Everything About Public Relations

Press Release (example) for Marie Stopes

2010-05-25T04:27:00.000-07:00

Example of a press release. NOT real.

PRESS RELEASE

30^Th of January 2010

Campaign “Be STRONG, say STOP”.

A new campaign to create safe sex awareness for the Afro-Caribbean society in the UK has been launched today by Marie Stopes International. The campaign “Be STRONG, say STOP” is encouraging women to look after their sexual health.

At Marie Stopes International UK clinics we often see young people wanting to seek information and services, however being reserved when it comes to seek help, is resulting in an unintended sexually transmitted infection. We hope that the first phase of the campaign, “Be STRONG, say STOP”, will encourage younger women to talk more openly about their options and fears, and find a method to best suit their individual needs and circumstances, enabling them to practice safer sex.

The campaign will run for four months until end of April 2010. The counting up timer has travelled around the UK for the whole of January, showing how many people get infected every day.

From today the www.bestrong.com website for young women is lunched in order to get them talking and registering their views on the safe sex issues. When they register they will receive a bracelet to promote their confidence and strength in a healthier sexual life and the goal of the Marie Stopes International campaign.

Yekaterina Odintsova spokes person for the campaign at Marie Stopes International said: “Marie Stopes International welcomes the new national campaign to promote more open and honest discussions about safe sex.”

Prevention is better than cure, and the evidence is clear that when women are able to talk about sex, and are provided with information and access to a variety of contraceptive methods, reductions in sexually transmitted infections rates will improve.

- END -

Notes for Editors

· Marie Stopes International is a specialist organisation providing expert and confidential care and support to adults and teenagers in relation to their sexual and reproductive healthcare. This includes advice, information and services related to regular and emergency contraception provision, sexually transmitted infections and unintended pregnancies.

· Website for the campaign www.bestrong.com

· Marie Stopes International provides a 24 hour information line to offer advice and assistance: 0845 300 8090. For further information, please visit www.mariestopes.org.uk

Contacts

Press officer Yekaterina Odintsova

Tribeca Public Relations

T: +44 (0) 796 193 2456

y.odintsova@tribecapr.com

www.tribecapr.com

Press Release (example) for British Museum

2010-05-25T03:48:00.000-07:00

This press release is NOT real. Used as an assignment example.

PRESS RELEASE

6^th November 2009

British Museum Exhibits the Real Atlantis

…An exhibition that will change human history

The British Museum, as the first museum in the world, will open its doors for the new exhibition The Real Atlantis. The scientist can now prove the existence of Atlantis; it was discovered outside the coast of North West Africa near the Canary Islands on the floor of the Atlantic Ocean. The found objects are borrowed by the UK for a short period of time before the exhibits continue their journey around the world. The objects will arrive to London on the 6^th of November 2009 and remain at the museum for two months until 6^th January 2010.

The exhibition will display what archeologists have discovered under water in the Atlantic Ocean. The collection has over 500 objects recovered from the excavations; some of the objects are partial remains of an ancient civilization, which was hidden under water for thousands of years. It will show images of the underwater world and artifacts that were found on the site. Also illustrating the changing role of the people living in Atlantis in an historical and social timeline.

The exhibition will also witness a conference where scientists will give different theories to explain how Atlantis was washed away under water with illustration on the changing role of the people living in Atlantis in an historical and social timeline.

Neil MacGregor, director of the British Museum, said: “ the world has never seen an exhibition like this, showing the spectacular finding of a lost civilization everyone believed to be a myth. Majority of the objects have come straight from the excavations, and will show the magnificent life that was long time forgotten. None of these objects have ever been showed to the public, Londoners will be the first to experience this amazing discovery of a lost civilization.”

Dr Sarah Marshall, the curator for the exhibition added: “the London visitors will have the first ever opportunity to see for them selves that Atlantis is no more a myth.”

-ENDS-

Notes for Editors:

· Exhibition:

The Real Atlantis will be at the British Museum from 9^th November 2009 - 9^th January 2010

· Ticket Information:

Tickets: £10. Contacts and advance online booking call +44 (0)20 7323 8181 or visit www.britishmuseum.org

· Additional information:

For additional information on the objects contact Dr Sarah Marshall on +44 (0)79 5693 2244

· Atlantis:

The underwater image can be found at the co-ordinates 31 15'15.53N 24 15'30.53W

Contact

For further Press information please contact Yekaterina Odintsova in the British Museum Press office on +44 (0)207 961 9324 or email y.odintsova@britishmuseum.org

News Letter Example for British Museum

2010-04-28T02:31:00.000-07:00

This is an example of a News Letter designed with InDesign.

News Letter Example

View more documents from Yekaterina Odintsova.

Has Max Clifford Ruined The PR Reputation?

2010-04-01T07:31:00.000-07:00

Max Clifford, mostly known as a PR guru, however has been called other things. His cliental vary a lot from highly paid celebrities to 'regular' people, of course if they can afford paying him (min £10,000). I got to observe this special person live in a debate hosted by the University of Westminster and organised by Trevor Morris. Max Clifford definitely lived up to his reputation and my perception of him, when he answered two phone calls while being on the stage; one of the calls was supposedly from Simon Cowell. After the debate someone asked if there is morality and respect in PR, when you answer a phone in a middle of a debate on stage inform of about 100 people. Max Clifford answer was: “I get paid a lot to answer the phone, and I don’t get paid to be here. It’s business.” And again his reputation supported my view on this man. The reason I’m writing about Max Clifford is because people see PR being equalled Max Clifford. I don’t agree. I’ve been reading on ethics in public relations for some time now for my dissertation. And many scholars write about that PR is perceived unethical and we need to change the way people perceive us. But how can we, when the most seen and celebrity popular PR practitioner is Max Clifford? Of course the rest of us will be perceived the same way as his practice as the general public doesn’t hear about other practitioners.

Why do we hear ‘it was PR’ when it is in correlation with spin and unethical practice or covering up crises? I guess that will always be our cross to bear if we want to be in the PR industry.

