UPRA to #OccupyWallStreet: Work on Your Narrative

Dear Occupy Wall Streeters,

First of all, this post will say nothing about your organization, your movement, your issues, your objectives, your rightness or wrongness, nor your methods. It appears you're gaining some traction, which is terrific.

But I've heard lots of people complain in the last few weeks about a lack of media coverage. These folks are right in one sense -- the mainstream media took a while to pick up on what you're doing. However, the media being what it is these days, it is your responsibility to get your story into the press.

Complaining about lack of coverage is kinda like throwing 96-mile-per-hour fastballs in your backyard, telling no one about it, and complaining when the Yankees don't offer you a contract.

Now, there are some of you who maybe don't care about media coverage, and that's fine, and there are others who want media coverage but not enough to actually do anything to get more. And that's fine too.

But for those of you interested in having your story told, on your terms, on the front pages of the papers ... a few notes.

The media, bless their hearts, need a nicely packaged narrative with:

1. Two (and preferably only two) clearly defined "sides"
2. A conflict between those two sides that can be summed up in one sentence
3. Clear objectives that would mean victory for each side
4. A plotline: a beginning, a middle and a foreseeable end.

For some guidance, let's look at the example of the #wiunion protests. Many have noted similarities between you, Occupy Wall Street, and the Wisconsin union folks. The Wisconsin protests, unlike yours, got good coverage. Why?

1. Two sides. Scott Walker vs. the Unions. (Or, Fitzwalkerstan vs. the workers.)
2. Conflict: Collective bargaining rights are terrible! No, they're essential!
3. Clear objectives: Walker wants to end collective bargaining to "balance the budget;" unions want to retain their rights.
4. Plotline: Radical bill introduced; Protests ensue; Senators dramatically flee the state; more huge protests; intricate subplots involving access to the Capitol and so on; and all along, the story is going to end one of two ways: the bill is killed, or it is not.

You guys finally put out a statement over the weekend with a long list of wrongs done unto America by corporations, all of which are true. But still ... this morning's AP story says you "lack a clear objective" and the Washington Post headline is "What does 'Occupy Wall Street' want?" So even the coverage you are getting is kinda sucky coverage. And here's why.

1. Two sides: No one knows who the two sides are. I know you don't want to label yourselves, but for the media you kinda have to. Are you liberals? Socialists? Libertarians? And who is the other side? "Corporations?" That's far too vague for the media to grasp. You might think about naming one or two in a more concerted way. Point to specific wrongs they have committed.
2. Conflict: You, a not-very-well-defined collective of very energetic people, are up against "corporate greed," an abstract concept. Or against "corporations," of which there are thousands in many places around the world.
3. Clear objectives: What do you want, exactly? And awareness isn't enough. It's never enough -- not to get press coverage, anyway. You need to give the press some specific objective -- some specific thing you're after. Even if it's some minor, arbitrary thing -- you want the CEO of Merrill Lynch to take a 50% pay cut, or return his bonus, or you want Congress to repeal corporate personhood, or something -- and even if you don't achieve that goal, it gives the media something to grab onto. Then, you get coverage, and that's where your awareness comes from.
4. Plotline: The media don't know exactly why this thing started. Many don't even know when, exactly, it started. And because the media don't know who/what you're up against, specifically, and don't know what you want, specifically, they won't be able to tell when you've won. Or when you've lost. They can't see a plot structure, which makes them uncomfortable. 

Again, I know many of you are going to say "the media is just a corporate tool and they won't do the work themselves and they just don't want to tell our story." And that's maybe all true, except for the last part. They do want to tell your story. They love conflict, but only easily defined conflict in the context of an easy-to-tell storyline.

So as I see it you have three options: keep doing what you're doing and not worry about the press at all; keep doing what you're doing and keep complaining that the press isn't paying attention; or keep doing what you're doing and attach a narrative to it that the press can grab onto.

I'm not going to tell you what to do. But if you do choose Door Number 3, at least you'll have some idea how to go about it. 

UPRA to Wis. Dems: Understand, this "special session" is a PR trick

First, a tip of the cap to Scott Walker and the Fitzgeralds for today's front-page headline: "Walker calls special session." Nice work on the PR front. 


Democrats, please understand, that's all this is: nicely done PR, in the interest of staving off the recall of Governor Walker.



Update: This piece proves my point.

Lawmakers are back to business as Gov. Scott Walker’s special session on jobs is officially under way.

