Public Relations

Torched KFC And No PR #muslimrage

Garth Beyer

As you have likely heard, a KFC in Lebanon was torched on September 14th by those opposing the anti-Islam film that ridiculed Mohammed. As deep of research as I could do online, I could not find a single action taken by KFC in response to it. Where is their PR team? What an incredible opportunity to turn the level of buzz up even more!


I’m not the only one that thinks KFC needs to step up their PR efforts. Clearly their choice to produce their meat according to Sharia Law didn’t stop them from torching the building. They (Muslims) must have seen, as I just did, that the certificate is only valid from May 11, 2012 to November 11, 2012 – just two months away. From the outrage created by the film, I guess it seems alright to cut burn it short.

Other than this short agreement, KFC’s PR team has done little despite that they have a grand opportunity to stand out, to make a voice, not just an image. KFC has the opportunity to represent all of America. KFC has the opportunity to respond in whatever way they feel best. Yet they remain silent. Where is the PR?

The way I see it is that everyone expects the President to be the intermediary between Islam and the U.S. He won’t. He can’t. There are too many repercussions with whatever action he takes, he’s better off doing nothing. KFC though, can take that position. KFC can leverage themselves by taking a stance where no one else will, by responding globally, with a statement, with a response, with a comment, with anything!

Oh yea … and it’s worth a note … I really liked KFC … now I can’t go out to eat there! #muslimrage

“All The President’s Men”: A Journalist’s Review

Garth Beyer

The question was brought up whether anyone in class had any previous knowledge about the Watergate scandal. I’ve heard about it, in middle school we glided over it in history class, it gets referenced from time to time, but I couldn’t give you an actual summary about it.

I thought I would gain further background knowledge on the subject by watching the film “All the President’s Men” (1976), but, being blunt, I was disappointed. I thought that watching this movie would lead to a better understanding of what actually happened with the Watergate scandal, thus instilling me with an emotional reaction that I could use next time the scandal was referenced or brought up in conversation. In turn, and in playing increasingly close attention to the movie, I learned more about journalism than I did about the actual scandal.

To ease into what I learned, take for instance the immediacy that the reporters Carl Bernstein and Bob Woodward took in writing notes as soon as a conversation with someone ended. In fact, and if they could, they did their best to pull out notebooks during a conversation. While it’s not unexpected, I do recall reading a passage in our text “Telling True Stories” which hinted at being careful as to when you pull the notebook out and how you want to make the person you are interviewing think that it is not even there. As a side note of my journalism geekyness, I mimicked the reporter’s immediacy to writing the story after getting their notes, in writing this paper.

On a similar note (pun intended), there were a few interesting tactics which I noticed that Bernstein and Woodward used to acquire information. After all, there is no note taking if there is no information to write down. The first technique was quite obviously; get the person to like you. In one scene Bernstein had complimented and connected with a girl who in turn gave him some leads to follow. A second strategy was patience. During one phone conversation Woodward simply remained silent while the person on the other end would continuously add on to her story after a few moments of hearing no response from Woodward. She had felt obligated to continue talking. The last tactic I noticed was the infamous guilt trip. In a couple of scenes you found Woodward saying something similar to “we don’t want you to do something that makes you feel uncomfortable.” As a result, the person does what she was asked.

While on the subject of communication, there was a scene in which Woodward was speaking to someone who only knew Spanish. I feel there is an even greater need to know multiple languages in journalism. While there are plenty more translators, it’s a common understanding that people are more friendly and open to you when you attempt to speak to them in their language, when they feel that you are part of their culture and not an outsider.

Something that I feel that the majority of people underestimate about those in journalism is the level of critical thinking, philosophy, and reason in communication that the vocation requires. Woodward and Bernstein took an entirely different execution of good cop, bad cop in their interrogations. They had played off of each other to get the information they required to get answers or confirmations. As you likely noticed, there is an incredible amount of guess-work in reporting, but guesswork is perfectly fine when you can get confirmations. In order to get those confirmations, what do you have to do? Yes, you have to be persistent, but you must have an in-depth knowledge of how a person’s brain works.