Despite the reputation Max Clifford has earned him self, you have to give him credit for his success. If I ever became famous and needed someone to cover up my adultery and deepest secrets, he would be the first I would call.

Campaign Pitch for Marie Stopes

2010-04-01T07:09:00.000-07:00

This pitch was an assignment for a MA degree in PR from University of Westminster. The pitch was for Marie Stopes to run a campaign about safe sex in the UK.

Safe Sex Campaign

View more presentations from Yekaterina Odintsova.

Transparency And The Truth In Public Relations

2010-03-31T03:41:00.000-07:00

We talk in PR about transparency, the need for companies to tell the truth, to avoid hiding or camouflage facts. But how can PR be transparent? Im thinking if there is a link between truth telling and transparency. Telling the truth means giving up all facts and secrets, where as transparency means you need to show your every step.

Do companies want to give up their whole process? Maybe for some companies it is relevant, but companies like Apple live on their secrecy. No one knows about their product before the launch day, and it works for them, and seams like their audience forgive them for the discloser of information. So why do people require transparency and availability to any information they want?

Looking up the definition of transparency: “Transparency is the opposite of privacy.” Of course, you can’t say that about truth, which drives this discussion about the difference between truth and transparency. Truth doesn’t require that “all information…is open and freely available.” Maybe people want the truth and not transparency. I believe with the new online communication, many question if what we read online is the truth, who writes the information, some one we can trust? PR since its beginning have been perceived as a deception practice, which means the transparency in online communication might be our way to put things straight and change this perception by for once telling the truth.

I'm writing this to see what others think, as i want to explore this 'transparency' concept further in my dissertation.

Codes of Conduct and New Media Transparency in Public Relations

2010-03-28T10:09:00.001-07:00

Everyone in media and PR are talking about transparency in new media, for my dissertation I'm looking in to what extent is transparency realistic when used in new media?

The idea for this topic came from researching about how public relations has changed due to new media, resulted in coming across the CIPR New Media Codes of Conduct. After reading it and comparing with the original codes of conduct I realised that the new media codes are an addition to the original and the only difference is that when the New Media Codes were written, the word ‘Social Media’ was everywhere.

In the New Media Codes, under the part ‘transparency’ it says: “Members' use of social media must be transparent, and they must make extra effort to disclose any potential conflicts of interest. They should, if writing or contributing to a blog which recommends a service supplier, make clear any financial interest they or their client might have in doing so. They should make timely and public declarations of any conflicts of interest or the circumstances which might give rise to them.” Which means, when public relations is using new media they have to be transparent however further down in the codes under ‘Disclosure / Confidentiality’ it says that public relations practitioners have to keep disclosure about their company, clients and competitor.

The opposite side of this argument has been discussed in the US where newspapers like the New York Times and the Washington Post has social media policy where they restrict employees to post their opinions on social media platforms like Twitter. “For flagbearers of free speech, some newsroom execs have the weirdest double standards when it comes to censoring personal views.” However on the PRSA website the American association has not adapted their codes of conduct for using new media. The argument here is whether this ‘transparency’ can exist in new media without hurting someone?

The BBC’s global news director, Richard Sambrook, was speaking to a media conference about the benefits of social media (2009):

“Objectivity, he then pointed out, had always been an idea important for the news. For him it was once designed to deliver journalism that people can trust. But in the new media age transparency is what delivers trust. He stressed that news today still has to be accurate and fair, but it is as important for the readers, listeners and viewers to see how the news is produced, where the information comes from, and how it works. The emergence of news is as important, as the delivering of the news itself.”

Study Fashion Public Relations at University of Westminster

2010-03-28T09:07:00.000-07:00

When studying at University of Westminster you get to be involved in many different and exiting projects. I got an internship with SNOW PR and helped them to arrange the Pam Hogg fashion show at London Fashion Week. Even if fashion is not for you, there are so many opportunities this course can give you.

Digital Climate to Kill Us All

2010-03-26T06:05:00.000-07:00

Press Release

Green Leaf Hosting, a London based agency, launched a viral video today for a new campaign called “Digital Crises to Kill Us All”. The video is published on YouTube in order to create awareness about the damage digital centres are causing around the world.

The data centres, which are used to house the millions of websites on the Internet, are now damaging the earth as much as the aviation industry. A large data centre consumes the same amount of power as 30,000 homes. These Data Centres run 24 hours per day, 365 days a year to power corporate websites. A solution is sorely needed, and Green Leaf Hosting is the answer.

Quotes:

Matthew Dowling, director of Green Leaf Hosting, said: “I hope this campaign will raise attention to the raising issue, and since so many of us use the internet more and more, people need to be aware of the damages they are causing. However it is not only an awareness campaign we want to educate people about what solutions they can use.”

In addition to the Carbon Free services, Green Leaf now provides Green Web Design & Development, Graphic Design, Email Campaigns and Online Marketing all from a Carbon Neutral office based in North London. The company’s mission to educate businesses on their impact on the environment and to offer a practical solution has been very well received globally.

Where Green Leaf differs from the average agency however, is its big ‘side project’. It is aiming to be the first agency to offer Carbon Free IT solutions from the UK by using nothing but the wind’s power. This giant project will be funded by sponsorship, grants, investors and profits made from their current services. Green Leaf Digital; a green IT solution that doesn’t cost the earth.

For additional information contact the Press Officer:

Yekaterina Odintsova

www.greenleafhosting.co.uk

Kat@greenleafhosting.co.uk | 0207 193 2564

Nestle's Social Media Crisis

2010-03-24T08:02:00.000-07:00

Greenpeace started a big global crisis situation for Nestle after posting an online video featured an office worker accidently biting into an orangutan finger instead of a Kit Kat. The video aimed to draw attention to the NGO's ongoing battle with Nestle over them using palm oil in their products.

Nestle have been bombarded with angry consumers on Twitter andFacebook with critical comments. Consumers have accused the company of ‘hiding behind PR spin', calling the company's response to the criticism a ‘major social media fail'. (PRWeek) Digital PR experts said the situation was quickly becoming a social media crisis.