 "Gov. Scott Walker's special session." Uh huh.


And:

Walker and legislative leaders said the session will run simultaneously with regular session floor periods scheduled over the last two weeks of October and the first week of November.

So, in other words, there is no special session at all. Just Walker attaching his name to the already-planned legislative session and pretending to be all "in charge" and stuff. And it's working, at least from the PR perspective, and it'll keep working until the Dems point it out.



Walker doing good PR is remarkable, because Walker's press shop has been really bad. I mean, really bad. Just terrible. Epic fail after epic fail after epic fail.


So I'm guessing this "special session" maneuver -- and make no mistake, that's all it is, a PR maneuver-- came from some clever staffer in the legislature.


How do I know it's a PR move? Um, guys, it's September. The day after tomorrow it's October. That's the time of year for regular session. Special sessions get called in August and January.


Remember when the Dems were (rightly) jumping up and down about the legislature only meeting one day in September? They knew they were supposed to be working, debating, voting. And even at that time, Republican leaders said they weren't in session then because they were "focused on advancing major legislation later this fall on venture capital and mining in an effort to help create jobs," according to the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel. Emphasis mine, and it'll be important in a minute. 


Yet they did not schedule any more session days. It's almost like the Republican legislative leaders wanted to be seen as not doing anything.


So now Walker comes riding in on his white horse, calling the legislature into "special session" and chiding legislators to focus "with a laser beam" on job creation. His "bipartisan" proposals include bills dealing with venture capital and mining. 


So, the Republican governor calls a special session to do the things the Republican legislature knew they'd be doing in regular session. 


Do you think they coordinated that? Maybe?


Question is, why? Why would the Fitzgerald brothers allow themselves to look like do-nothings? Why would they let Walker publicly tell them to do something they were planning to do anyway?


To me, it's easy -- Walker is scared to death of recall. Or at least of his current polling numbers. So since the legislative Republicans survived their recalls (barely), he somehow convinced them to stop doing their job so he could be seen doing it for them. Or, at least, he could be seen telling them to do their jobs. 


The result is that Walker get a few days of headlines (including the State Journal's moderately idiotic use of the word "bipartisan" in a headline .. guess what, WSJ, it can't be bipartisan until members of both parties sponsor it). Walker is seen as large and in charge, even if he isn't. He's seen as the one working on jobs, even if he's just taking credit for what the legislature was going to do anyway. 


And that, my friends, is good PR. 


So all I'll say to the Dems is: understand what this is. Be ready. Some of the bills might be truly bipartisan, and might do some genuine good. 


But also understand: this is them circling the wagons. They're defending against recall. Don't think it's anything else. And maybe think about calling them out on it. 


Rep. Barca .... perhaps just pose the questions ... "Why is the governor proposing your bills? Why are we in special session in October? Do you think we're stupid?"


The answer to that last one is no, they don't think we're stupid. But they do think they're smarter than we are. Please, prove them wrong.

UPRA to #Wiunion protesters: Don't be discouraged, but don't be douches either

OK, first of all, dumping a beer on somebody is a total douche thing to do. Complete dick move. Not only is it just kinda mean to the dumpee, but it becomes all about attention for the dumper, no longer for the dumper's worthy cause.


The incident in question (semi-professional protester Miles Kristan, dumper, vs. GOP Rep. Robin Voss, dumpee) led to a front-page story in the Wisconsin State Journal by Clay Barbour, who's usually pretty good. But really? One idiot dumps a beer, and we have to examine the whole thing, after months of relative peace and hundreds of thousands of well-behaved people expressing themselves?


The headline immediately gives away the bias of the piece. Sorry, Clay, but it does. The print headline was "Wearing out their welcome?" 


Yeah, Clay, and yeah, headline-writing copy-editor person. The protesters have worn out their welcome. That's kinda the point. They're there to make the governor and Republican legislature uncomfortable. I think they wore out their welcome on about February 15. Which is terrific for them.


Online the headline is not a question, it's just "Wearing out their welcome: Protesters still at Capitol, irking lawmakers."


Oh, no. Lawmakers are irked. How dare anyone irk a lawmaker.


If we set aside for a moment the fact that this story didn't really warrant being written in the first place, the story itself is not terrible, except for a few editorial intrusions on the part of the reporter. For example:

Several conservatives believe the protesters have been coddled by the Dane County District Attorney's Office and fear the beer incident is just another step toward a violent altercation.