All in all, the movie “All the President’s Men” clearly had the intention to divulge the lifestyle of a Journalist at the time, much more than communicating information of the Watergate scandal. The movie felt nothing like a documentary. To top this response off, here are a couple of my favorite lines.

“If you got’m by their balls, their hearts and minds will follow.”

“How do you keep going with something you don’t believe in?

You just have to start over again.”

InkHouse: A PR’s Favorite Website To Visit

Garth Beyer

Today I simply want to share with you my favorite website. I incredibly admire InkHouse and dream about one day visiting their home base. (My aunt lives a little more than an hour away from it. Hopefully next time I visit I will also take a trip to InkHouse headquarters crosses fingers.)

Here is the site:  Inkhouse

Enjoy

Persuasive Communication: Monroe’s Motivated Sequence

Garth Beyer

What is the most important part of a persuasive essay or speech?

The call to action, of course.

There is no better proven step to a successful call to action process than Monroe’s Motivated Sequence. Developed in the mid-1930s by Alan Monroe at Purdue University, this communication sequence, or checklist if you will, is the most used and method for persuasive presentational organization.

By arranging the components of your message to fit Monroe’s Motivated Sequence, you present the maximum chance of your message making an impact and more importantly, creating a successful call to action.

1. The Attention Step: While there is a level of sophistication you must approach this step with, this is also the step in which you can be most creative. You’re well aware of an attention getter; sometimes it’s a question, a statistic, or an outburst. In the Public Relations world, that is childs play.

The best attention getter is a form of interaction: physical, metaphorical, or simply just an interaction you begin to describe. Getting someone’s attention isn’t about getting their eyes to be set on you, it’s about connecting with them.

2. The Need Step: “Everybody needs somebody.” But why do they need you communicating to them? Because you wouldn’t be communicating them if there wasn’t a problem. Step two is about making your audience feel uncomfortable with the fact that there is a problem. You have to create a desire, a need for them that will not go away by itself.

3. The Satisfaction Step: The problem most have with the satisfaction step is that they provide three to three hundred different solutions. Stick with one. Just one solution that your audience can perform to satisfy their need.

An aside: While researching this, I came across an article on Pro Blogger by Sean Davis which uses monetizing a blog as a vehicle for explaining Monroe’s Motivated Sequence. The vitally important part of the article is his explanation of advocating your audience to take one action, not any more than. You can view the post here.

4. The Visualization Step: What encourages a person to take action more than anything? If they know it benefits them. This is the step in which you show them they can profit from your idea. The common trap is that people focus so much on how the world will benefit, how this industry will benefit, or how the economy will benefit. No. While that can all be added as support, be direct and show how your specific audience can benefit.

While my personal preference is to always create positive visualizations. You can also use negative and contrast methods of visualization. These angles are representative of how you describe the situation if your ideas are adopted, rejected, or both.

5. The Action Step: This is two-fold if you are looking to truly make an impact. First, your audience – if they don’t already – need to be told what you are doing to solve the problem. This plays on so many strings of human psychology. Secondly, this step is when you tell the audience what they can do. Simple as that.

Careful about repetition in your points, but some thing are meant to be repeated to add emphasis. Build the need. Use the 7 C’s of communication. Make sure your proposal is workable. Can they afford it, do they have time, are they able to do it, and most importantly (and why I added the part in the action step about you telling what you are already doing about the problem), are you credible?

The more questions you answer for yourself, the more action you create in others.

A Problem-Solving Tool: SWOT

A Problem-Solving Tool: SWOT

Garth Beyer

To evaluate a public relations project or campaign, you can use the SWOT analysis, a strategic planning method that allows you to get a better understanding of the situation so you can make justified and positive adjustments.

This tool, credited to Albert Humphrey, is one that, if done at the beginning of a project or start of a decision-making process, can certainly be returned to at any point of the projects implementation. This SWOT analysis is the core of your project, its foundation, that if you are ever lost while on the path to making a decision, you can simply refer back to your SWOT analysis to redirect yourself on a profitable course.

Strengths: Attributes of the organization that are helpful to achieving the objective.
Weaknesses: Attributes of the organization that are harmful to achieving the objective.
Opportunities: External conditions that are helpful to achieving the objective.
Threats: External conditions that are harmful to achieving the objective.