Porter Novelli associate director, digital, Kerry Gaffney said: ‘Nestle's status updates are pushing people on to its official site to see its corporate response. Someone within Nestle is also responding to posts, but they are not corporate in tone and are juvenile. The company should be tailoring its response more to the environment with a more human tone.'

One of the things Nestle did wrong was to use a junior position to respond to the comments, but they should have used a more experienced senior position to deal with the online attacks.

Nestley thought they could get YouTube to close down the video and ignore the situation, which made it even worse, it was like throwing gasoline into a fire. The story blow even bigger! One user commented on Vimeo: "Thank you Nestle...I would never have seen this video if you hadn`t had it kicked off YouTube. Now I`m forwarding it all my friends, through Facebook, and guess what they are forwarding it all their mates. Fire your PR team. They are muppets."

Facebook has been hit worse, people was leaving critical comments on Nestle’s fan page, some criticising the company’s social media approach. For example, "social media is about embracing your market, engaging and having a conversation rather than preaching!" Which then resulted in more hostility from Nestle as they started to delete some of the comments.

After deleting, Nestley started to respond with juvenile statements like: "Thanks for the lesson in manners. Consider yourself embraced. But it's our page, we set the rules, it was ever thus."

This situation is a perfect theory example for a phenomenon called the Streisand effect. If Nestle reacted differently to the situation it might not have become a crisis for them. Use PR right: Don’t insult your customers. And in PR 2010, mind your behaviour in social media platforms — especially those particularly created for the fans of your company. Some say It may there is no such thing as bad press, but think twice when it comes to social media. Nestle is a perfect example.

What Nestle could/should have done:

1) When the video came out, respond where the attacks were happening and respond with the same technique.

2) Greenpeace have freedom of speech to spread their version, you spread yours. Never try do delete the content, as people will feel you are taking away their rights of free speech. After all, Nestle have good blogger relationships, they should have used that.

3) Point out that you are trying to make things better, but these things take time. In the meantime all suggestions welcome.

The way Nestle handled things Greenpeace achieved what they wanted with their campaign. Will this result in people stop buying Nestle products? Now on Facebook people are talking about boycotting Nestle products during Easter. The situation has resulted in revenue loss for Nestle; it will take them time to convince their consumers to buy products again.

This whole mess draws attention to what I think is one of the most important aspects of social media, which is the social media crisis plan. Clearly, Nestle had no such plan ready.

NGO Against Public Relations, Really?

2010-03-24T08:01:00.000-07:00

Non-governmental organizations (NGO) need healthy relationships with the public to meet their goals. Foundations and charities use sophisticated public relations campaigns to raise funds and employ standard lobbying techniques with governments. A speaker from Friends of the Earth said that their NGO organisation would do anything to separate what they do from anything related to public relations. However, at the end of the day, what all NGOs do is PR!

He said another interesting thing, that NGO is "a brand destroyer". According to this man NGO run campaigns in order to destroy or threaten reputation of big companies. It all comes back to the first statement, how can NGO achieve all that with out techniques used in PR?

A good example of the statement is when Greenpeace ran a campaign against Dove. Greenpeace's forests campaigners were invited to meet with senior executives at Unilever headquarters on Friday 9 May 2008. In just two weeks Unilever had received tens of thousands of protest emails from around the world, because Greenpeace activists brought masses of news media to their buildings in the UK, Netherlands and Italy. Greenpeace achieved that by launching a viral video online called "Dove Onslaught(er)". Public pressure moved Unilever to react.

This was the first success in a broader campaign to secure real change on the ground in South East Asia. The campaign was designed to stop the palm oil industry from destroying the Paradise Forests, and ensuring the protection of the climate and a future for orang-utans. On the Greenpeace website they state: “If others in the palm oil industry are smart, they'll follow Unilever's lead. There's no excuse for wasting time now, so any industry slow-learners could be our next campaign target”.

15^th March 2010, Greenpeace kept their word. They launched a viral video “Kit Kat – give the orang-utan a break”.

Greenpeace state they have new evidence which shows that Nestlé - the makers of Kit Kat - are using palm oil produced in areas where the orang-utans' rainforests once grew. Even worse, the company doesn't seem to care. This has now resulted in Nestlé has struggled to contain a bombardment of criticism from angry consumers on Twitter and its official Facebook page.

On Twitter, the firm has been bombarded with critical comments. Consumers have also turned to Facebook and accused the company of ‘hiding behind PR spin', calling the company's response to the criticism a ‘major social media fail'. (PRWeek)

Digital PR experts said the situation was quickly becoming a social media crisis.

NGO might be fighting for a better cause using PR, but I believe the way they do it is harming the overall PR reputation.

Greenpeace vs Kit Kat

http://www.greenpeace.org.uk/blog/forests/kit-kat-give-orang-utan-break-20100317

Greenpeace vs Dove

http://www.greenpeace.org/international/campaigns/forests/asia-pacific/dove-palmoil-action

PRWeek - Facebook Crises

http://prweek.com/uk/news/search/991636/NestlE-faces-Facebook-crisis-Greenpeace-rainforest-allegations/

Will Social Media Lead the 2010 Election in the UK?

2010-03-14T08:37:00.001-07:00

Just as the US elections used social media to communicate with voters, so it is in the UK.

Obama is a ‘role model’ for campaigning online and for his success with online fundraising. According to Business Week, in July alone, Obama’s fundraising doubled that of McCain, generating $51 million. In addition, the Obama campaign has cited that 88% of their donations have come from online resources. This has never happened before. The man knows how to move and engage people; he listens, he reacts, he empowers. The Washington Post has even gone so far as to title Obama as the “King of Social Networking.”

In social media you have to be able to give up some of the power. But how can you when power is what drives an election?

In the past, a campaign team may have overreacted to a video such as Obama Girl or been concerned about not having a say in the messaging behind a video such as Yes We Can. Instead, Obama’s team has embraced these videos and recognised the value and power of user-generated content in moving others to action. However the UK politicians are not fully ready to give up that kind of power. They want to follow Obama’s strategy in their own elections, but on the other hand, do it with much caution. The UK election has gone online, and many are now discussing if it is beneficial for the 2010 election or not.

