PR 101

This sight could soon be a thing of the past.

I hate it when I agree with press baron Rupert Murdoch. But The Alien (as the late, great Chicago newspaper columnist Mike Royko called him) is correct. Newspapers should start charging for their online efforts. However, Murdoch’s suggestion is half-uh, planned. In my view, newspapers should stop printing completely and go exclusively on line. Think Kindles and IPods. Throw in a heaping helping of social media and I think newspapers would again be successful. I feel it is going to take something that radical to save quality journalism.

What’s killing newspapers is that the so-called Millennials get their information from the Internet – primarily from social media. They make decisions on purchases by reading other customers’ online comments, and get their news from sites such as Google News, Twitter, Digg and Facebook and go to Craigslist for classified ads. Their lifestyle does not lend itself to reading a newspaper as they sip a cup of coffee at the breakfast table.

Editors around the world have tried valiantly to reach out to those readers. Hiring younger reporters, creating special sections aimed (hopefully) at younger reader’s interest and sponsoring concerts and other events. None of it has worked.

Newspapers need to survive. I could talk watchdogs and the Fourth Estate, Thomas Jefferson and others. But, for the Internet generation, I will provide a major reason. Where do you think all of the aggregated content on news sites comes from? It comes from journalists around the world gathering that information. Who will provide that if news organizations go away?

As marketers, we still need news outlets. It is still one of the best ways to reach potential customers.

“By undermining the financial viability of traditional media, marketers are jeopardizing the only viable means currently available for reaching mass audiences,” Karlene Lukovitz wrote in the Aug. 4 issue of MarketingDaily, “That’s the core premise of “The CMO’s Dilemma: Can You Reach the Masses Without Mass Media?,” a new white paper co-authored by John Rose and Neal Zuckerman of The Boston Consulting Group. Rose and Zuckerman argue that it’s critical that marketers, agencies and media companies start addressing the issues surrounding this dilemma together.”

So, what to do? Well, I would scrap the presses and everything else physical used to produce a newspaper. In their place, I would provide every reader with a Kindle or IPod. I would sell subscribers the electronic reader at a reduced rate and then provide everything from breaking news to crossword puzzles on the Web.

“Wireless can offer newspapers a distribution platform that can provide a new source of revenue, as well as replace revenue loss from a readership transitioning from a physical to a digital product by providing enhanced value,” Mark Desautels, of The Wireless Association wrote in an NAA blog.

I agree and it also would save a lot of money for newspapers, I think. I could not find an aggregated figure for newspaper production costs. But, the Business Insider estimated it costs the New York Times twice as much to print the paper as it would to give all 800,000-plus readers a Kindle. The blog estimates the Times spends approximately $644 million a year in production costs – that’s printing and distribution.

It currently costs $680 a year to subscribe to the New York Times, according to its website. According to Amazon’s website, a Kindle retails for $299. When I was a reporter, it was assumed that four people read each paper. So, the Times would need to procure 200,000 kindles, give or take. I am willing to bet Amazon would discount the price for buying in that kind of bulk. And that’s a one-time expense.

So, the Times cuts $644 million in expenses by going to an electronic only newspaper. It also has the means to reach out to all those Gen-Yers who wouldn’t be caught dead getting newsprint all over their fingers. This is a generation who gets its information from the Internet. So go where they are and give them the news by sending out The Electronic Gazette.

My Electronic Gazette would send out news 24-hours-a-day, seven-days-a-week. There would be podcasts and video. The advantage it would have over current Internet news sites is that it would be news geared toward where it was based. That’s key. It’s easy to get national and international news. What’s hard to find out is what is happening in your community. As newspapers have made cuts, one of the things that has been thrown over the side is in-depth coverage of local news.

It is well documented that newspaper websites are recording millions of hits. The market is already there. It just needs to be monetized.

“Surprisingly, research conducted by Frank N. Magid Associates in June indicates that consumers are willing to pay for access to the content they enjoy,” Lindsey Schutte wrote in the Aug. 7 edition EngageGenY, a Media:Post blog. “In fact, members of Gen Y are more likely to say they will spend money than Gen Xers and Baby Boomers.