What you may have noticed is that this analysis focuses both on internal affairs as well as external. Strengths and Weaknesses are regarded distinctly as internal factors, whereas Opportunities and Threats are regarded distinctly as external factors.

It is extremely important to label the conditions and attributes correctly in relation to whether they are internal or eternal as it is this sort of labeling that assists you in prioritizing, classifying your actions in order of importance.

For a visual examples and more information on the SWOT analysis, I suggest visiting this site.

Identifying Publics For Beginner PR Specialists

Garth Beyer

Mr. Grunig and I have something in common. Other than the fact we (you included) are all fascinated with studying Public Relations, Grunig and I share a relationship with UW-Madison. Grunig received his Ph.D at UW-Madison and knowing this made writing this topic for you ever more interesting.

If you’re not yet aware, James E. Grunig is a Public Relations theorist and guru. He is well-known for creating the four models of Public Relations. Before I elaborate on those four models, you must understand a little about your public. After all, the public must be important since it is in the career Public Relations.

You probably haven’t had any experience running a Public Relations campaign. So what? Whether you are researching how to identify your public for your first campaign or hundredth, it’s always positive to review the basics.

We may define public, in simple terms  to mean a group of people who having something in common. According to Broom, author of Cutlip and Center’s Effective Public Relations, public is defined as “people who are somehow mutually involved or interdependent with particular organizations.”

Let’s identify a public by looking at the public of whose in charge in the restaurant industry. You have a broad categorical in-charge public of Employer. Within that public there are Managers, the CEO, Stockholders, and other decision makers. Inside that public, there are more in depth ones. Managers for example is a public made up of Regional Managers, Assistant Managers, Store Managers, and so on. Categorically defining people is what it means to identify your public.

However, it goes much further than simply sorting skittles by color. This is where Grunig steps in and begins to build his four models of public relations.

Grunig had examined how specific publics behave toward issues and the messages that communicate them. In doing so, he identified four types.

 All-issue publics are active on all issues.
 Apathetic publics are absentminded and abeyant on all issues.
 Single-issue publics are active on a rationed number of issues.
 Hot-issue publics are responsive and participative on an issue after being exposed.

Believe it or not, Grunig goes even further to define publics. (Hey, he got famous because he kept defining publics after people were satisfied.)

Latent publics are flatly unaware of their relationship with a situation.
Aware publics understand the importance of an issue and how it relates to them, but have not produced any action.
Active publics are taking action on a particular issue.

Once you can define your public or in other words, your audience, to this level of depth, you are ready to decide which of Grunig’s four models of public relations you are to implement. Here they are.

I could go on to explain each model thoroughly but I have found this resource to help with that. You know it’s an extremely helpful source since he uses Seth Godin as an example.

Cheers.

 

Broom, G. M. (2009). Cutlip and Center’s effective public relations (10th ed.). Upper Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Prentice Hall.

Getting Your Client To Take A New Angle

Garth Beyer
Maps: Making Exploration Even More Interesting

Maps exert a powerful pull on the public psyche. That same pull can be – and at times, must be – made with your client.

Just because you’re the professional does not mean that you don’t have to convince your client to follow through with your plan. Especially when your plan entails risk, trying something new, and exploring different angles.

The most effective way to persuade is to create a map, a picture journal, a story of exploration.

What we have seen since the original mapmakers is that maps create a sensation, a desire to explore. Maps lead to explorations which are then turned into stories. When you combine maps and stories you receive an overwhelming amount of support and investment to draw more maps and make more stories.

Maps are defined as a symbolic depiction highlighting relationships between elements of that space such as objects, regions, and themes. Can you see the simplicity of its connection to Public Relations?

You may think your client will go with your plan simply because it shows that treasure will be found if it is followed. In reality, they may already be finding treasure and with most clients you will discover that it isn’t so much about finding more treasure that is the problem.

The wonderful aspect of creating a map for your client is about making the map interesting. Anyone can find treasure, but it takes an expert Public Relations Specialist to design a map that is more invigorating than the profits to be made.

Turns out it’s a win-win situation.

The more enthusiasm a map creates, the greater the reward.