How “Big Desk Syndrome” Can Backfire with the Press

January 25th, 2010

From the series What Not To Do

by Lou Pierce

Big Idea Company

So, there he is: Mr. CEO — the big desk, the secretary, everyone answering to him; sure, it’s a lot of responsibility, a lot of work, but sometimes it can go to person’s head.  I’m the President of a company myself, and I know – just ask my colleagues at Big Idea Company.  But, when you’re working with the press, you simply cannot afford to let what I call the “Big Desk Syndrome” foul things up.

Fortunately, most CEOs are smart enough to know that the media do not exist to further his or her company’s corporate agenda; that they are professionals whose words can either be helpful or hurtful.  It is only the rare company president who believes that the media will print whatever he or she says without corroboration, without opposing view, without checking of facts.  It’s only the rare CEO who is a press hog and believes that reporters are here to do him or her a favor.

I once worked for a company president who believed that only he should handle his company’s press contacts because reporters would surely find his combination of intellect and charm so irresistible they’d always print whatever was best for the organization.  This, of course, was folly.  But, try telling that to someone who’s enamored with himself and is naïve enough to think that everyone else is too!

Whenever this gentleman encountered reporters on the street or at community events, he’d strike up a friendly conversation.  Typically that friendly chat would devolve at some point to an “off-the-record” remark that he was sure would never be printed or used against him or the company he presided over.  After all, he reasoned, ‘these are my friends.  They like me.  And, I can say things to them that other people can’t.’

Well, he was wrong.  There’s no such thing as “off-the-record.”  And, while most of his awkward comments were just that (awkward), not all of them were so harmless.  Some of his observations regarding company competitors were provocative enough that they called for professional scrutiny.  And it is the job of reporters, after all, to look into things. 

More often than not, when the results of such professional scrutiny uncovered facts that were inconsistent with the CEO’s view of the world, instead of acknowledging his mistakes, he’d complain of unfair treatment — ‘how dare the media question his view of things.’  So, after a while, he began to see the media as an enemy – as his company’s enemy.  And his complaints of unfair treatment became public knowledge. 

As for the reporters who at first considered this guy to be merely socially awkward, they started to see him as a buffoon with an axe to grind.  Press releases, media comments from the company, they were all ignored.  This guy had undermined his own credibility, the company’s credibility and started a war with the media at the same time.  It became impossible to get a good story done about the company whatever the pitch.  Media relations were terrible.  And whether reporters knew it or not, they were inadvertently feeding this guy’s perception that reporters were the enemy.

It was all so Nixonian; all so unnecessary.  But, you could see it coming – a classic case of “Big Desk Syndrome” that made public relations for this company a nightmare of a job.

What can you take away from this true story?  You can remind yourself that journalists are not your friends.  They cover a beat.  And they’re looking for any less-than-intelligent comment to fall from your boss’s loose lips — particularly if he or she is a ‘news hog.’

If you’re a new in-house marketing director or public relations manager, make sure your president understands the boundaries when it comes to talking to the press.  Nothing is ever “off-the-record.”  Nothing.

Most CEOs are not like the guy in this cautionary tale.  They can be tough to work for, but they’re reasonable and know that reporters have an important job to do. They actually respect the media and will appreciate the good press you bring to the company.  They’ll also be the angriest when things go wrong.  So, step in early.  You’re the professional.  And watch out for what I call “Big Desk Syndrome.”  It can really foul things up.

A Four-Letter Word that Boosts Morale and Productivity, and Decreases Absenteeism at Work

January 18th, 2010

by Jill Klinedinst

Big Idea Company

Like most businesses, you’re probably wondering how you can get the most from your employees.  Maybe you want to increase productivity, decrease absenteeism or simply make the work environment a little more comfortable. There’s an easy way to do all of these things – a simple four letter word: DOGS.

Not what you were thinking, right? Take it from a team of professionals who have been bringing their canines to work for years – dogs boost office morale and productivity.  “The dogs in our office have a way of keeping me grounded,” says Ryan Faist, Writer at Big Idea Company, who does not own a dog, but gets his fill at work. “It’s hard to be stressed out with a German Shorthaired Pointer looking out my window at the people outside. Sometimes I take a break from my work and look with him. You’d be surprised how spending a few minutes with a dog can help clear your mind.” Daily 4 to 5-minute walks for potty breaks in the sunshine also do a great job at reinvigorating employees.

