Posted by Tom on Aug 9, 2010 in
General interest
Sometimes people ask me what I most enjoy about PR? My answer will change depending on how I’m feeling of course but the most common answer is that I really enjoy the variety. Take for example the last few hours of my day. I’ve written a feature article about the right jewellery to choose on your wedding day, I’ve spoken to journalists about piggy wiggies and baby goats on a farm park, and I’ve started the design process on a new website. And that’s just the last few hours.
In my view PR is all about variety. Not just the variety in my day-to-day job, but the variety of communication tools and channels open to the modern PR guy. Others may disagree but our approach is to simply ask three simple questions in order:
1 – who is my audience?
2 – what do I want to communicate to them?
3 – what channel is best to reach the audience?
The answer to the last question used to be newspapers, magazines, TV and radio (most of the time). But with falling circulation and media proliferation this final question has become much more varied. Which is great! More choice and more variety means more job satisfaction for me…and that means my clients get better results!
Posted by Tom on Jul 29, 2010 in
General interest
I was very excited to receive my Flipboard Facebook and Twitter invitation this morning. For those of you who are yet to experience the delights of Flipboard on the iPad here’s what you are missing. Flipboard brings together your Facebook and Twitter feeds into one place. Nothing new here I hear you say. And you’re right, but Flipboard does it in such an anaesthetically pleasing and user-friendly way. It basically creates mini magazines from your friend’s content. You have to see it to really get a feel, so here’s a video clip.
While this may seem just another app to grab the headlines it is yet another digital channel to consume very targeted media content. In fact the iPad itself has opened up a new level of digital media interaction for me. Yes it is just a tablet computer but the user interface is so enjoyable and actually very natural. For the first time I can actually see myself reading a longer article on a digital device.
This is a very exciting time to be a PR guy. These evolving media channels are something to be embraced, not trivialised. Our PR programmes need to understand this changing landscape and learn how to extract maximum value for our clients. Long gone are the days when we can call these media channels ‘new’.
Posted by Marc on Jul 21, 2010 in
Marketing,
Opinion
“What makes a great creative concept – and has it changed?” That was the subject being discussed by myself and a colleague this week.
One thing we were both agreed on is that the most important element is, and always has been, what we think of as the ‘wow’ factor.
Now the ‘wow’ factor is pretty hard to quantify or define, but the one thing you can say about it is that you know when you’ve got it. It’s the head turner, the punch line, the thought provoker, the eye catcher – without it, there is really no point in having a concept.
That’s why delivering the ‘wow’ factor is such a big part of Leader’s mission statement.
So, the ‘wow’ factor comes first. What about second?
Well, I think not too long ago we’d have said ‘relevance’. After all, a great marketing concept isn’t just a creative idea – it’s something that helps you raise profile for your business, create or build a brand allegiance and, ultimately, sell products and services. So traditional marketing wisdom has always said that the creative concept should be closely linked to those products and services.
Except does it anymore? Where is the link between drumming gorillas and chocolate? Between meerkats and car insurance?
These are just two of many examples where the power of the ‘wow’ outweighs any issues of relevance. What they prove is that if you can interest, excite, amuse or intrigue your customers, they will go out of their way to find your brand, to remember it and to engage with it i.e. They will no longer need your sales messages spoon fed to them in the form of ‘relevant’ images.
So, if relevance is no longer the second placed factor, what has replaced it?
Well, given the explosion of media outlets and forms over the last decade, it has to be adaptability and longevity. Does your idea allow you to build, develop and grow a theme over a period of time and across multiple platforms, both online and offline?
The meerkats are a great example. Despite being a long way from relevant, they are simple(s), funny and adaptable, allowing them and their catchy punchline to be used in TV adverts, online video clips, viral campaigns, print / banner adverts, events and other PR activities – the list is endless. A great creative that combines the wow factor with this kind of longevity can give you months and months (if not years) of fresh angles, fresh impact and business success – whether it’s relevant or not.
So, we concluded, a great creative for the 21st century is characterised by:
1. The wow factor
2. Adaptability and longevity
3. Relevance to brand or product.
What do you think? We’d love to hear from you in the comments section.
Posted by Lydia on Apr 23, 2010 in
General interest
I tuned in, along with 9.4 million other people last week, to watch the first ever live televised debate between the country’s three main political party leaders. Armed with my Blackberry I half watched the debate and half communed with my fellow tweeters as the debate was broadcast. Twitter as a social networking tool came into its own, the ordinary person – not just pundits - could express their opinions on the leaders in real time, giving instant reactions to what they had heard moments before. It’s not surprising that #leadersdebate became a trending topic . So now having witnessed the second debate last night, how has the world of Twitter responded to the live debates?
In the first debate not only were many ordinary people voicing their reactions and ideas as the leaders gave it their all, but also many of the political big hitters were on Twitter to add their thoughts on how the debate was going. Ed Balls, Alistair Campbell, John Prescott, Conservative home, William Hague and many others used Twitter to poke fun and tear down the oppositions’ comments and to bolster their own champion’s performance. Tweeters were treated to spin that showed more about the parties furiously at work behind the scenes trying to convince us of their party than anything else.
Once the debate was over what was really interesting was the ‘debate about the debate’ which has raged since. The Liberal Democrats have been riding the wave of the ‘Clegg’ effect for a week now and expectations on each of the leaders to supersede their first performance has mounted.
I proceeded to engage with the second debate much like the first with Blackberry in hand to tweet reactions to the points raised. Feisty was probably the best word to use to describe the more polished style of the big three. Armed with a weeks’ worth of media analysis, the world was a-twitter dissecting the new techniques adopted by David and Gordon to address the camera more and challenge Nick Clegg more for detail. But how did the use of Twitter for the second debate compare to last week?
On statistics the first debate stirred up the most discussion with 180,000 tweets covering the hour and half debate on ITV compared to 140,000 for last night’s Sky debate. This could, of course, simply be attributed to the debate not being on a mainstream channel. That aside the decline in tweets and the nature of the tweets is interesting. The decline is probably most indicative of the novelty factor having gone - people are less hyped to see what the live debate would look like. The nature of the tweets is the most valuable to Twitter and social media analysts. This week Twitter was more awash with party candidates and spokespeople repeating key messages, putting down the opposition and boosting their own leader’s impact. They have seen the twittersphere as a new place to try to influence opinion and use it as a platform for key messages and electioneering.
What conclusions, if any, can we draw from the creation of a twitterstorm in this context? To me, it has enabled thousands of people to engage with politics in an intensely interactive and immediate way that it has to be a good thing for British democracy and it also underlines the value of social media as a tool for modern living.
