Justine Adelizzi

As I start thinking about long-term communications planning, this article from Sean Gibbons and Tristan Mohabir is energizing and motivating. It's time (frankly, it has been for a while) to move away from broadcast models and towards targeted community building. I'm looking forward to more from this series of articles from The Communications Network! https://lnkd.in/eVgS6raH

6

2 Comments

🚨 Battling the Bots 🚨 Here’s what some senior leaders are doing to respond to bot-driven social media noise: 1️⃣ Evaluating Bot Influence: Scrutinizing engagement metrics to distinguish between real and artificial activity. 🤖 2️⃣ Providing Context: Educating leadership on the real sphere of influence of viral posts, not just their volume. 📊 3️⃣ Strategizing Responses: Focusing on the sentiments of key stakeholder groups, not the sheer quantity of social mentions. 💬 4️⃣ Monitoring Risks: Considering how shifts in sentiment align with broader corporate or legal strategies, especially around DEI. ⚖️ 💡 But here’s what the most forward-thinking leaders have told me they're doing: 1️⃣ Differentiating Real Impact: Analyzing metrics to identify genuine engagement from key stakeholders. Focusing on where your core audiences (employees, customers, investors) are active. 🎯 2️⃣ Recalibrating Risk Discussions: Shifting focus from short-term reputational hits to long-term risks like litigation or regulatory scrutiny. 🛡️ Using data-driven insights to reveal how bot-driven campaigns often inflate perceived threats. 3️⃣ Framing the Response: Responding to real stakeholders, not the noise. Crafting communication strategies for your most valuable audiences, minimizing reactionary responses to bot-amplified posts. 🎯 4️⃣ Aligning with Corporate Strategy: Positioning DEI and other commitments within broader business objectives. Keeping your core values intact while tracking competitors’ responses and adjusting accordingly. 🏆 #Leadership #CorporateAffairs #ReputationManagement #StakeholderEngagement #AI #StrategicCommunications

2

This article from Columbia Journalism Review is fascinating, and an argument for the importance of a reputation management communication plan. There are volumes authored by PR pros advising against ignoring reporters inquiries, yet this article documents how frequently it happens. Throughout my career, I can count on one hand the number of times I have made a calculated decision not to respond to a media request, and 99.9% of the time it was after multiple engagements with a reporter who repeatedly misrepresented or distorted information (even if not intentionally). I suspect, more often than not, reporters get ghosted because the brand is caught off guard. They haven't planned how they will respond in a reputation crisis. Or haven't socialized the planned response with stakeholders. If the PR team is haggling with executives and lawyers on what to say or how to say it when the reporters' questions start rolling in, the opportunity to frame the narrative is quickly lost. Thanks for sharing the article Jennifer Johnson Avril! https://lnkd.in/gYmTA9CW

6

Question for the communications pros out there: Do you think the job market is finally improving? The past 24 months have been 𝘣𝘳𝘶𝘵𝘢𝘭 for comms professionals, and now I’m hearing mixed signals about where things stand. Here’s the general vibe I’m getting: 🙂 More roles are popping up for specific comms roles, especially internal comms and analyst relations. 🫠 PR, social media, and content are still facing cuts across the board (and the open roles are few and far between). 🫠  Senior-level comms positions are seriously scarce or non-existent. Is this matching what you’re seeing out there?

73

95 Comments

REMOTE

21

REMOTE

16

3 Comments

Reporters, what would you like PR practitioners to know about pitching you their news/press releases? What tips would you give? I'm hoping to get some input directly from journalists on what's working best 𝒓𝒊𝒈𝒉𝒕 𝒏𝒐𝒘 to help public relations pros do a better job, as I put together a couple of upcoming presentations. I know what works for my B2B clients, but I always like to gain a broader perspective to inform my work. Thanks for sharing your thoughts. #publicrelations #mediarelations