And you don’t have to take our word for it.  Take Google’s word for it too!  One of the most-successful companies in the world, Google has been inviting well-behaved dogs to work since they were founded.  But even Google would tell you that there’s data to back up the claim that dogs are good for business.

For example, in a recent study conducted by the American Pet Products Manufacturers Association, 73 percent of all businesses that allow pets find that work environment is more productive, 27 percent of those same businesses reported a decrease in staff absenteeism, and 96 percent reported that pets created positive working relations among staff members. 

So there you go.  But before you go unleashing Fido and Fluffy, there are a few things to consider. Here are five tips on how to maintain a peaceful, dog-friendly workplace.

Hound Health
Be sure all dogs in your office are up-to-date on vaccinations, and are on flea and heartworm preventative medications.  Sick dogs can spread their germs to other dogs in your office.  So, just like people, when a dog gets sick, they should stay home and rest until they’re well enough to come back to work.

Doggy Rules
Establish rules, and stick to them.  If dogs need to be ‘put away’ when clients visit, do it.  Your clients will appreciate it, and so will your dogs.  They learn from routines.  By disciplining dogs whenever they misbehave, they will quickly develop manners. Dogs need to know that it’s not okay to run, bark or jump at office visitors.  But make sure you’re fair with your discipline.  Don’t let one dog get away with something another dog just got scolded for.  They need consistency to learn what is right and wrong. 

Puppy Pee and Poo
All office dogs must be house-broken, or in this case, office-broken.  They need to be able to express their need to ‘do their business’ outside, and do it only there.  Of course, accidents will happen – it’s a part of canine nature – but they should be infrequent, and always followed by doggy discipline and prompt cleaning. 

Canine Manners
Office dogs must get along well with others.  They must never show aggression towards other dogs or people.  There’s no place for aggressive or bad-tempered dogs at work – ever.

Doggy Daycare
Office dogs need to be able to entertain themselves. After all, you’re running a business, not a doggy daycare.  You need to be able to concentrate on your work.  So bring things like toys, chews, beds and other things that will keep your dogs happy and occupied.

By adhering to these simple rules, you will not only make your pooches happy by letting them spend more time with you, but also create a better work environment for dog lovers.  There might be a little more work for your cleaning crew (think dog hair and extra dirt), but the benefits of a dog-friendly workplace will far outweigh the minor inconveniences.

Of course, dog-friendly workplaces are not appropriate for every business (such as financial institutions  or retail outlets). If you work in places like these, consider asking your boss if you can take your pooch to work on the fourth Friday in June. This is national  “Take Your Dog to Work Day.”  For the past 10 years, this annual event has encouraged employers across the country to sample the experience of having pets in the workplace for one day.  And every year, companies all across the country have decided to do what Google has done.  Every year, they add a few four-legged friends to the permanent office personnel pool and everyone wins.

It’s What You Do Next That Counts

December 16th, 2009

A Lesson from Tiger Woods from the series What Not To Do

by Lou Pierce

Big Idea Company

TIGER small adI couldn’t help but cringe. There it was. On the very weekend that Accenture announced it was parting ways with Tiger Woods, was this print ad in the Harvard Business Review.

The ad shows Tiger hovering over his golf ball which is precariously perched on the edge of a rocky cliff. The message is clear:  We all get into trouble from time-to-time. But, “it’s what you do next that counts.”

Ironic? You bet. Here’s this phenomenal athlete who has an uncanny knack for getting out of trouble on the golf course, but is seemingly helpless to do so in the trickier world of public relations.  But, is Tiger really helpless?  Or, is the situation just hopeless?

I’m not chiming in here to beat a dead horse. It’s obvious that Tiger Woods’ ongoing saga is bad for golf and bad for him. But, if there’s anything good to come of this, it’s a lesson in public relations.

Tiger Woods is arguably the best professional golfer in history. But, like all of us, he is human and therefore prone to embarrassment when things go wrong. There’s no doubt that he will eventually return to the golf course and earn more championships and titles before retiring. But, in the meantime he’s done everything he can to make the mess he’s currently in, as messy as possible.

Forget the small cadre of idiots who say that Tiger as a brand will be back someday, bigger and better than before. Those people are either in denial or maneuvering for a job on Tiger’s new brand-building team. Yes, he will resume his rightful place as the world’s greatest golfer – there’s utterly no doubt about that. But, the Tiger brand? Well, that will never be the same.