Even before official campaigning begins, one thing seems clear - this election is going to be fought in cyberspace as well as on the doorsteps (BBC). Social media platforms such as Twitter and Facebook are now seen as crucial battlegrounds, as well as potential forums for political mistakes. The influence of bloggers are enormous, they have the power to very fast spread their view of either supporting or attacking the various parties. These are the reason behind why the UK politicians fear the social media.

The reason social media campaigning was so successful for Obama, was that he was able to reach and influence the younger voters who might well take a steer from their peers rather than traditional media. When it comes to politics, it seems young people are less interested in participating, however with the social media, even when you can’t vote, you are part of the community who can. Which means people can still be heard.

It looks like the UK politicians are sceptical about the social media approach, Mr. Cameron might have made it clear last year that he is no fan of Twitter (BBC), however when they see the results they quickly change their minds. The news comes as David Cameron has said he is considering finally joining Twitter the social networking site (PRWeek), following his infamous ‘too many twits make a twat’ gaffe on Absolute Radio last July.

According to resent statistics conservative party dominates social media platform Facebook as election approaches (PRWeek). The research showed a staggering 4,688 comments and wall posts had been made on the party's fan page. This compared with only 1,229 commented or posted on the Labour Party's page and 727 on the Liberal Democrats. The figures demonstrate a substantial gap between the Conservatives' online engagement tactics on the platform. And still Mr. Cameron is afraid of Twitter; despite the success they have on Facebook. The biggest challenge for the parties will be to turn their Facebook friends into Facebook supporters.

Winning elections is about finding your voters and getting them to vote for you on the day. It is here we will see how effective social media campaign is in the UK.

So what will we see in our first social media affected election?

I predict we will see more MPs surrender to the online campaigns, which will stop them gaining more power. We will see the candidates who use social media getting higher audience, as the online activity creates a buzz around their election. I believe that the 2010 elections will see social media playing a big role for politicians. It will also generate more interest among the younger voters.

Reference:

PRWeek http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/search/979583/Labour-dominates-Twitter-David-Cameron-finally-considers-joining-site/

PRWeek http://www.prweek.com/uk/news/search/991885/Conservative-Party-dominates-social-media-platform-Facebook-election-approaches/

BBC http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/8589037.stm

Business Week http://www.businessweek.com/technology/content/aug2008/tc20080825_761567.htm?chan=top+news_top+news+index_technology

The Washington Post http://blog.washingtonpost.com/44/2007/10/06/barack_obama_social_networking.html

Will Women ever run PR?

2010-03-05T02:52:00.000-08:00

The debate is, will women ever run PR?

“The past 20 years have seen an influx of women into the practice of public relations, yet gender-based disparities in pay and advancement remain a troubling reality. As the field becomes feminized, moreover, female and male practitioners alike confront the prospect of dwindling salaries and prestige.” Gruning (2001;p.4)

PR is considered a female profession; most students on PR courses are women. Which should imply that women run PR, however that is not the case. Many women have the lower level positions, and as soon as the talk is about managerial positions, they are mostly occupied by men.

The reason behind this I would think is that women need to make a really hard choice: career or family? The discussion is that most women do not want the higher positions as they are forced to do the same job as a man but for a lower pay.

In a study conducted in Melbourne has revealed that most women are opting for a healthy family life rather a career. The survey says women are shifting from a “perfectionist” attitude and rate their family, seeing friends, keeping fit, further study and community work as more important than pursuing their career.

Where as in this study “Israeli women managers balance careers, family” the Israeli women believe that you can not separate that, you can have both. Their conditions might not be as favorable, but Israeli women managers refuse to sacrifice family for career. In fact, according to Hagit Yerushalmi, who wrote an award-winning master's thesis on "Women in Management," almost all Israeli women senior managers are married and have children while climbing the corporate ladder, unlike the Americans who usually remain either unmarried or childless until their careers are established or even beyond.

From both studies women feel that there is an absence of female role models in business management. Women in management tend to become invisible. They are either ignored by their male colleagues, or contribute to their own invisibility by dressing and acting in a way so as not to draw attention to their sex. As to why there is a lack of women in top management positions, Yerushalmi points out that studies have shown that there are "gender schemes" which affect expectations of men and women and how their work and performance as individuals are evaluated.

"If a man is appointed and fails, everyone will say, 'He made a mistake.' If the same thing happens to a woman, people will say, 'Why did we appoint a woman?' Appointing a woman is perceived as taking a greater risk. This is the glass ceiling."

Until women in the western world find a way to have both, career and family, they will only work in PR but will never run it.

Gruning, L., Toth, E. and Hon, L. (2001). Women in Public Relations: How Gender Influences Practice. A Division of Guilford Publications. New York

Lichtman, G. (2002). Study: Israeli women managers balance careers, family. Jerusalem Post Service

http://www.jweekly.com/article/full/18795/study-israeli-women-managers-balance-careers-family/

Benefits of Social Media for Public Relation Press Release

2010-02-27T09:48:00.000-08:00

New approach to social media webcast is launched on YouTube

A new webcast "Benefits of Social Media" was launched today, to show how beneficial social media is to a public relations strategy. Katodin PR designed the webcast in order to illustrate how social media has a massive impact on business and how companies can benefit from a social media public relations strategy.

The webcast "Benefits of Social Media" is about social media, what it is and what benefits comes with it. However it also covers the downside of social media and how you can turn it around for your benefit. The webcast covers different areas regarding social media.

What social media is and why it is called ‘social media’. This part is covering the global aspect of social media, explaining how each country has its own most used social media platform. Despite the different platforms the bottom line is that social media is about community of people with same interest, regardless of geographic and their social and economic background.

What are the sociological and cultural concepts behind social media and what their relevance is to PR. One of the biggest advantages of social media is globalization. Globalization has a power of speed in which social media enables communication. Part of the power that social media has is that so many people participate in it.