Really? How do you know that? How do you know what anyone believes? Even if you added "say they believe," that'd be a little better. But how about an actual attribution? You quote Joel Kleefisch, but is there anyone beyond him? Does he speak for "several conservatives?" Without better attribution, I will continue to believe you're kind of fanning the flames a bit, Clay.


By the way, Chris Rickert wrote an interesting response to Clay's piece. Worth a read.


But anyway, now, on to Democrats and their protester friends: to you, I say, chill a bit. 


First, protesters, don't dump beverages on anybody. And also, don't shout down the Democratic Representatives. Don't be purity trolls. One very important thing from a political PR perspective is to present a unified voice and a unified front. You can disagree on certain things with people on your own side, but for heaven's sake don't let the other side think they can divide and conquer.


Second, Dems, don't turn on your own folks. Even though it's as natural to you as breathing, don't worry! Don't wring your hands and start talking like Joe Lieberman. Or Droopy Dog. Don't say things like "Protesters who misbehave make our whole side look bad." That's dumb. 


For example, new Rep. Brett Hulsey:

"We really don't need bad behavior taking attention away from what Walker is doing," said state Rep. Brett Hulsey, D-Madison. "We need to focus on recalling him. Pouring beer on someone doesn't help the cause."

Brett, I know you feel this way, and I agree, it's a distraction. But here's what you should have said:

"This is all a distraction. We need to focus on recalling Walker and restoring the labor peace that has kept Wisconsin going for the last 50 years."

See? Makes the same point without blaming our own people.

And we can't win anything by calling attention to "bad behavior" of our own people. Because guess what? No matter how well-behaved our protesters are, the other side will just make shit up. They'll lie about damage to private property. They'll lie about damage to public property. They'll start calling peaceful protests "riots." They'll even actively do things to make us look bad.


But listen: The other side of the debate are never the people you need to impress.


This is a good place to introduce my Third Rule of Public Relations: Go for the swing voters. At least when you're talking about public debate, you're never ever going to convince the other side to ease up or change their tune, so you have to let them say what they're going to say and respond in an effort to win over everybody else. 


That does not mean capitulate to the masses or try to move toward centrist positions. That's a common mistake. All it means is that you can and should get the swing voters to your side. And by swing voters I mean people who maybe aren't paying full attention all the time. People who don't have a dog in the fight. People whose opinions are malleable.


When the other side does lie, respond. Rather than saying, "These protesters are making us look bad," say, "The Republicans want to use our protesters to make us look bad, but it's not going to work, because 99% of our protesters just come and sing songs and don't cause any trouble. Unlike demonstators on their side, who seem prone to violence."


So. This has been a long and somewhat rambling post, so let's sum up:


Protesters: Don't be douches. But don't let yourselves be scapegoats, either. Don't quit singing just because some reporter thinks maybe you've "worn out your welcome."
Democrats: Republicans will say all protesters are douches. Don't let them get away with it, and for the love of God don't even let it seem like you maybe might agree with them for one second.


And I'll leave it at that, because I fear this post has probably worn out its welcome 250 words ago or so.

UPRA to Smash Mouth: Have Your Press Releases Written by Someone Who Can Actually Write

Often, the press release is our first and most frequent contact with the media. The form is antiquated and awkward, reporters get dozens to hundreds of them every day, and each one has to exist as part of a larger strategy. Never, ever will a single press release accomplish any real long-term PR goals. All of which is to say, it's not the best use of time to overthink each individual press release.


However. 


For the love of Christ, you must hire someone able to write at a level above that of a high school sophomore writing your press releases.


Writing is like running. Pretty much everybody can do it, but very few can do it for a living. And remember, you're sending your press releases to that select few -- people who write for a living. I used to be one of them, so I know, they're a little bit snotty about bad writing. A poorly written press release can kill you.


So, Smash Mouth Lead Singer Steve Harwell, when I saw this press release, I just had to weigh in. It's a silly little publicity stunt, even though your publicist denies that. But whatever ... there's nothing wrong with a publicity stunt now and again. It may or may not get covered on the merits of the event itself, but it's a lot less likely to get anything with this release.


Let's start up top ... why the hell is this on the PR firm's letterhead? I know EMB is a big-time agency but still, it's not a press release about EMB.