Why does this matter to me and to you? Well, it matters if you are in the public relations business. And you’re in the public relations business if you represent a large organization, a small business or an individual performer or political candidate. It matters because there are important lessons to be learned from this saga and the way it has evolved.

Here’s the first lesson:  As a carefully-crafted public brand, Tiger Woods never had the option of keeping the sordid details of this public incident to himself. His deal with the public, is to be public.  And He’s profited greatly from this arrangement. But now that people are curious about what’s happened and demand to know more, he has withdrawn without comment. This, in turn, has forced the media to fill the void with sometimes questionable information from other sources. It’s tawdry, and getting more tawdry.

Can Tiger Woods erase all of his public relations problems simply by making a statement, a fairly detailed statement that includes contrition and remorse? No. He can’t. Not in this case. Evidence that his public image is contrived and wholly at odds with who he really is has become overwhelming.

But he can minimize the damage. He should choose his place and time, admit to his failings just once and in fair detail, and then enter into a clinic or program of some kind to demonstrate his commitment to changing – though I don’t know if there is such a thing for philandering. If he doesn’t do something like this soon, things will continue to spiral out of control.

Here is the second lesson: The Tiger Woods brand was built upon a contrived set of characteristics that were completely inconsistent with who he really is. We all know that now. So, what can his handlers do? Can they ask for forgiveness? Yes. But, the shear scope of his inconsistent behavior is breathtaking. Is every woman who has “confessed” a relationship with Tiger Woods being honest? We’ll never know. And, until Tiger talks, we’ll never be in a position to form an objective opinion. Confirm it all. Deny it all. But talk, Tiger. Talk.

Finally, here is the third and most important lesson of all. It’s not about Tiger. It’s about our profession as public relations executives: like any profession, great public relations people have choices to make. In the legal field, for example, there are plenty of attorneys who, for ethical reasons, will not defend someone whom they know to be guilty. This is not to say that they would deny anyone a fair trial. It’s just to say that they would not feel good about themselves if they defended someone whom they know to be guilty. In our field, we too have choices to make. When we find ourselves lying, rather than ‘spinning;’ when we support and enable ongoing and egregious behavior because we make good money by doing it, something is wrong.

Tiger Woods will be back. The new Tiger Woods will be awesome – the world’s greatest golfer. He will bring with him television ratings, fans and lots of momentous new achievements.  But, it will be a new Tiger Woods.  The endorsements will be limited to his field of expertise. They will not include financial institutions or other types of businesses that require consumer confidence and transparency. He will live rich and live well – as he deserves.  His handlers will even develop and exploit a new image of Tiger – one that is consistent with reality. And, that will be both ethical and fine. After all, ‘it’s what you do next that counts.’

Beware Attractive Media Plans that Actually Burn Your Budget

December 14th, 2009

By Jill Klinedinst

Big Idea Company

burning moneyIf you’re lucky enough to work with a professional media buyer – someone who subscribes to, pays for and actually understands the ratings and demographic data in your market – then you don’t need the following advice.  But, if you’re not fortunate enough to work with an agency that offers this service, BE EXTREMELY CAREFUL!  It’s easy to get burned.  The following advice will help you avoid those too-good-to-be-true media packages that I call “fire sales.”

Too many times I’ve seen clients get sucked into bad media purchases because they were fire sales. You know the salesperson drill: “We only have three more media packages left, and today is the last day! With this amazing deal, you’ll get all these spots at this great low price! Should I sign you up?”

Not so fast. Usually these types of sales are urgent appeals, generally meant to sell inventory that is unsellable.  Sure, you’ll get three prime time spots, but you’ll also get twenty-three that run throughout the night… or worse yet, what’s called a Run of Schedule (ROS) spot (which they might as well call a WTH spot, because it means the station can run them Whenever the Heck they want).  But what portion of your target audience is watching a ‘Rockin’ to the Oldies’ infomercial at 2am?  That’s when the majority of your spots will air with a ROS agreement. The only legitimate reason to pay for a spot that will air overnight is if you’re selling mattresses to people who wish they were sleeping.  If you’re not appealing to insomniacs, stay away from ROS media plans.  They’re worth nothing to you.

When it comes to purchasing media time, don’t be fooled by the numbers. Remember, most of these fire sale packages are designed to sell you the air time that nobody else wants. Sure, 250 guaranteed spots during the second quarter of the year sounds great, but if only a percentage of your audience will see them, what good are they to you?