35

7 Comments

🎤🎸🤘🏻🚨 Latest from The Repute: "Crisis Comms Under the Microscope: Dave Grohl’s Approach" 🎤🎸🚨 In this edition, we take a real-time look at how rock legend Dave Grohl is handling the media fallout from his recent infidelity scandal. Using data-driven insights, we break down the New York Times' coverage of Grohl’s crisis communications strategy and analyze what worked—and what didn’t. https://bit.ly/3MIZy76 The analysis explores: - The effectiveness of proactively addressing scandals before they spiral - Why timing didn’t minimize media coverage as others have suggested - The nuanced balance between controlling the narrative and avoiding sensationalism Whether you’re dealing with a major PR issue or simply curious about how the media operates during high-profile scandals, this edition offers valuable lessons for managing your brand’s reputation. Read the full analysis and let me know what you think. I’d love to hear your thoughts! Have a great weekend everyone! Will Valentine Publisher, The Repute Founder and Principal, Valentine Advisors

36

7 Comments

Worth reading from NiemanLab: Readers prefer to click on a clear, simple headline — like this one By David Markowitz, Hillary Shulman and Todd Rogers In an era when people trust news less than ever, how can journalists break through and attract the attention of average people to provide information about their communities, the nation and the world? By not complicating things. Our research, published in Science Advances, shows that simple headlines significantly increase article engagement and clicks compared with headlines that use complex language. In our research, typical news readers preferred simple headlines over complex ones. But importantly, we found that those who actually write headlines — journalists themselves — did not. We first used data from The Washington Post and Upworthy to see how language features, such as word length and how common a word is, changed how many people clicked on an article’s headline. These datasets included over 31,000 randomized experiments — also known as A/B tests — that compared two or more headline versions of the same underlying article to determine which one generated the most clicks. Headlines with more common words — simple words like “job” instead of “occupation” — shorter headlines, and those communicated in a narrative style, with more pronouns compared with prepositions, received more clicks. For example, The Washington Post headline, “Meghan and Harry are talking to Oprah. Here’s why they shouldn’t say too much” outperformed the alternative headline, “Are Meghan and Harry spilling royal tea to Oprah? Don’t bet on it.” This example illustrates how sometimes a more straightforward headline can generate more interest. In follow-up laboratory experiments, we found that typical news readers focused more on simple rather than complex headlines because the writing was easier to understand. When journalists participated in the same experiments, they didn’t show any preference for simple headlines over complex ones. Put differently: Those who write the news appear to be less responsive to simple writing than regular audiences. Generations of communication consultants have advised that communicators follow the rather crass acronym KISS: Keep it Simple, Stupid. We suggest a modified version applied for journalists. Since KISJ isn’t all that simple, we propose: Keep It Simple, Staffers. Simplicity increases the number of people who click on a news story headline and improves reader recall of the material in the article. Most importantly, simplicity boosts reader engagement, such as how much attention they pay to the information.

4

If you follow me, you’ve seen my posts bragging about generating breakthrough media coverage. No doubt, it’s important. But just as important is counseling clients on how to dominate the discussion. How to set agendas and own dialogues. How to be the thought leader that customers, partners, reporters, analysts, investors, scholars and government officials turn to, to understand the zeitgeist of key publics and key industries. I wrote about ARM yesterday - that’s what we did with them. Challenged them to own mobile, and later data centers. To dare to be the dominant voice to set an industry agenda. That’s not a one-off. With every client served, that’s the nexus of the campaigns we lead - understand your strength and put it to work. If you want this kind counsel and the resulting dominance that comes with it, I’d love to talk.