The webcast covers the issues regarding cultural barriers, about how they are breaking down. Despite difference in culture, religion, social class and other ways we used to divide our society, social media gives everyone a chance to be heard. The other benefit is the freedom of information; there are 'almost no restrictions' on what users can search for and no regulations telling you otherwise.

How the agency need to constantly feed information to its community and followers. The most important part of social media is to always be where things are happening, monitoring what people are saying about the business and react when things go wrong.

What the benefits are to the client. The approach to digital media is the same as to traditional. It is still about finding right people to send information to and reach the right audience, in social media the new tools differ. The additional element that comes with digital media is that it helps to amplify your point. News in traditional media disappears fast, where as social media works as long tail. When information is online it will stay there for a long time, it has no time limit! While magazine readership and the number of available print publications continue to decline, the number of consumers using the Internet to access and share information continues to rise. Which means, if the business is to be successful, social media is crucial for the business strategy.

What are the negatives to the client and how will they be dealt with. When information is public, it can get out. It is important to be there when things go wrong! Posting videos of response; create blogs answering the audience’s questions etc. Instead of watching what people are talking about, jump into the conversation by responding. The audience is a huge asset, they will speak up therefore listen – and respond.

In the case of a crisis traditional media always comes to the rescue, use it so support the argument.

Quotes

The director of Katodin PR Yekaterina Odintsova said: "I hope this webcast "Benefits of Social Media" will provide a new view of social media and the way it is constructed should provide an easy understanding for everybody who watches it. I hope that this new approach of using social media to tell about social media will inspire others to contribute or question the changing media and the benefits of using social media."

For more information contact the press officer:

PR Director

Yekaterina Odintsova

y.odintsova@hotmail.com

News Facts

Social networks and blogs are the 4th most popular online activities online, including beating personal email.
It took radio 38 years to reach 50 million listeners. Terrestrial TV took 13 years to reach 50 million users. The Internet took four years to reach 50 million people... In less than nine months, Facebook added 100 million users.
The most recent figure of blogs being indexed by Technorati currently stands at 133 million. The same report into the Blogosphere also revealed that on average, 900,000 blog posts are created within a single 24-hour period.
If Facebook were a country, it would be the fourth largest in the world. More people communicate via social networks than via email. There is no denying that the whole world is moving on-line and business and the way people communicate is changing at the fastest pace in history
78% of consumers trust peer recommendations and Only 14% trust advertisements

The Video

Does Ethics Exist in PR?

2010-02-27T02:07:00.000-08:00

Creating a positive reputation for a company in the public's eye is essential for the survival of any organisation. Unfortunately, for many PR practitioners, this means using whatever means possible, including any unethical methods, in order to create the "right image" for their organisation and still maintain a pristine reputation amongst the general public. It is because of these dubious tactics by certain PR practitioners that lead journalists to call them "PR flakkers", a negative term given by journalists to PR practitioners for manipulating, self-serving information, which does not tell the whole story most of the time (Parsons 2004;5).

‘Truth telling is not a matter of speaking the truth but is rather a matter of speaking what one believes to be the truth’

Michell Green (2003)

The role of PR as a practice has had three major interpretations: controlling publics, responding to publics, and achieving mutually beneficial relationships among all publics (Newsom and Scott, 1985). Within the first interpretation lies the root of the belief that PR is persuasive by nature, the idea that PR practitioners would do anything in order to achieve their goal.

From a PR point of view, this interpretation is open to debate. ‘Ethical harmony is essential for social stability. And social stability is the mission and product of public relations’ (Sharp, 1990;25). In PR, credibility is vital. It is logical that an ethical business practice is better tha

n an unethical one when it comes to reputation and public image. Every person has their own ethical morality and follows those ethics on a regular basis, however, when it comes to a company’s ethics, the result might be contradictory to the practitioner's own beliefs. And here in lies the question. Is a PR practitioner's ethic's based on their company's standpoint or visa versa? To what extent will a PR practitioner bend their moral ethics to please their employer?

According to Bowen’s research, which supports a historical trend of associating PR with all things that are unethical such as lying and spin doctoring. She writes that many critics argue that there cannot be ethical PR for the reason that the practice itself is manipulative. The answers to the above questions, lies in that the PR department in a company has to follow its company’s ethical standpoint for the PR’s beneficial reasons. However if the company’s morality is not in accordance with the PR practitioners own ethical beliefs, PR is responsible for applying their ability to cover any issues up in a way that it will manipulate the output of the message so it is believed to be ‘in the favour of the public’. This is why many critics have the opinion Bowens is referring to.

No formal guidelines exist that could explain how a member should go about behaving in accordance with the ‘public interest’, nor has any formal structure been developed where a practitioner may contribute to the public interest on behalf of the profession (Parsons, 2004). Parson is not the only author discussing the lack of rules in PR; many others have joined the big debate, and everyone has their different points of view. However, it is interesting that they all have the same conclusion, that the PR When it comes to ethical behaviour, it is up to each individual’s morality, like Albert Camus once said, ‘Integrity has no need of rules’ (cited Parsons, 2004;37). However that is not always the case when it comes to dealing with PR. The Codes of Ethics were designed by major PR associations in order to help and prevent any unpleasant behaviour amongst practitioners by adapting these broad guidelines for members of their organisations to follow.

The Codes were created in order to have regulations within PR and to create a better reputation within the professional bodies. The creations of the Codes are an attempt to turn PR into an ethical practise and recognised as a profession by other organisations. PR for PR!

In order for PR to be considered a profession there must be a shared definition of professional ethics between any organisations and the ethical obligations a PR practitioner must possess.

The PRSA provides no concrete guidelines for its members who need them in order to show professional responsibility when serving the public interest. Suggesting that members simply conduct their interaction ‘in accordance with the public interest’, these guidelines can be manipulated into the belief that something is beneficial for the public, however a PR practitioner must follow the client's request. PR practitioners often state that Codes of Ethics are too vague to be useful in their own careers or that they do not give enough specific guidance to be anything other than basic (Bowen).

