal like this otherwise suppliers simply won't be attracted. ROI is essential and if suppliers can't get paid, decent programming will soon dry up. However, as Bebo already has advertising support in place, this could easily be home free for the next generation of television.

A gurgling BBC 'scandal'

Sorry to carry on, but what’s all this about babies gurgling? Apparently the BBC, horror of horrors, added some baby sounds to the tape of the recently born quintuplets, perhaps to spice up the footage somewhat?

I still don’t care! In fact this isn’t the same thing I was talking about before. However, the media need to drop their obsession with ‘BBC fakery’, before we all get bored.

What they refer to is not ‘fakery’ – it is called editing and it is a big part of what makes television interesting. So to the media - please give it a rest, or the BBC might start screening weeks of unedited footage just to escape your continued criticism.

The reality of television

Friday arrived with yet another Blue Peter ‘scandal’. It turns out they’ve been using talented young actors in the challenging role of being guests on the show. I’m not sure if socks the cat is an impostor, or what other cobwebs may be lurking in the BBC’s collective closet but it’s only a matter of time until we find out.

Blue Peter’s reputation nightmare is the next step in what has been a torrid time for both commercial networks and the BBC. However, should we really be surprised? It seems the nation’s obsession with the paradoxically named ‘reality TV’ has turned the rest of television into something decidedly unreal. The cat’s got a fake name, the guests are actors and when we call, no-one is even listening.

Our TV nonchalance has obviously pervaded the networks to such an extent that they think we just don’t care. But is this true?

Myself, I feel mildly abashed that I’m being lied to on a daily basis (not that I watch Blue Peter anymore to clarify). However growing up in a world of misinformation, I have come to expect that much of what I read, listen-to or watch isn’t going to be completely true. As such these new ‘scandals’ are irksome at worst but never come close to invoking any higher levels of derision.

Granted people get fairly annoyed when they’ve been conned out of money as in the ‘phone-line scandal’ and I’m sure reactions would be different if the news media wasn’t largely based on fact. However, changing the name of a cat, or fielding a few fake contestants doesn’t seem to have annoyed anyone but the media – I certainly don’t care.

Entertainment television has done away with reality and people have done away with caring – tell me if you think otherwise.

Two plus two makes five

The government’s way with numbers is continually astounding. Even with the maths man himself at the top, Labour just keeps getting their sums mixed up. However, is this simple mathematical mistakes or the age old technique of embellishing statistics?

The government recently released figures for the number of rough sleepers in the country as less than 500. Now, I don’t know about you but even on face value this sounds like a tiny amount. I probably see half that many on the way home from work! The Conservatives, true to form, are contesting these figures saying they could be three times higher.

Just last week we saw another numbers fiasco with immigration data also being wide of the mark. The Conservatives had a good bash at these too. The trouble is that Labour doesn’t seem to realise these mistakes are simply adding to David Cameron’s armoury whilst making themselves look incredibly incompetent to the general public.

What’s interesting is that these figures were added up correctly but with a liberal dose of rounding-down. In wards with an estimated homeless population of 0-10, ministers counted 0! A highly representative medium I’m sure you’ll agree.

Akin to a schoolboy altering data in his survey to make it fit with his hypothesis, this is a classic example of embellishing the figures. However, unlike the schoolboy, ministers should have known better.

As I always say information will out sooner or later and it is stupid to think manipulating a few figures will make the incumbent government look more impressive. Actually making things happen is what makes governments look more appealing. At the moment Brown’s government of ‘all the talents’ looks at best like a bunch of GCSE maths failures and at worst a little dishonest.

Information will out

Control over information is nowhere as strict as in China. With Google, the veritable centre of the internet and Yahoo, the young pretender (should that be old), completely beholden to the Chinese government, what hope is there for freedom of information?

In a stinging and saddening example of this, Yahoo’s CEO Jerry Lang has released information to a Chinese court incriminating a Chinese journalist in pro-democratic activity. The journalist was yesterday sentenced to 10 years imprisonment.

The jailing of this journalist symbolises the problem of companies putting business interests before human rights and the freedom of information. Creating farcical information blocks like Google, simply to access the Chinese market, is ludicrous and is a tacit approval of China’s oppressive regime.

Of course, I am not spouting anti-communist or capitalist sentiment, nor am I saying companies should simply act the same in local as in new markets – this would be bad corporate governance. Respecting local traditions á la HSBC adverts is par for the course. However, entering into a market which means a company has to change its business model as a condition of entry is simply ridiculous. Search engines are about freedom of information, in China they’ve become the opposite: information limiters.

Jerry Lang’s excuse that he didn’t want to endanger local staff, while appearing noble, results directly from Yahoo’s entrance into the market. It was Yahoo’s agreement to sell its wares in China that put Chinese staff in the untenable position of information peddlers in an information-poor economy.

The growing dual personality of search engines between the West and the East is immoral as it limits people’s basic right to make their own choices. The agreement to limit content on behalf of the government is also exactly what creates situations like the jailing of this journalist.

The truth is that however much information is limited, as long as the Chinese people continue to desire freedom of expression and thought, information will find its way out one way or another. The sooner search engine companies accept this fact by either withdrawing from China or challenging the demands of the government, the better off the whole country will be.

Blogs blogs blogs...

As we all know, blogging is the future. And people read and respect blogs, especially those written by important industry figures. This is why getting blogging opportunities for clients is one key current PR tool. And Buffalo is leading the way (we like to blow our own Buffalo horns from time to time).

A couple of recent blogs written on industry leading websites that Buffalo has secured - the NOA now has its own blog on ComputerworldUK. Check it out!

Also, BiBC has started to blog on Broadcast's website. Definitely worth a read.

What's in a name?

The tragic end of TWL sparks some interesting questions – what is in a name and what’s in this name when it’s on a blog? 

While TWL’s undeniable interest, writing talent and acerbic wit definitely had something to do with its success, would it have been as popular if he had just used his own name?

While other PR blogs use a real name, they frequently benefit from the status of the writer: Drew Benvie, Wadds' Tech PR Blog, Byrne Baby Byrne. But what hope would there be for a blog called ‘Brown Blog’…maybe I just have a crap name – I may as well call it Brown’s Boring Blog. Perhaps we’re better placed with ‘Buffalo’. Is there anything in this?

Also, what’s the benefit of anonymity when, with the ever growing number of prosecutions for ‘cyberlibel’, you’re just as likely to be pulled up in front of the beak for an untoward comment as any other blogger. 

Was TWL simply fulfilling the destiny created by its ingenious name, or was it simply great blogging that took it to the top? And what hope is there for those at the bottom? To name or not to name that is the question…