“For instance, 80% of Gen Yers say they would pay for music, whereas only 52% of Baby Boomers say the same,” Schutte wrote. “Sixty-nine percent of Gen Yers would pay for professionally produced television programming, whereas only 51% of Baby Boomers say the same. The gap narrows when it comes to news and information, 43% of Gen Yers say they would pay versus 36% of Baby Boomers — but the gap still exists. Paying is defined as exchanging money; it does not include accepting ads for content.”

Social media would need to be part of the mix. I think electronic papers could drive circulation up by social media. If I were the publisher of The Electronic Gazette, I would make sure links our stories were tweeted, Dugg, and were on Friendfeed. I would invite bloggers to link to our site. Facebook would be a big part of my effort. I think social media would deliver the so-called “golden readers” advertisers want: the 18- to 25-year-olds who do not yet have much brand loyalty.

What this would do would be to create a community around the newspaper – the same has been built around Apple or Zappos shoes. Once that happens, newspapers might actually survive.

NOTE TO MY READERS: If you are interested in a free, introductory course on social media, email me. This is the last week I will make this offer. Myself and some other social media acolytes are giving away an EBook written by social media guru Simon U. Ford. Ford sold several thousand of the books for $67. However, we have permission to give it away for a limited time. In addition, you get five free podcasts. We also will be holding a series of four virtual “book clubs” to go over the book. Between the book and the sessions, you will receive a comprehensive overview of social media. Because we want to provide the best possible training, there are 25 spots left. For more information, go to the Social Boomers site. That’s right, we are actually marketing to Boomers – and anyone else who is interested.

So, you’ve landed that big interview for your boss or client. The CEO is set to appear on CNBC’s Squawk Box or be interviewed by one of Business Week’s top writers. You’re feeling good about yourself. This will put the company on the map.

So, you call the CEO’s secretary to give her the head’s up. She tells the boss. The boss is so happy he calls to congratulate you. As you are talking to your leader, you suddenly realize this person couldn’t put five words together in a coherent sentence if he had a gun to his head. Or even worse, he won’t be quiet. He just talks and talks and talks.

I had this situation once with a company executive who just didn’t know how to be quiet. I cannot tell you the company – confidentially and all that. There was a great deal of concern about what he might say in the interview. Remember, I said the interview is not over until the interviewer leaves the building. When I was a reporter, I often got my best stuff after I put the notebook away.

So, what to do? Media training is the solution. Anyone smart enough and savvy enough to run a company is smart enough to learn how to be interviewed. That’s where people like me come in. We train executives how to handle questions, what to do when a tough question is asked, and what to when the interviewer is openly hostile.

So, how does one media train a chief executive officer? Well, the first thing is to make sure the individual wants to be trained. The most dangerous person to deal with is someone who has not been trained, or at least reviewed by a professional. Some corporate leaders are naturals when it comes to be interviewed. They are well spoken; never more volunteer more information than asked for, and never get ruffled when asked a tough question. May you be blessed with such an executive.

However, most executive are not like that. Their training never prepared them for being questioned by someone who is trying to dig out information. They don’t know how to properly answer a question. When confronted by a tough interrogator, they get angry and lash out, start sweating, or just spew more and more things out. This is an interviewer’s dream. It is a public relations person’s nightmare.
So, what to do? Here are my suggestions on how to prepare your corporate leader for being interviewed.

One note before I start. It is impossible for some people to learn how to do this. I know of chief executive officers who have gone through media training half-a-dozen times. It never took. It those cases, gently suggest some other senior person handle the interview. Better a bruised ego than a depressed stock price or a competitor learning  a company secret.

If the leader won’t listen to reason, someone else has to be in the room to monitor the interview. This person has to be senior enough to be able to monitor, prompt, and cut the leader off if necessary.