It is quite interesting since every Code of Ethics is essentially a collection of moral principles and values. However it is noticeable that most scholars that discuss morality focus on the foundation of ethical principles. Concluding that the Codes are neither professional nor ethical and until fundamental changes are made, PR will fail in its aim of achieving a professional status (Parkinson, 2004).

In order to change the perception of unethical PR, it is not only vital to have concrete ethical regulations for PR professionals, but also to have laws that will restrict and punish any PR practitioner and not only the members of the PR associations.

The discussion on the questions whether the Codes of Ethics are effective and can help PR practitioners to be ethical is still a very popular discussion. Until there are better-structured regulations in the field of PR, other professions will continue to consider PR as an unethical practice. These regulations are needed in the field of PR in order to have better guidelines for the practitioners and with the intention that the public will know that for any unethical and untrustworthy acts, there will be consequences.

The purpose of the discussion is to illustrate the unethical side of PR, as there are no laws stopping the practitioners to work around the rules in intention of achieving their clients’ requirements. The evidence from this discussion proves that the Codes of Ethics are ineffective as they are only written for PR associations’ members and are only used as a guideline, one of the biggest issues with the Codes of Ethics is that they do not cover the majority of the practitioners who are working within PR. What about those who are not members of big PR associations? Does that mean they can do what they please with no further punishment? This is still arguable, as mentioned prior, the PR associations need to come up with more strict rules and laws that would consider all PR practitioners and not only its members. By adapting more strict and structured regulations in PR, the public and other professions may change their existing view and start to consider PR practice as a profession that has values and rules, and if any of those regulations are broken there will be consequences.

Reference

Newsom, D. and Scott, A. (1985). ‘This is PR: The Realities of Public Relations’. Wadsworth, Belmont

Parkinson, M. (2004). ‘The PRSA Code of Professional Standards and Member Code of Ethics: Why They are Neither Professional or Ethical’. Public Relations Quarterly, Fall, 27-31

Parsons, P. (2004). ‘Ethics in Public Relations: A Guide to Best Practice’. Institute of Public Relations, London

Sharp, M (1990). ‘Harmonizing ethical values in the global village’. International Public Relations Review. Vol 13, no 3. P 25

Benefits of Social Media Webcast

2010-02-19T08:13:00.000-08:00

A new webcast "Benefits of Social Media" was launched today on YouTube, to show how beneficial social media is to a public relations strategy. Katodin PR designed the webcast in order to illustrate how social media has a massive impact on business and how companies can benefit from a social media public relations strategy.

If you can't see the video click here (YouTube)

Think Globally - Act Locally

2010-02-07T09:34:00.001-08:00

The debate about “Think globally - act locally” has been a well-discussed topic in PR world. Should you consider local customs in global campaigning or not? The technological communication tools have enabled us to communicate globally. Companies now need to be global and their communication strategies have to involve global PR. However the cultural differences matter. When operating in a particular country, the nations political systems and culture shapes the PR practice.

The principles of balancing global operations with respect for local culture extend to managing communications, in which cross-cultural understanding can make a significant difference in the effectiveness and success of a global campaign.

Cross-cultural communication came into its own in the mid-1940s. During the “Cold War,” the U.S. established the Foreign Service Institute, bringing together linguists and sociologists, among others, to help the corps develop language competency as well as an understanding of and sensitivity to distinct cultures.

Effective global communications has to take into consideration how local attitudes and behaviors differ from the global communication strategy. When building a campaign, it is essential to have a clear message and a defined audience, considering who the audiences are and where they are, and what local factors might influence the result of that campaign. Something as simple as observing local seasonal or religious holidays when timing the launch of a new campaign can have a direct impact on the success or failure of the campaign.

When setting up local communication team, a good idea will be to employ locals for the campaign as they have a better knowledge about the audience you are trying to reach. When PR companies run campaigns they need to take the local needs into consideration, otherwise the results might turn to the worse. International companies should first act locally, and then in order to sell their products, act globally.

Is Corporate Social Responsibility Window Dressing?

2010-02-06T05:47:00.000-08:00

This post is part of an argument that is 'for' the following statement:

"CSR is nothing more than window dressing and business should focus on making money."

There are many critics arguing for and against CSR, many believe that CSR distracts from the fundamental economic role of businesses; that it is nothing more than superficial window-dressing.

To take the example of simple corporate philanthropy, when corporations make donations to charity they are giving away their shareholders’ money, which they can only do if they see potential profit in it.

This may be because they want to improve their image by associating themselves with a cause, and use a cheap way of advertising, or to contradict the claims of pressure groups, but there is always an underlying financial motive, so the company benefits more than the charity.

According to David Henderson (2001) CSR is criticised as being a PR stunt, bearing in mind that most CSR workers in companies sit in the communications and PR departments, and considering that the strategies of CSR - dialogue with NGOs, codes of conduct, social reports - were all designed and developed by PR companies such as Hill and Knowlton.

CSR helps to greenwash the company's image, to cover up negative impacts by giving the media positive images of the company's CSR credentials. As Deborah Doane points out in 'From Red Tape to Road Signs', CSR enables business to claim progress despite the lack of evidence of provable change.

What does all that implies? CSR is pure window-dressing.

Milton Friedman famously argued that the ‘business of business is business’, the sole responsibility of the organisation are its shareholders, and providing profits for them. He acknowledged legal and ethical constraints on business activity, emphasising that the organisation should not harm society.

Corporations should obey the laws of the countries within which they work; other than that corporations have no other obligation to society.

Follow government regulations and avoid CSR.

CSR is seen as catering to public relational purposes. Corporate responsibility is used as conventional public relations with the aim of distracting society.

Instead of focusing on CSR corporations should focus on making money. The increase of profits in a company benefits the economy, which benefits the citizens of that economy. ‘The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits.’

Big companies move their production to places like china and then “they don’t pollute”. 40% is caused by Europe and Americas export. Covering up negativity, in many cases simply reinforces the criticism that CSR is nothing more than a PR exercise.

Shell has a much-publicised CSR policy and was a pioneer in triple bottom line reporting, but this did not prevent the 2004 scandal concerning its misreporting of oil reserves, which seriously damaged its reputation and led to charges of hypocrisy. In Africa the communities where Shell operates they are still waiting for schools and hospitals.