So how do you get the most bang for your buck with your media budget? Just put your money where your audience is. The best thing you can do to determine the value of a media package is to assess what shows are WORTH paying for, and then compare that total with the price of the package.  Here’s what I mean: let’s say a media package offers a ‘reduced rate’ for primetime or access (the hour before primetime shows). To assess its true value to you, add up the individual costs of air time for each show that provides good ratings in your target demo. Do NOT add the costs of the shows in the prepared media package that are of no value to you. For example, if you don’t want to air during daytime court shows, don’t add the cost of those spots. Then compare that total with the actual price of the fire sale. Chances are, you’ll find that your money is better spent creating your own plan.

These last minute sales are called ‘fire sales’ for a reason. You guessed it – you might as well burn your money. So use caution the next time one crosses your desk. If it seems too good to be true, it probably is.

Jill Klinedinst is a professional media planner at Big Idea Company, where all media ratings and demographic data in the northern Indiana/southwest Michigan region are used on a daily basis to build effective media plans for large and small clients throughout the region.

The Ugly Secret Behind the Coke vs. Pepsi Rivalry

December 7th, 2009

by Ryan Faist

Big Idea Company

coke and pepsiI started a war in my last post, but this time I come in peace. Yes, I am taking a break from the battlefield to examine a little rivalry in the marketing world. Actually, it’s one of the longest running marketing feuds in U.S. history, affecting more than 200 million Americans every day.

As G.I. Joe taught me in the eighties, knowing is half the battle. So, before I jumped into the battle ring with two heavyweight companies that together generate more than $60 billion in annual revenue, I decided to conduct a little investigation of my own. I presented five people each with two unmarked cups filled with a different but similar beverage. Then, after recording which one they thought tasted better, I asked, “Do you consider yourself a Coke person or a Pepsi person?”

Coke and Pepsi have been battling each other for market dominance longer than any other two companies in the country. Pepsi tries to position Coke as boring and unhip; and Coke tries to position themselves as the original, authentic cola that can’t be replaced. They’ve been battling  this way for decades now, with Coke enjoying a slightly larger share of the cola-drinking population.

But I don’t care who sells more or which one tastes better. What I want to know is: why are people are so loyal to their cola? In the cola world there are Coke people and there are Pepsi people. Everyone knows this. But it’s not like that with potato chips, candy, hot dogs, etc.  What is it about this carbonated beverage that divides an entire nation of people?

Logic would submit that people choose Coke or Pepsi based on which one they think tastes better. I wish it was so. You may recall that Pepsi conducted a taste test much like my own back in the seventies. They called it the Pepsi Challenge. Surprisingly, most people who said they liked Coke actually preferred the taste of Pepsi. So Pepsi posted their results in a series of popular commercials that increased sales for a few years. But then, for unexplained reasons, things went back to normal and Coke jumped ahead again. Much to their dismay, the Pepsi Challenge suggested that even people who preferred the taste of Pepsi eventually resumed their loyalty to Coke… it was as though they couldn’t help it.

The fatal flaw in the Pepsi Challenge was that it never tested the “loyalty” of its subjects. It is my hypothesis that loyalty has nothing to do with taste. And after reviewing the results of my own study, this is what I learned: of the five people who participated in my blind taste test, two claimed loyalty to Coke and blindly preferred the taste of Coke, two claimed loyalty to Pepsi and blindly preferred the taste of Pepsi, and the fifth person was indifferent. Needless to say, I was puzzled. According to my results, loyalty does have something to do with taste.  

But I just don’t believe this. If people were loyal to the cola they thought tasted better, why would the Pepsi Challenge prove otherwise? This is the question nobody has thought to ask… the question that certain people don’t want you to ask.

I have since developed a new theory about the Coke vs. Pepsi rivalry, and it has nothing to do with taste, nothing to with the cola your parents drank, and nothing to do with your DNA. 

It’s the government. It has to be. There’s no other explanation. Big Brother decided your cola for you before you were old enough to say your first words, I just know it. How, you ask? Why, you say? All good questions. But remember, this is the government we’re talking about; they can do anything. So just picture this: you’re young and in love. You get married. You start a family. Everything is perfect. And then one day the doorbell rings and two federal agents in black suits are standing on your doorstep with a little brown briefcase. Enough said.