Back to my suggestions:

• First the general rules to teach the executive:

1. Remember, Cole’s rule #1 – the reporter only provides the rope. What the executive does with it is his business. It is your job as the public relations person to keep the executive from fashioning the noose and slipping it over his neck. Make sure the executive understands this.
2. Only provide the information asked for, do not volunteer anything. In volunteering lies trouble. You might give the reporter access to a whole line of questioning that did not occur them.
3. Nothing can guarantee that the executive will not be misquoted. However, the odds can be lowered. Speak in short, declarative sentences. Ask the interviewer if they understand the answer. While most interviewers will not let you read the story, or see the videotape, most will review quotes before broadcast or publication.

• Do not wait until an interviewer calls to set up a meeting to start media training. That’s a time to review what has already been learned.

• Block out at least an hour, preferably longer for each training session. Note that I say each training session. Most people cannot learn this in an hour. How long will it take? That’s impossible to say. It depends on the pupil. I generally recommend planning on at least eight sessions.
• At the first session, conduct a mock interview. Someone who has done interviewing professionally should do this. If you have spent your entire life in public relations, you are not going to do it as well. I am sorry, but only someone who has actually grilled people for a living can act the part well enough. If you can, find a public relations person who was a journalist. They know both sides of the aisle.
• The first interview is to determine the executive’s strengths and weaknesses. It should be videotaped. Show the tape to the executive. Review it, discuss the strengths and weaknesses the person demonstrated. Reinforce one, work on the other. In fact, tape every session so progress can be reviewed.
• Remember, a broadcast interview is different from a print interview. A television interview is different from a radio interview. A newspaper interview is different from a magazine interview and a blog interview is different from all of them.
• In a television interview, the interview subject has to remember to watch out for non-verbal cues. Don’t let them hunch their shoulders, look around the room or turn away from the camera. The best way to handle a television interview is to look straight into the camera and answer each question clearly and concisely. If this is not in a studio, the cameraman will move around to get different shots. In that case, look right at the interviewer.
• In a radio interview, body language is not as important. No one is going to see the CEO obviously. However, still answer the questions clearly and concisely.
• In both television and radio interviews, keep the answers as short as possible. It makes it harder to cut down the quote and shade its meaning.
• In a print interview, assume everything is on the record. Again, answer clearly and concisely. Do not assume just because the notebook has been closed and the pen put away that the interviewer is not listening. Anything said could end up in a story.
• Magazines interviews tend to be the longest because magazine stories tend to be the longest. It is not unusual for a magazine writer to do three or more interviews with the executive. This is a time to be careful. By that third interview, the executive may relax a little too much. He or she might start volunteer information because he now feels he know the interviewer. Very dangerous. Make sure you are in the room.
• Bloggers often has a point of view. Many are more akin to editorial writers. Many are also not professional interviewers. So be very, very careful. There is a strong possibility that the quotes will be taken out of context.  Make sure the executive understands that.

Those are the basics. Obviously there is a lot more to media training. However, if you use what I have written, you will probably keep your executive out of trouble. Good luck.

On March 27 Milwaukee-based Rockwell Automation, Inc. announced in an internal memo that management had come to the painful conclusion that an undetermined amount of employees were going to be laid off. The continuing recession dictated the company had to cut costs.

Within approximately five minutes of that memo going out, reporters were calling the company to inquire about the layoffs. That memo had not been made public by any of Rockwell’s official channels – it’s senior management, its public relations staff or anyone else with the authority to do so.

Therein lies the key rule of employee communications: never, ever tell your employees anything you don’t want to be made public. Employee communications should be treated exactly the same as external communications. There is no longer any difference, if there ever was.

Employees are your ambassadors. It is important that they trust the company, its management and the direction the company is going. An employee who feels he or she is being kept in the loop will usually feel the company cares about them. That in turn will ensure they will say good things about your company. That is a very effective third party endorsement.

Put another way, employee communications serve management best when it shows empathy for, and understanding of, employees.

Rockwell understands that. The memo announcing the layoffs was written as if it was going to be made public – because senior management knew it would be. The memo was composed in a way that relayed Rockwell’s key messages. Writing the memo with the key messages ensured the company had no need to issue an additional press release. It also ensured every employee received and disseminated the same message.