In our media saturated culture, companies are looking for ever more innovative ways to get across their message, and CSR offers many potential ways of doing so.

The dream that socially responsible corporations can transform our society is an illusion.

SCR is nothing more than window-dressing!

Reference

David Henderson (2001). Misguided Virtue, False Notions of Corporate Social Responsibility. http://www.iea.org.uk/files/upld-release5pdf?.pdf

Deborah Doane. From Red Tape to Road Signs http://www.corporation2020.org/corporation2020/documents/Resources/Doane.pdf

Milton Friedman (1970). The Social Responsibility of Business is to Increase its Profits. http://www.colorado.edu/studentgroups/libertarians/issues/friedman-soc-resp-business.html

Corporate Branding

2010-02-02T06:42:00.000-08:00

Apple's Brand and Identity

View more presentations from Yekaterina Odintsova.

Brand Image

The Apple logo is one of the most famous logos in the world. Apple fans not only put this logo on their vehicles to show their loyalty, they go to the extreme of tattooing themselves with it, a level of dedication very few brands achieved.

Also it was kind of iconic about taking a bite out of an apple. Something that everyone can experience. It goes across cultures. An interview with Rob Janoff, where he is telling about the logo design and its history. " I was told by my boss that there is a computer term called byte". And I was like: "You're kidding!" So, it was perfect, but it was coincidental that it was also a computer term. At the time I had to be told everything about basic computer terms.

In advertising Apple used great leaders like Cesar Chavez, Gandhi and the Dalai Lama, to persuade people that a Macintosh might also allow them to "Think Different."

Brand reputation

Ask marketers and advertising experts why Mac users are so loyal, and they all cite the same reason: Apple's brand. Apple, of course, is the archetypal emotional brand. It's not just intimate with its customers; it is loved.

Apple is about imagination, design and innovation. Mark Gobe said about Apple "It goes beyond commerce. This business should have been dead 10 years ago, but people said we've got to support it." "Absolutely, completely dead. The brand is all they've got. The power of their branding is all that keeps them alive. It's got nothing to do with products." "It's like having a good friend," Gobe said. "That's what's interesting about this brand. Somewhere they have created this really humanistic, beyond-business relationship with users and created a cult-like relationship with their brand.

It's a big tribe, everyone is one of them. You're part of the brand.

The company has established a "heartfelt connection" with its customers. This can take several forms, from building trust to establishing a community around a product. In Apple's case, its products are designed around people: "Take the iPod, it brings an emotional, sensory experience to computing," said Steve Jobs. "Apple's design is people-driven."

It’s been pointed out that seeing Apple’s cool logo makes you feel more creative and smarter. And it’s not only about that — how you feel — but how you act. That’s an interesting proposition: in a collective spirit of self awareness, you’re inclined to actually feel smarter and more creative about your sense of personal self awareness, when you actually see an exemplar of creativity — Apple.

The Apple brand personality is about lifestyle; imagination; liberty regained; innovation; passion; hopes, dreams and aspirations; and power-to-the-people through technology. The Apple brand personality is also about simplicity and the removal of complexity from people's lives; people-driven product design; and about being a really humanistic company with a heartfelt connection with its customers.

Brands are more important than products. Products have limited life cycles, but brands can last forever.

Blogging in Social Media

2010-01-30T03:48:00.000-08:00

The successful blogs are written to connect, help and gain information. Blogs that contain informative and knowledgeable content and address real issues are read and passed along to others as credible. However there has been a noticeable increase in reporters where journalists pick up a piece of a story through social media and run it with whatever is out there without checking the credibility. This is how the profession becomes a defence, and the PR becomes the ‘bad guy’ again in the world of media. This comes from company’s leaks and are much more difficult to stop. Once this happens the PR practitioners only chance to correct this is to come forward before every piece of the story is ready for the public, which leads it back to the perception of PR being illegitimate. It also means that stories with major publications will not be newsworthy, as the leaks sometimes contain inaccurate information resulting in journalists lose their interest in the story once they realise they no longer have an exclusive.

For many years PR has been fighting to be credible, by using new media it is easy for everyone to access and post information, which means in order for the information to be credible the readers need to spend more time on researching in order to be reinsured that the information is reliable. In the book "Flat Earth News" Davis is talking about how naive the readers are when reading a newspaper, which most readers believe to be credible news, but how can they know better when the journalist many times run a story with out themselves knowing how credible the information is.

Will blogging be a positive or negative tool for PR? At this particular time during recession, blogs are here to financially support the communication channels. Everything mentioned in this report suggest that there is more pros for the social media and blogs, however as everything else, it has its own downsides.

After talking about social media, it sounds like traditional media is no longer relevant. It is not true, media is critically important for many organisations. A positive story in the Guardian or an article in the Financial Times will still bring more publicity to any company than any web-blog. Blogs as a trend is here to stay and there is much that the PR industry can achieve by using social media and its channel of communication. Blogging may change the nature of PR as an industry and it could perhaps take it to a new way of building relations with the public, a way that is not only direct and honest but one that includes responsibility. What will happen with social media and PR in the future? Social media era is here and PR needs to adapt and follow its trends.

Propaganda in Russia

2010-01-24T04:12:00.000-08:00

After watching the “War Spin” by BBC, I thought about how Russia uses propaganda. Next year the Russian government will spend $1.4 billion (£866m) on international propaganda – more than on fighting unemployment. Kremlin has a 24-hour English language TV channel, Russia Today (RT), they broadcast to everywhere in the world, In January RT launched a Spanish service aimed at Latin America, a region of growing Kremlin geopolitical interest; RT already broadcasts in Arabic. The Kremlin employs two major PR agencies, Ketchum and GPlus, and in London uses Portland PR. And then there are the angry bloggers – a shadowy army of Russian nationalists who are active on western newspaper websites, including the Guardian. Anyone who dares to criticise Russia’s leaders, or point out some of the country’s deficiencies, are immediately branded a CIA spy or worse.

