PR and non-profits - What does it take?

What are the types of issues that would confront PR for non-profit organizations? We've seen the United Way in the news, unfavorably, when leaders were pilfering more than their share of earnings. They also make the news when someone who needs services doesn't "qualify." The United Way also makes the news for service projects and funds that help people and organizations - but when the chips are down, does the good out-weigh the bad?

My thoughts are these: First, negative stories far out-weigh positive ones, so when negative situations hit the news, the PR group had better be prepared to hit the ground running so they keep their organization afloat. A non-profit's PR department needs to ensure at all times that their organization is reflected positively in the news, and ensure positive publicity whenever possible. This way, when something negative does happen, they won't be trying to come up with positives that out-weigh the negatives. They'll already be there. Second, when the negative does happen, the non-profit's PR should never try and sweep it under the rug. Rather, they should acknowledge the incident, explain it as best they can, make it right if necessary and then move on.

Lastly, I would say that above all a non-profit's PR group needs to be in it for the cause - they need to believe in what they are doing, or nobody else will.

Now that's what I call PR!

What? Harry Potter will disappear from stores soon? Seriously. After December 29, Warner Bros. says they will no longer ship Harry Potter film titles to stores - even the final installment! OK - so immediately one side of me thinks, "I'd better go pre-order the final installment!" The other side of me thinks, "Fine! I don't need no stinkin' Harry Potter films anyway!"

Why announce, before the video is even out, that no more will be sent to stores? If I were Warner Bros. PR guy, I would send them final film out pre-holidays in true Harry Potter fashion, then issue a special edition of the final film (in Lord of the Rings fashion), and THEN, I would issue a special, special collection of all eight films together. But that's just me.

So it's an OK tactic to do what WB is doing - I just think they're missing an opportunity. They'll make great gains short term, but I believe they'll lose long term. Of course - never say never. Just when we think the very, very last Harry Potter DVD has sailed from WalMart's shelves .... I'll bet we see something "very special" come along.

Internal Communications - Is it PR?

I hadn't thought about internal communications as being public relations, until I read a chapter in my text book about employee communication. Internal communications is indeed public relations! It's just a different "public" (a word I still hate when used in this context).

So many tools that are used in external communications (traditional public relations) can be - and are - used for internal communications. And, as a company, who is our most important customer? The employees who work for us, of course. A sentence in my text says, "... well-informed employees interacting with an organization's stakeholders will have significant positive influence on relations with customers, the community, investors, and the media, to name a few important groups." That is so true. You know those rumors you hear in the real public? How often do you think they start with employees? Pretty darned often, I'll bet. So if employees are happy and well-informed (or even simply well-informed), the public will be, too. They will have the facts from reliable sources.

I don't think internal communications is given enough thought in companies today, and the function needs to be re-thought. Another idea from my text book, "People are seeking meaning in their work lives," really stood out to me. I think that too often we think employees come to work, do their job and go home - end of story. Oh - and receive their paycheck. I believe that more importantly, employees want to make a contribution and to feel good about what they do. I know I do.

So let's remember our most important customer and take care of our employees. What would companies have without dedicated, well-informed and satisfied employees? Not success.

When Your Campaign Staff Quits

Apparently Michelle Bachman's entire New Hampshire staff quit .... yesterday? The rumors were flying about this yesterday and Bachman's "team" said it wasn't true. But, today ... it is true. So what do you do PR-wise when your staff quits? You apparently say you didn't need them! "It has been said from the beginning that we have an Iowa strategy...." As if they didn't need the New Hampshire staff anyway. Perhaps this is true. Perhaps they weren't being utilized so they hit the road. So why the untruth yesterday? "No, that isn't true!" When, indeed it was.

The second thing is where to go from here. Maybe their tactic of "We always had an Iowa strategy" will work. I think it will be hard to deflate the rumors of a failing campaign, and hasten the recovery on this.

If you ask me - it was a big mistake to lie yesterday. Maybe they didn't know the facts yet - but I seriously doubt it. PR Truth #1 - DO NOT LIE. For one thing - it will never hold water. For another thing, once caught in a fib, it is harder to gain trust.

PR Can Solve Any Problem!

OK - PR can solve just about any problem. Particularly if PR is involved at all levels - all the time - I believe they can alleviate or mitigate just about anything. If a company leaves PR out of planning and decision-making, but then expects them to save the day, they will pay the price.

I do wonder if Netflix can be saved, but that goes back to my original point. Where was PR when the decisions were being made to jack the prices and split the services? If they were involved in those decisions - or even aware of them - they failed miserably. Netflix is doing too much too little too late - we need to see some fancy footwork from them, I think.

We have seen, however, major disasters in this country, and the companies (or stars) have managed to recover, thanks to great PR. I think even Charlie Sheen has come off smelling like a rose - in spite of being kicked off of his show. I don't think he's hurting too badly. I even think British Petroleum is doing OK - and their initial PR was abysmal. They're still getting tremendous gigs, all while "rebuilding the gulf."

So yes, PR can solve any problem - if it is worth solving and if they have the opportunity.

What's up Netflix?