And the headline is fine, I guess, but check the subhead:

STEVE HARWELL SETS DATE WITH GUY FIERI TO COMPLETE EGG EATING CHALLENGE

Media Invited to Attend for Coverage

Media Invited to Attend for Coverage? Well, no shit. Why else are you sending a press release? Why would you waste that space for something so ... I dunno, logistically obvious? You know what would be better there? "Proceeds to benefit St. Jude Children's Hospital." If that's what the event is all about, as your publicist claims, you need to get that into the headline, not bury it in the third paragraph.

Now, on to the lead:

After being prompted by a bizarre online fan challenge, lead singer of the multi-platinum GRAMMY-nominated group Smash Mouth,Steve Harwell, has set a date to eat 24 eggs as promised. Pairing up with celebrity chefGuy Fieri who has offered to cook the eggs, the "Egg Challenge" will take place on October 10, 2011 at 1:30 p.m. at Fieri's restaurant, Johnny Garlic's, in Dublin, Calif.

 A whole paragraph in a combination of passive voice and present perfect tense. Is this better?

In response to a bizarre online fan challenge, Smash Mouth lead singer Steve Harwell will eat two dozen eggs, as promised, at 1:30 pm on October 10, 2011. Celebrity chef Guy Fieri will prepare the eggs and the event will take place at his restaurant, Johnny Garlic's, in Dublin, Calif. 

Yes. The correct answer is yes, that's better.


And paragraph two:

The call for Smash Mouth to eat two dozen eggs came about when a fan prompted the challenge on a blog website, Something Awful.

"A blog website?" What are you, my grandma? How about "... when a fan issued the challenge on the blog somethingawful.com."  

The spontaneous request was immediately backed by a multitude of fans via the website, Twitter and Facebook continuously urging Harwell to eat the eggs.

Paaaaassssiiiive! "A multitude of fans began urging Harwell to eat the eggs through the blog, Twitter and Facebook." 

Soon, it became one of the hottest trending topics on Twitter and Yahoo ...

No it didn't. Don't say things that aren't true. 

... and like an encore chant at a live concert, Harwell had no choice but to submit to their pleas.

See now that's not bad. I knew you could do it!


I won't keep nitpicking every paragraph because you get the idea, right? Strike the "to be" verbs, the passive voice and the past perfect tense. Don't bury the lead. 


Oh, and you also might want to make sure the photo your publicist sends out doesn't make you look like a douche.

UPRA to Netflix: Oh, where do we begin?

So, Netflix, apparently your new DVD-by-mail company, Qwikster, is also a stoner soccer fan who recently made it to level 25 in Original Gangstaz.

Yes, you started a new business and forgot to secure the corresponding Twitter handle, and now a shlub who can't spell has almost 10,000 followers and dreams of a big payday (which, by the way, he probably won't get).

But, funny as that was, it's the least of the things you did wrong yesterday, from a PR perspective.

Since the deed is kinda done, there's little reason to give advice. So I'll just tell you what you did wrong.

And let me remind you that this is a PR advice blog. I have very little to say about your business decision to split off your DVD mailing business. That might make sense in the long run, but the way you announced it yesterday was riddled with stumbles and gaffes. To wit:

• You diluted one of the strongest brands in the country. Years ago you joined the elite ranks of Xerox and Google as one of the very, very few brand names that have become verbs. ("Did you see that movie with that actor?" "Yes, I Netflixed it." "What's that actor's name?" "I don't know, Google it. Then print it out and Xerox it.") I understand that DVD mailing is very different from instant streaming, and I understand the need to give that business its own model and its own space. But for the love of all that is holy, keep your brand attached to it. (And no, "Qwikster: A Netflix Company" isn't enough.)
• You failed to understand the sentiment of your customers. Your email to customers (and blog post) apologized for the way in which you announced changes to your pricing structure. But guess what? Nobody gave a rat's ass about the way you announced it. They're just mad about having to pay more. And that's understandable. But look, setting your own prices for your own stuff is your right, and if that's what you need to do, do it. Some people will drop the DVDs by mail service, some will drop you entirely. But if that change leads to long-term growth, terrific for everybody. No need to apologize. But if you do apologize, at least apologize for the thing that made people mad.
• You tried to put two massive and contradictory messages into one communication. And you did it in the weirdest, most awkward manner I've ever seen. I fervently preach singularity of message. Every communication should carry one and only one single, simple, clear message. That can't always happen, of course, but it's usually possible, even if you have to labor a little bit to squish two messages together into a single one. But you ... oh my God you screwed this up. You spend three paragraphs grovelling and kissing my ass and asking for forgiveness, and then announce the launch of a new business? In the same damn email? Really? "So, hey guys, sorry we pissed you off, but you know that thing that pissed you off? Yeah, it has its own website now." Next time, either skip the apology altogether, or only issue the apology by itself. Express regret, point out successes despite the possible missteps. Let that sit and breathe for a week or two, let the complaints roll in for a bit and die down, and then announce your new venture. That announcement should be good news, exciting news, not something you offer up as part of an apology to mollify an angry mob. 
• You broke the Number One Rule of Public Relations. You panicked. Remember when I said the Twitter debacle wasn't that big of a deal? It's really not, in the big scheme of things. You can get @qwikstermovies or @qwiksterDVDs or something. And I don't imagine you do a lot of DVD by mail business on Twitter. But your failure to even check and see whether anyone had @qwikster registered means you made the announcement in a hurry. Which means you panicked. And what's the number one rule of public relations? That's right, Don't Panic.