7

The Corporate Communications team at Maximus is awesome and award-winning. How do I know? I'm a member of the team (😉) and we recently won THREE awards for our generative AI case study: an IABC Gold Quill Award and two Annual Communicator Awards. Our study used a comparative use-case analysis and an employee survey to determine the effect of AI writing assistants on business communications. Our results supported the idea that AI writing assistants can increase efficiency by offering time savings, reduced word counts, and lower levels of effort when used in collaboration with human expertise and review. In short, it's about synergy, not rivalry. Check out the full report: https://lnkd.in/er9EYgDE #AI #InternalCommunications #MaximusInsights

19

1 Comment

I watch a lot of football, which means I watch a lot of sideline reporters. We writers/researchers can learn a lot from them. At halftime, sideline reporters have to interview coaches who (a) are frustrated, (b) are hangry, (c) need to pee real bad, or (d) are some combination of the above. Good sideline reporters know that if they want a chance at a decent answer, they must ask Very. Simple. Questions. Apply that to our work: We talk with people who likely have better things to do with their time than chat with us. We must ask Very. Simple. Questions. But too often we don't. Our subjects' answers, and ultimately our work, suffers for it. After writing out my interview plans, I simplify them by checking for the following: > If there's an "and" in any question, I break it into two questions. > If there are two question marks in any question, I break it into two questions. > If there is more than one short sentence of context preceding my actual question, I break it into two (or more) questions. "'Tis better to ask many short questions than one complicated one." - some sideline reporter in history, I'm sure.

2

As eloquently put by Eleanor Hawkins in Axios Communicators, there's a recalibration happening as executives navigate how and when to address socio-political issues in the era of Trump 2.0. For corporate communicators, decisions about if, and how, to respond are going to be taking up a lot more of our time over the next four years, if past experience is any indication. Check out the full article at https://lnkd.in/eZCnfVNQ

2

I work with journalism and editing (my passions). I used to work more with/in communication (I'm good at it). It looks like the same, but they are definitely NOT the same thing, however, it's not a big jump for a journalist to become an editor (and an editor is a journalist, but not necessarily the other way around) and some adaptation is required for a journalist to work in comms for an NGO, company, etc - the other way around is a bit more difficult, but obviously not impossible. You also have the copywriter and copy editor who have also different set of skills - they focus on content creation for marketing and refining text by correcting grammar, punctuation, and style issues; ensuring factual accuracy respectively. "Oh, but editor and copy editor are the same?" No. The editor supervises the process of creation and refines the draft. His task is to turn a draft into an engaging article so then the copy editor can proofread, check style, etc. But i digress... These jobs are already complicated in themselves, with their own demands, expertise and skills needed, but I just love (please note the irony here) when I see job ads requiring most of if not ALL skills advertised as "communication [officer, expert, add any fancy name here]." Sometimes there's a "communication and [insert here something else that usually makes no sense]" to make it less preposterous, but it doesn't change anything. You have to write, edit, do copy, research... and also you have to master both social media AND image editing! Why hire 5 people to properly do the job (or jobs, they are all different) if you can hire someone to be underpaid to half-ass do it? Sorry, but no one is good at everything and no one should be, because it makes no sense. No one can do all the work or should do all the work of 5 other people, but unfortunately that's not how things work in the EU bubble. Oh, I forgot, employers also expect you to organise meetings, events, and you guessed it right: another completely different set of skills. Sure, there can be overlapping, it's good that they exist and you're capable of doing a bit more - you can write and edit (like I do and I have no complaints there), you can work with comms and also do some social media, etc... But demanding that everyone has all the skills is not just ridiculous, it's offensive. Particularly when the paycheck comes and you see that you're working for 5, but getting paid for LESS than one. I like looking at job ads to see how bad things are and are becoming and I'm never too surprised to see that, well, they are indeed getting worse. Also, not surprising that the same places that love to say they are helping changing the world are the ones changing the lives of their employees - for the worse. Giving them anxiety, stress, impossible workloads and expecting them to be happy while being underpaid. #Job #Work #EUBubble #Journalism #Comms #communication #Editing #Skills #Employment #copywriter #copyeditor #Exploitation

8

Why #digitalliteracy matters: as I scrolled through all the Juneteenth content this past week, one viral post in particular caught my eye for all the wrong (or right?) reasons. Part of why misinformation and disinformation spreads so easily is because it exploits our references for truth. While the content of this image is believable, in line with artifacts from the days of slavery, there are substantial anachronisms that indicate this is not an actual ad from 1848. This is not to shame anyone - unfortunately we all fall for something, sometimes - but to raise awareness of how to spot misinformation and keep it from spreading. Can you spot the reasons this is fake? Some are obvious, but some aren’t - drop a comment and let me know.