OK Netflix - did you fire your entire PR department? First you make crucial mistakes in communicating (not) very important changes to customers. Then, a month in, after admitting you didn't communicate appropriately but explaining the need for the change - you ........... undo it? The price hike remains, but customers are back to dealing with one customer rather than two. I don't think the price even matters anymore. It's been bad PR from the start - leading right into bad recovery (again, bad PR).

With Netflix stock down 60 percent over the past three months (only three months!), it seems difficult to imagine an effective recovery - ever. It will take lots of PR (good PR), and lots of butt-kissing (an early PR term). If I worked for Netflix, I would initiate some pretty intimate communication with their remaining customers to ensure they stick around, and then working to woo back those who left. Being undaunted by the anticipated rejections, I would also go after new customers, explaining the many benefits to being a Netflix customer compared to going elsewhere. My final step in this process? Never jerk my customers around again!

Netflix needs to now be constant, consistent and cool - but not too cool. They need to be approachable and willing to meet their customers needs. And they can't just tweet about it - they need to continually satisfy their customers and, most of all, put their remaining money where their mouth is.

So Who's Romney's PR Guy?

With the wide variety of Republican candidates campaigning to run for president, Mitt Romney seems to have taken center stage - being the only member of The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints - commonly known as Mormons, who is in the running. Why this draws so much interest amazes me. I don't remember worrying about candidates' religion before. Although it seems like the fact that Jimmy Carter was a Baptist was a conversation point back when. It would be nice if people were as concerned about a candidate's capabilities and desires as they are about his or her religion.

However - I think Romney's PR guy (even if it's himself - which it could be) is doing a bang-up job. The guy is irrefutable. He defends his religion, but draws attention back to the campaign, back to our country and what it needs - what he can provide. PR at its finest.

From a recent story on msnbc.msn.com, it seems people are becoming less concerned about Romney's faith. In fact, 66 percent of Republican voters say they have no concerns - only 13 percent say they are concerned. In my humble opinion, this is, in part, thanks to great PR.

Mormons may differ in their beliefs from other Christian faiths, but to say they are not Christian. It is The Church of Jesus Christ of Latter Day Saints. With Jesus Christ being in the center of the name of the church, it's hard to deny that Mormons are, indeed, Christian. Anyway.

Four years ago as Romney campaigned, while he did well, he didn't have the presence he does today. He has obviously been doing his homework - and so has his PR guy.

PR for Jobs

Is it PR when you focus on the life and death of a person? You bet it is. People are big business. Steve Jobs, Apple co-founder, passed away yesterday, and within hours his biography went from #437 to #1 on Amazon's bestseller list - and it isn't even published yet. The publication date also moved up immediately, from November 21 to October 24. People (including me) care about Steve Jobs and for what he stands for - but make no mistake, a lot of the PR surrounding Jobs, even surrounding news about his death, is about making money.

Suddenly there are stories about "The spiritual side of Steve Jobs," "Steve Jobs as master showman, cult hero," 5 memorable quotes from Steve Jobs," and "Timeline: Steve Jobs' career." And that just lists a few. Add to that, the author of Jobs biography also wrote biographies about Henry Kissinger and ....... Benjamin Franklin. Now that's keeping some good company.

Yes Jobs was (and still is) fascinating. He was undeniably successful, intense and intriguing. It's natural for people to want to know more about the man. Even existing Jobs books are increasing in sales.

Have I ordered my copy of Jobs' biography? You bet.

Our Contribution to History - Disappearing?

I read an interesting article in The New Yorker, appropriately entitled, "Oral History." The piece shares how Columbia University's oral-history archive was founded by a historian who was worried that people weren't writing enough down - because of telephone use. People weren't writing letters like they used to, and these letters had also served as important documentation for historians.

Allan Nevins, the historian mentioned, would absolutely roll over now - with use of e-mail, Twitter (used to announce such important trivia as Beyonce's pregnancy and Osama bin Laden's death), Facebook, texting, telephone calls (much increased with the immediacy of cell phones) - any documentation that survives the delete key would be nearly impossible to track down, unless of course you were on the appropriate Twitter channels and had the right "friends."

Are we losing history? Is the documentation still accessible? I think Ian Parker (author of The New Yorker piece) makes a great point. Not that we need to know exactly where and when Beyonce announced her pregnancy, and surely bin Laden's death was recorded elsewhere - in TIME Magazine if nowhere else, but what else is lost. Family history for sure. Letters were once a great source to help family historians piece together facts important to them.

Coincidentally, I'm reading a purely fictional account of a woman tracking down the happenings of her ancestors, which surprisingly included a Sioux Indian woman. A missing piece of the puzzle was found in an oral history library in South Dakota. If not for that, she would have hit a brick wall.

So, oral history is great! But .... who is recording these now? I'm not against new technology, or social media. Quite the contrary. I merely support our descendants' right to know what happened to their ancestors. I'm sure points of history important to the world will be recorded by "someone, somewhere," but what of the trivial, the mundane - that will be so important to persons trying at some point to trace their roots? I'd like to think many of us are keeping journals with these most important tidbits. But if my rate of record-keeping is any indication, we're not meeting this important need.