Rockwell showed its moxie in another way. It was honest with its employees about the state of the company. That’s smart internal communications. The days that a company could only tell its employees happy news are long gone. There are just too many outlets from which employees will hear about the state of their company. Employees expect candor and honesty from their bosses. Not giving them that risks creating a disgruntled workforce. A disgruntled workforce can severely wound a company. It can make the difference between recovery and failure.

When I worked as a reporter in Detroit, I was always struck by the difference between General Motors and Ford workers. While both companies had their labor issues, I never heard a Ford employee knock the company to an outsider. It seemed to be a family atmosphere. Inside the family, they might be trying to punch other’s lights out. But, they always presented a united front to the outside world. General Motors employees, on the other hand, seemed to have contests to see who could say worse things about their employer.

I think that came down to the attitude each company’s management had toward its employees. Ford was, and is still very much, a creature of the Ford family. They treat their employees like part of the family. GM does not.

As the American auto industry struggles for survival, it seems that Ford has turned the corner and will again prosper. As an outside observer, I fell that is because Ford employees trust their managers. They know what they are hearing is the truth.

Which brings up the next point, making sure the right people receive and believe the messages. Just because it comes from management doesn’t mean employees are going to believe it. It has to be endorsed in the cubicles and on the shop floor.

I speak from personal experience.

Before I became a reporter, I had a number of jobs. I worked for a utility, first in what was called underground (think manholes) and then as a lineman climbing towers. I have also worked in a toy factory, a soda bottling plant, a grocery store and as a bike mechanic.

In every case, I had a foreman. But, on every crew, there was also a worker who had a least as much influence as the foreman. This worker was usually a veteran employee. He or she had worked the job for years, knew the ins and outs, know what one could get away with and what had to be done. This was the person I and everyone else went to with questions. Usually, this person has outlasted several supervisors.

The smart supervisors always made sure they enlisted this person as an ally. If they didn’t, jobs did not go as well as they could have. Just because a supervisor wants something done in a certain way doesn’t mean it is going to happen. The people who are going to carry out the task have to buy into the mission. Put another way, in the Army, officers give orders, sergeants make decisions.

So, it behooves anyone seeking to communicate with a company’s employees to identify those people and bring them into the circle. This is a great way to kill rumors. If the shop floor leaders know what’s going on, they can quash all of the untruths that spread when change is afoot. This used to be called the grapevine. If they trust you, they can also give you an accurate picture of what’s going happening on the shop floor. You will avoid many problems if you know how your employees feel about company issues.

In fact, I recommend drawing a communications chart that includes those people. You leave them out at the company’s peril. Because they can be the roadblock you never see.

Which brings me to my next point, just as you should have a business plan, marketing plan, a communications plan and a crisis communications plan, you should also have an employee communications plan. The format is essentially the same as the other plans: it should have a mission statement; how employee communications will help the company achieve its overall goals; its own goals; strategy and tactics;  a budget; and an evaluation function.

The evaluation should include input from employees – in fact, that’s the most important part. It can be done informally by talking to employees, committees of employees and management can be created or surveys can be done. I usually recommend a combination of the three.

Think of your employees as internal customers. Keep them happy and your company has a much better chance of prospering. Cut them out of the loop, don’t communicate honestly with them and you are laying the foundation of a disaster.

Next week I will talk about the best channels and ways to communicate with employees.

I post this every Monday. As a new feature, if you have questions you would like me to answer, please email me. I am always looking for topics and input. My email address is in the next paragraph.

My background: I worked as a reporter for 25 years in central Illinois, upstate New York, suburban Detroit and Milwaukee. I now help clients with marketing communications through my company – JJC Communications LLC. If you want to know more about my company, and myself, click the link. It’s a cliché, but it’s true for me: no job is too big, no job is too small. I have worked with companies on the Fortune 500 list and I have worked with companies that have one employee. The service I provide is the same for all.