9

3 Comments

It's going to be an interesting week in comms. The 2024 US election presents unique challenges and opportunities for brands considering leveraging it for their PR. Here are some pointers: 1. Exercise extreme caution, as the election is likely to be highly divisive. Avoid explicit political stances, as research shows only 21% of US consumers want brands to take political positions. Instead, focus on nonpartisan messages encouraging civic engagement. 2. Leverage contextual advertising carefully, ensuring ads appear alongside appropriate content. Consider alternative channels to reach audiences, as news programming will likely be saturated with political content. Emphasise authenticity and brand values rather than opportunistically jumping on election trends. 3. Only explore cause-related marketing aligned with nonpartisan issues. Utilise social listening to understand audience reactions to election-related content. Focus on long-term strategy rather than sacrificing brand positioning for short-term gains. Remember, while the election presents engagement opportunities, the risks of backlash and negative associations are significant. Carefully weigh potential benefits against risks before incorporating election-related themes into marketing strategies.

14

NPR and PBS should be on their own. The Public Broadcasting Act, the LBJ era media ecosystem is long gone. They take 8% from Corporation of Public Broadcasting, 10% from colleges, 8% from state and local budgets. PBS takes 15% from the feds, 13% from states, 3% local governments, 8 % colleges- that's 39% before folks and rich foundations. What they provide is balanced in some places, like Amanpour and Firing Line, and bias in most other places. NPR is a mouthpiece for the MSM , and the current long list of advocacy from Roe v Wade to pro - Palestine coverage. The design during the great society was needed, now in our vast array of media sources, the federal government does not need to fund any of it. C- Span can carry the record keeping load , with their truly unbiased , long form coverage. If you want NPR and PBS ( nee American BBC) you can pay for it.

5

When Words Fail: The Critical Role of PR in Managing CEO Missteps Today, #CEOs are exposed to being the public face of their companies and holding countless more precarious positions than at any other point due to the hyperconnected world that exists today. Although this position affords the opportunity to shape the positive perception of the public, the risk of damaging a brand's reputation exists with miscommunication. This issue has been brought to light by a very public spat recently between Ola's CEO Bhavish Aggarwal and comedian Kunal Kamra, bringing the stark reminder of how poor communication from a company leader can become a PR crisis. The #BhavishAggarwal and #KunalKamra Incident: A Case Study The argument started after Kunal Kamra began posting issues with #Ola's service centers on social media and posting an image wherein several electric scooters were parked for repair. Kamra's serious question through the tweet, wherein he questioned the service rendered and asked if Indian consumers are being given a proper platform to air their grievances, fueled a defensive response from Bhavish Aggarwal, Ola's CEO. Aggarwal's ripostes, that seemed to taunt Kamra accusing him of being paid to criticize and dismissed the latter's concerns outright, the entire episode turned into a public spat gaining quick virality. Aggarwal's statements that described Kamra as having a "failed comedy career" and offering him a job at Ola were interpreted as defensibly immature. Such an incident began to get most people on the column of questioning the tone and manner with which the CEO handled relevant customer complaints, which reflected poorly on the brand and leadership. Why CEO Communication Matters A CEO is not merely an executive but more so an ambassador of his company's values, vision, and culture. His or her words and acts can have far-reaching effects, not only on the public perception but also for the internal stakeholders in the form of employees and partners. In the digital world of today, where one tweet may become viral within minutes, a CEO must talk cautiously and sensibly. A reaction to defensiveness, as in the case of Bhavish Aggarwal-Kunal Kamra, reflects poor accountability and a lack of respect for customer feedback. This alienates the consumers and does damage to the brand's credibility. read more - Subscribe on LinkedIn - https://lnkd.in/guTnwxgJ

5