The Russian government uses all of its recourses to change the perception of the new ‘democratic’ country, after many years of soviet time. However they are doing it in a very aggressive way to show how powerful the country is. Perhaps they are doing their job, as many are afraid of Russia, however this concludes in a vicious circle where they want to achieve a good reputation but want everyone to be afraid of them. Evgeny Morozov from diplomacy department of Georgetown University’s, who is writing a book on how authoritarian regimes are exploiting the internet, said the Kremlin was taking a more “aggressive” approach following last year’s war in Georgia. An armed conflict started in August 2008 between Georgia and South Ossetia. The Russian and western media had very different view on this situation. The same images and footage clips were used when reporting news, however the western world was showing how it was the Russians attacking Georgia where as in Russia we saw how the Russians were protecting Ossetia against the sudden Georgian invasion.

From the Russian media the information was that the Russian peacemakers were attacked in South Ossetia, many died, because they did not have weapons, as they were there to keep peace under control. The western media reported that it was Russians attacking Georgia and how bad the Russian government dealt with the situation. After the five day war, Russia was accused of using propaganda and controlling the media to say that they were defending them selves and many in the western world believed that it was a cover up to get in to Georgia. The media confusion came from that both sides were accusing each other of who started the fire first. In war no one is right, as innocent people are dying despite the fact of who started the fire first.

During the war the western world was on Georgia’s side, Russia was in trouble in terms of convincing its public that they were not the bad guys. There was a strong media control about what was said internationally, as the last thing Russian government wanted was doubt from its public. Some of the news slogans were: "Georgia erases the country from face of the earth, Russia inputs the troops" or "Russia offers an ultimatum for the Georgian troops". People have perception with words and slogans, by using these examples Russia looks like saviors and that they are trying to make peace with Georgia.

When observing the media analysis worldwide, it is possible to spot the mutual classical slogans and easy assessments, not always accurate. As soon as the clashes began in South Ossetian capital, anti-American propagandists rushed to accuse the Bush Administration of "pushing President Mikheil Saakshvili to perform an attack destined to weaken the Kremlin." Other more sinister charges linked the Georgian move to a US "interest in Oil pipelines." Similar to the 9/11 conspiracy theories these allegations were also found in some Russian unofficial commentaries. But opposing narratives spoke of a "Putin offensive to expand Russian power southbound after years of weakness." Many stories accused the Kremlin of simply trying to "re-occupy" former Soviet Republics.

Over a year after the European Union commissioned a report in which they report that states that it was Georgia who opened fire first. First after that the western media like the Wall Street Journal, which has published a fair amount of columns by the Georgian President Saakashvili, had a headline that read “Report: Georgia Triggered War With Russia”.

This time Russia turned out to have said the truth, however it is not always the case. The presidential order is not to say anything about the opposition, the financial crisis in Russia, repression of the freedom of speech and murder of journalists. This is how western world see Russian media communication. When a western journalist asked about Putin and Medvedev, a male journalist of the Russian state media replied: ‘they are heroes, strong men, my great examples. Men with great characters.’ To the same question Russian female journalists answer that they are the best-looking men they have ever known and that they would like to marry such men. The presidential order would be a great success for Russia, but unfortunately reality is different. Western media and the general public have already understood whom they are dealing with. This is the 21st century; the truth can no longer be kept secret as easily as in soviet times. However propaganda will be a big part of Russian media communication as the country is enormous and to have the world see the ‘new and improved’ Russia, that is what they believe is the right way, even when the rest of the world disagree with their way of dealing with the situation.

Freedom of Speech in Denmark

2010-01-21T09:31:00.000-08:00

On September 30^th 2005 a Danish newspaper Jyllands Posten, posted 12 Muhammad cartoons as to announce that this publication was an attempt to contribute to the debate regarding criticism of Islam and self-censorship. This has then later led to further examples of the cartoons were reprinted in newspapers in more than fifty other countries, further extending the controversy. One other big Danish publication Politiken reprinted their version of the cartoons. These publications resulted in protest from Muslims living in Denmark and other Islamic countries (on the 22^nd of February 139 were recorded dead because of the situation).

All this was happening because in Denmark media has freedom of speech. For four months radical Muslim organisations have unsuccessfully demanded government control. However, despite their pressure and the support they were receiving from international organisations such as the UN and the EU, the Danish government refused to call the newspaper to account. In this situation the government stands back pretending that they are not involved. However the whole situation was for Denmark to get publicity, as it happened after the US went to war with Iraq. Denmark is a small country that sits in the back and keeps to them selves. After the publications, all of the death threats and even murder attempts on the journalist started to happen, the Danish government as an ally with America assumed that the Americans would come and protect the country, which never happened. After they realised that, the Danish government and the media was forced to stick to their belief in freedom of speech and handle the situation on their own. The Danish government refused to interfere and limit the freedom of speech, as it will make them look weak and they want to be heard about their strong position.

But was it the right way to do so? The Danish government press knew what they were doing and what they will get out of publishing these cartoons. The government used the media to express their views through press, as they are the ones with freedom of expression.

The twelve drawings illustrated:

- The face of a man whose beard and turban were drawn within a crescent moon, and with a star (symbols normally used for Islam);

- The face of a grim-looking bearded man with a turban shaped like an ignited bomb;

- Five stylised female figures wearing headscarves, with facial features depicted as a star and a crescent moon. The caption reads: "Prophet! You crazy bloke! Keeping women under the yoke!";

- Two bearded men wearing turbans and armed with a sword, a bomb and a gun, running towards a third bearded wearing a turban. He is reading a sheet of paper and gesturing them to hold off, with the words: "Relax folks! It’s just a sketch made by an unbeliever from southern Denmark";

- A bearded man wearing a turban and carrying a sword, standing with a black bar covering his eyes. Two women are flanking him, wearing black gowns, with only their eyes visible;

- A bearded man wearing a turban, standing on clouds with arms outstretched, exclaiming: "Stop, stop, we ran out of virgins!". Men in tatters with plumes of smoke over their heads queue up in front of him.