Think about that the next time you pick up a glass of your favorite cola. But act normal. Don’t let them know you’re onto them. Just take a sip, smile big and raise your glass to the federal government. They’ll be watching.

I Delcare War

November 16th, 2009

by Ryan Faist

Big Idea Company

vietnamI haven’t wanted to do this… but you’ve pushed me too far. I’m talking to a certain group of writers who have somehow advanced their troops to the frontline of American media. Well, I’m here to tell you that this is as far as you go.  

For you innocent civilians reading this, I will explain. My enemy is any writer who inflates their prose with sensationalism. That means hype. Sensationalism is when a writer takes a banal experience, like walking down the street or brushing your teeth, and turns it into some kind of melodramatic or extraordinary experience. It’s what my father would refer to as B.S.

To make sure you understand why I’m about to pick a fight, I’m going to get a little technical. First off, you have to realize why my enemies want to sensationalize their writing. It has to do with creating conflict, or tension. You see, in any piece of prose there are two types of conflict: macro-tension and micro-tension. Macro-tension is the major conflict in the article or story. In a murder mystery, it’s the “whodunit?” Micro-tension is a series of minor conflicts that help advance the story, but aren’t necessarily related to the major conflict. For example, in a murder mystery, micro-tension may be when the protagonist runs out of gas on the highway or when the phone rings and nobody’s there. We want to know what happens, so we keep watching… or reading. That’s micro-tension.

Sensationalism, on the other hand, is a lazy technique that bad writers use to keep you reading when there is no organic tension. For example, instead of running out of gas on the highway, a writer using sensationalism might describe how the highway brought back painful memories of riding to the pumpkin patch with his mother when the hero was a child. It’s creating tension where there is none, and it’s the lowest form of writing.  

I’m not just talking about fiction. Every piece of prose has to have some kind of conflict. I don’t care if you’re writing an article about a new treatment for wrinkles or a press release about an old man who sings the alphabet in Spanish pig-Latin. If you want people to read it, you’ll find the natural trouble – notice I said find and natural.

Too many writers have developed the awful habit of inventing the trouble. That’s sensationalism. Instead of discovering the tragic root of the old man’s peculiar singing habit, the lazy writer might try to invent tension by comparing him with a famous tenor like Mario Lanza, and then alluding to his tragedy of never becoming famous himself. Unless the old man is actually as good as Lanza, and had even a remote chance of becoming a successful tenor (which is doubtful), then the entire comparison was sensationalism: phony tension, a sorry attempt to make the writing interesting. It happens. You’d be surprised at the lengths my enemies will go in order to sensationalize their writing because they’re unable to find the true tension in the story. It’s becoming more and more common every day.

Here’s the point to remember: micro-tension is good, sensationalism is bad. My enemies don’t know the difference. They don’t know that readers can always tell when you’re faking it. If they could just learn to distinguish micro-tension from sensationalism, their writing would instantly comes across as more genuine, and therefore more appealing.  

But they never will. They’ll keep writing their B.S. until someone stops them. So allow me.

Those of you guilty of this literary travesty know who you are. But your fun and games are over. Consider this post both a declaration of war and a first offense. So round up your army and meet me at the frontline. We shall see whose pen is mightiest.

Six-Foot Dogs, Villainous Ad-Makers, and the Degradation of American Culture

November 2nd, 2009

by Ryan Faist

Big Idea Company

dog

Credit: The Pack

I was waiting at a stoplight, staring at a six-foot tall dog with a newspaper jammed in its mouth. It was an advertisement on the back of the truck ahead of me. When I stared longer, I realized that it was an ad for a landscaping company. The dog had nothing to do with the message; it only served to grab my attention, which it did. But after seeing it, I wasn’t compelled to treat my lawn. Instead, I was asking myself why Americans’ attention spans have shrunk to the point where some advertisers will stray so far from their message to grab a person’s attention.

It’s not just advertisements. It’s all forms of popular media. If you look closely, you’ll notice that the average scene-length of movies and television shows has shortened significantly over the years. Even the style of most blockbuster novels today is much more fast-paced – tension on every page. I’m not saying any of this is bad, but I am saying that we Americans have become an inpatient culture. And the media knows it.

Some people will argue that technology is to blame. The internet, social media, iPods, blackberries, yada yada yada, have all collectively spoiled us with immediate access to information. That makes sense, but something else is bothering me.