Netflix, you'll probably be fine. You have an awesome new PR opportunity coming up in the form of that Kevin Spacey series made just for you. You still have a lot of customers, and you'll keep getting more. You'll stave off or at least absorb competition from HBO GO, Hulu Plus, Blockbuster and other services.

And no, this wasn't the worst PR disaster of all time. But it's about as bad a series of blunders as any of us will ever see. Hope it all works out for you.

UPRA to Walker aide Cynthia Archer: Keep Trap Shut

The Second Rule of Crisis Communications: When in doubt, be quiet.

First, to catch up ... A member of Governor Scott Walker's inner circle, Cynthia Archer, leaves her job in the Department of Administration for a political appointment at the Department of Children and Families, and goes on medical leave. The FBI visits her home at 6:45 on a Wednesday morning, taking photos, removing at least one box of stuff, and grabbing a hard drive from a computer Archer had sold to a neighbor. Media assumes this has something to do with an ongoing investigation of political work being done by Milwaukee Count employees on County time on Walker's watch as County Executive, even though Archer has previously said she was "not involved in any way" in that investigation. The raid was reported online Wednesday and in print Thursday, and follow-ups with Archer's protestations of innocence were published Friday.

You've heard of a thing called "crisis communications?" Yeah, this is the time for that. Any time the FBI is mentioned in the same sentence as you, it's crisis communications time.

My first rule of crisis communications is Don't Panic. Neither Archer nor Walker panicked on Wednesday. Good for them.

My second rule is, as mentioned above, When in doubt, be quiet. While they haven't said much specific, Archer did talk, and email, the very next day.

From the Milwaukee Journal Sentinel:

A former top aide to Gov. Scott Walker said in a sharply worded email Thursday that "I have done absolutely nothing wrong" in connection with an FBI raid of her Madison home. ...

"I have done nothing wrong," Archer wrote in an email to the Journal Sentinel. "I have nothing to hide. I feel no need for legal representation.

"I fully cooperated yesterday and intend to cooperate with law enforcement in any way that they need." ...

"This is becoming character assassination and I cannot stand for it," Archer said in a separate email. Archer also said she couldn't discuss Wednesday's raid at her home upon instructions from law enforcement. 

 First of all, "sharply worded" is obviously an inappropriate editorial insertion by the JS. Still, don't give reporters a reason to describe your words that way!

Second, by this time, Archer had been ordered not to discuss the investigation. That means don't discuss the investigation, including your involvement or non-involvement. It also gives you a convenient excuse to shut your pie hole.

And why must the pie hole remain shut? Even if you're telling the truth and you don't know what the investigation is about, you don't know what the investigation is about, and you shouldn't talk publicly about things you don't know about. There may be something on that computer that you didn't even know was there, or something that you didn't know was illegal. And you may be right -- maybe you aren't the subject of the investigation. But someone close to you almost certainly is, someone you're loyal to, someone you will want to help and protect. And that person does not need you talking, at all, about anything. And it would have been good for all involved for it to fall off the front pages for a day. If Archer had followed the second rule and stayed quiet, there's a decent chance that there wouldn't have been a story at all on Friday.

Yet Cynthia stood outside and talked to reporters, trying to play the victim. And she sent at least two emails to the Journal Sentinel.

Look, Cynthia. I know you want to "clear your name" or whatever. This stuff gets under your skin and pisses you off. But one way or another, you'll be able to respond. But you didn't need to do it that day.

And to my readers ... next time the FBI shows up at your house, cooperate, call your lawyer, and keep your trap shut.