Let us suppose that America suffers from attention deficit disorder for whatever reason. Fine. Advertisers and marketers have to adjust as the playing field changes, just as any businessperson must. I understand this. But the giant dog staring at me from the back of a commercial truck was something much more frightening. At first, I thought it was an ad for the local newspaper, or maybe a dog-catching service. That would have been okay with me, even though I like dogs. But when I realized it was an ad for a landscaping company, I became enraged. In a strange way, I felt like the people who created it were contributing to the degradation of a once patient culture… just so they could make a few bucks. No, I’m not crazy.

Don’t get me wrong. I believe in the power of a good advertisement. But I can’t help but wonder about how the current state of advertising is dealing with the shortened attention spans of American consumers. Even worse, I wonder if some advertisers are somehow helping to shrink attention spans even more with ads that ignore the rules once practiced by the advertisers of previous generations. Maybe people will get used to advertisements that use arbitrary and shocking images to catch their attention, just as they’ll get used to short scenes and fast-paced novels. Where will it end? How about the Statue of Liberty dressed in fish net to sell macaroni and cheese? Why not a three-eyed gargoyle floating over the moon to promote toothpaste?

I’ll tell you why. It’s stupid. Creating advertisements is a craft, and just like any other craft, there are techniques, guidelines and aesthetics to every good ad. It’s within these boundaries that you find your creativity. Once you become a rebel ad-maker with no respect for anything done in the past and a willingness to do anything in the future, including arbitrarily exploiting people’s short attention spans, you risk more than just failing your clients with bad ads. You may unknowingly participate in the degradation of our culture by contributing to the shrinking of the average American attention span until it reaches the point where 1) we as a people have no patience for anything other than instant gratification, and 2) ad-makers become more and more willing to stray even further from good ad-making principles in the lazy effort to grab your attention. Both are grim forecasts for a brave new world.

Are You Ruining Your Radio Ad?

October 26th, 2009

Your Guide to the Most Popular Radio Ad Faux Pas of Our Time

by Ryan Faist

Big Idea Company

credit: bbaltimore

credit: bbaltimore

If you’re looking for a good way to ruin your next radio ad, just turn on the radio and listen. That’s the best place to find world-class examples of how to do it. I guarantee you’ll hear ads that may have looked good on paper, but somehow manage to just add more noise to the two minutes of indistinguishable and ineffective clutter that is sandwiched between the actual radio programs. So how does this happen?

Well, there are many simple ways to ruin a radio ad. Some people like to start with a bad idea. That always works well. Others prefer to kill a good idea with poor execution. But most of the time, it comes down to the strategy when writing. Addressing the wrong audience, speaking from your business’s point of view instead of your customer’s, and wasting precious time repeating a phone number that nobody will remember are all good ways to ruin a radio ad.

However, the best way to ruin a radio ad is the one used most often. It’s the trump card of ways; the easiest method to ruin your radio ad no matter how good your idea or how great your execution. And chances are, you’re doing it already.

First, you need to know that nearly every ad on the radio is overstuffed with information.  That’s a fact. Sometimes you can actually hear how the voice-over has been sped up electronically just to fit it all in. Overstuffing your ad is the single most effective thing you can do when you don’t want people to remember anything about it – other than its bloviating. It’s also the most common way to ruin a radio ad because you can do it without even trying. Hell, most people overstuff their ad accidentally. They don’t even know they’ve done it!

All you have to do is write too much voice-over. That’s it – the trump card for ruining your radio ad. Here’s how it’s done. To be certain a sixty-second radio ad sounds like all the others, write more than 160 words of voice-over. If you can get it up to 200, you’re on your way. The more, the better. You want your narrator speaking so fast that he or she sounds like a tongue-twisting spokesman rattling off bids at an auction. What you don’t want is for your narrator to speak slowly and clearly. Radio ads rarely do this because it’s a good way to ensure that people actually hear what is being said. It also increases people’s chances of recalling that information later, which may actually increase sales. You don’t want that.

So you see, it’s not so hard to ruin your radio ad. There are lots of ways, and I’m sure you can find one that suits you. But if you’re looking for something that will work every time, something that promises to ruin a radio ad that otherwise might have been great, just write too much voice-over. It works like a charm for everyone else.

What Every Editor Wants Your Press Release to Say

October 19th, 2009

Real World Strategies vs. Classroom Theory

by Ryan Faist

Big Idea Company

IMG_1856_without armSome public relations professors will hate me for what I’m about to tell you. I don’t care. The P.R. purists who preach a strict, formal approach to writing press releases may have good intentions, but their own loyalty to old school journalism is actually keeping you out of the news more often than not.

Don’t get me wrong. Anyone who writes a press release should familiarize themselves with the Associated Press style. In its purest form, it is objective journalism. That’s a good thing. But if you want to get in the news, there’s something else you need to know.

First off, you have to realize that real people are reading these releases; not robots. If you were submitting to machines, you wouldn’t have to worry about the pitfall of boredom. But in real life, a boring press release is a sure-fire way to keep you out of the news. More on this in a second.

You also need to realize that you’re writing for a specific audience who only wants to do two things: (1) find news that will appeal to their audience, and (2) narrow down the stack of a hundred or so press releases received that day into the few that will actually make the news.

Before you write a word, think about these two things carefully. Discover the reason their audience will care about your announcement.

Now you are ready to write. This is the tricky part. You have to intrigue editors the same way they want to intrigue their audience. You want editors to read your headline and think, ‘Now this is interesting.’ In order to do that, you must always remember that they only care about news that their audience will care about. So make sure your headline SCREAMS why their audience will love your announcement. But don’t give away everything. Write your headline in a way that makes the editor want to read the next paragraph. That’s how you get an editor’s attention. AP Style Guide doesn’t teach you that.

Once you’ve caught an editor’s attention, you’ve got three to five seconds to convince them that it was worth it. So get to the point. The first paragraph of your press release is where you list the who, what, when, where and why. Journalists call this an inverted pyramid structure: most important information at the top, least important information at the bottom. Stick to this. Busy editors will appreciate you getting to the point quickly.

Finally, list your contact information at the bottom of the press release; not the top. I know many press release guides tell you differently, but they’re wrong. You want editors to see your headline first; not your contact information. Editors decide in a matter of seconds whether to throw your press release away or read the next sentence. Do you think they’ll be intrigued by your name and number? 

This is real life press release advice. I can see some old pundits shaking their heads at me right now, despite the wall of newspaper clippings behind me. All I can say is: it’s a good thing you and I are submitting our press releases to real editors instead of people who preach and theorize about them. With all due respect, there is a difference.

The Biggest Mistake in Email Marketing

October 12th, 2009

Reach More People From Your Computer by Avoiding What Everyone Else Does

by Ryan Faist

Big Idea Company

glowing screen copyIt seems too good to be true — an easy way to reach your target audience without the expense of postage and print materials. Don’t be fooled. Most email marketing goes straight from the inbox to the waste box.

The next time you check your email, notice how fast you delete your spam. Take a second and actually read the subject lines. Knowing why spam looks like spam is the key to avoiding the biggest mistake in email marketing.

First, burn this into your brain: the subject line is the most important part of your email. If you don’t know this, you’re doomed. You can send the most brilliantly designed email in the world, but if you’ve got a bad subject line… poof. All gone.

Let’s look at some bad ones: Find Your Soul Mate is quite popular. Do you think spammers are proud when they come up with this? Delete. How about this: Your Ticket to Financial Freedom. As it turns out, your ticket will cost you $499.99 plus shipping and handling. Delete.

Here’s a tip that will help distinguish your email marketing from the likes above: never be cute or clever. Have you seen the emails that try to trick you into thinking someone is replying to you? They look like RE: Save More on Car Insurance or FW: Make Thousands Without Leaving Your Home. Do the people who write these subject lines think they’re fooling anyone? Absolutely. That’s their biggest mistake.

Before you go crazy with email marketing, remember this: people know what you’re up to. No matter how you approach them, they know you want something; otherwise you wouldn’t be emailing them.

To make matters worse, people expect to be inundated with spam. They know they’ll have to trash hordes of junk mail every day, so they’ve subconsciously programmed their minds to immediately delete anything that resembles spam. And since only spammers write subject lines that are cute or clever, guess which emails get deleted most often.

So what’s the secret to writing subject lines that people want to open? The answer is something you probably learned when you were five years old.

Be honest. If you’re sending an e-letter, say so. If you’re sending an e-coupon for a fitness center, don’t try to disguise it with a subject line that reads Your Answer to Total Fitness. It won’t work. Free Three Month Fitness Trial will get more opens. Why? When it comes to email subject lines, people are attracted to straightforward honesty. It’s just the way it is. Direct subject lines will always yield more opens than cute ones.