Interesting story last week about the world’s oldest newspaper, which has decided to go with an on-line version only. Sweden’s Post-och Inrikes Tidningar, founded in 1645, became a web-only publication on January 1.

Mind you, the paper edition had a very humble circulation of approximately 1,000, but it’s still noteworthy given its history. I wouldn’t be surprised if we see a majority of the tier two dailies here in Canada forego their paper editions within the next five years. However, I think our national papers and other leading daily newspapers will be around for a long time to come.  

Thoughts?

12 February 2007 | General Information | No Comments

We have added a new glossary item to our popular PR and marketing resource center at http://www.mediamiser.com/resources/prglossary/gatekeepers.html. Take a look. It’s all about gatekeepers and news gatherers at major newspapers.

6 February 2007 | General Information | No Comments

I was talking to an old-time journalist the other day. Most of the discussion was about her contempt for the changing landscape of journalism - especially when it comes to print media.

She didn’t have a real problem with new media, such as blogs, but rather with the loss of the old media and the old traditions, particularly the newsroom. She’s not alone in believing the reason many print media newsrooms are disappearing is because of financial pressures, mainly those placed on publishers by investors and executives as they strive to not lose money for the business.

It’s no secret that technology is quickly changing the news landscape. According to Statistics Canada, “in 2005, about 62% of home Internet users - or 38% of Canadian adults overall - went online to view news or sports information.” My guess is this trend will continue, and will go on eating into the bottom-line of traditional news outlets, forcing them to either make cuts or find new revenue streams.

There are numerous ways to make cuts. Publications can encourage staff to work from home, or hire more freelancers, reducing the physical overhead of the publication. They can syndicate content among publications, saving money on staffing. All of these  contribute to the disappearance of the newsroom.

The journalist I was talking to raised a number of points that emphasized the importance of the newsroom: Colleagues could feed off one another, exchange ideas and share information; younger reporters could learn from their more experienced colleagues, and the experienced reporters would help keep the rookies in line; and - perhaps most importantly of all - there was an emphasis on research and accurate reporting. These days, journalists have access to the Internet for information. Some rely on it way too much.

Already, Barack Obama has reportedly fallen prey to misinformation, which was partially fueled by the Internet. Not only has this unfairly hurt Obama’s credibility, it has also hurt the credibility of the news outlets that decided to report it as fact.

Furthermore, the loss of the newsroom has lead to a more personalized form of news, often reflecting the persona of the journalist. Yes, blogs and technology have also contributed to this, but with journalists isolated and having less access to peers, it will get worse. People like Jon Stewart and Stephen Colbert routinely make light of this trend.

So what does all this mean for those of us who are trying to make sense of the news, and trying to derive some value from it? First, we must closely scrutinize all information. It’s evident some journalists are not corroborating their information. Second, we need to have methods to collect a more diverse range of media. We can’t ignore blogs.

Reporting has changed significantly since the days of Woodward and Bernstein. We need to ensure we continue to change with it.

5 February 2007 | General Information, Media Analysis, New Media, Trends | No Comments

It’s funny that even in these days of modern management, PR too often gets caught up in the ‘how broad was our distribution’ rather than ‘how many people were spurred to action.’ In this sense, I don’t think the ’shotgun’ approach to distributing news releases has ever been truly successful.

But the reality is, news releases in any format can be effective if used properly.

Traditional news releases can work, although I was always taught to use them sparingly. I don’t think anything has changed.

That being said, the so-called “new media news release” also has to be used for what it was intended. If it’s abused, the ‘them again’ attitude will rear its ugly head.

Here at MediaMiser, we’ll distribute our news differently, depending on the type of news.

We don’t just target the media. Some of our releases are targeted at investors, customers, and our online public. In fact, we rarely distribute our releases on the traditional news wire.

We post them on our site and at online news distribution sites, such as mediasyndicate.com. This helps our Google PR rating and provides us with even greater exposure.

3 February 2007 | General Information, New Media, Trends | No Comments

I believe corporate messaging is just an extension of advertising and vise versa.

When it comes down to it, it’s all just branding and this is why marketing departments and corporate communicators need to work more closely together. Branding is branding and consistency will help reinforce your image to your audience.

That said, I think messaging can also be very dangerous if not used properly. Overexposure can have the same effect as ‘Chinese water torture’.

Also, because corporate branding is being used in an ever-growing variety of media, it’s extremely important that corporate communicators and marketing specialists have processes and a way of managing the message.

3 February 2007 | General Information, Media Analysis, Advertising | No Comments

Most of the talk around media analysis usually focuses on measurement and not so much on analysis—two terms that can intersect but often go in different directions.

Measurement is usually about providing some sort of scorecard-based result surrounding a proactive media relations activity about your own organization or that of your client—usually highlighting the successes, and often hiding the failures. If you’re benchmarking these results properly against future campaigns it can provide for the makings of a decent measurement program (aside from hiding the failures part).

However, an ongoing analysis program provides intelligence about your organization, competitors, stakeholders, industry analysts and key issues for both proactive and reactive media relations campaigns—knowledge that can help drive strategic communications and organizational planning. Most measurement programs can’t or won’t deliver this type of information.

Case in point, last year in Canada, CPRS introduced a new measurement standard called Media Relations Points (MRP) which provides a score out of 100. From most accounts, PR agencies are adopting this model in droves as a way to demonstrate the success of proactive media relations campaigns. One of the key metrics involves inputting the budget of the campaign—which, from an agency perspective, is easy enough and provides proper benchmarking from campaign to campaign. However, it doesn’t provide the ability to conduct proper benchmarking from a competitive analysis standpoint, for example between Yahoo and Google, since you don’t have the competitive budget data. If you work for Yahoo and consistently score an MRP score of between 75-80 it may look promising. But what you don’t know is Google is scoring 90-95.

This is where an analysis program can kick in. Expanding the reach of your daily media monitoring to include news about not just your organization, but that of your competitors, stakeholders and key issues—will provide a full competitive and issues based analysis that can help compare apples to apples, and provide you with the knowledge and intelligence that’s buried within the news.

1 February 2007 | General Information | 2 Comments

No matter how many times my dad tried to explain the concept of twice-removed cousins, I never quite got it (sorry dad). However, when I think about the relationship between PR, Marketing, and Advertising, it just seems to fit. PR seems to be the cousin that’s twice removed from Advertising in most organizations. But it still doesn’t seem to make much business sense.

Wouldn’t it be more strategic if PR, Marketing and Advertising acted as one cohesive unit? Right now it seems one rarely talks to the other, unless they happen to bump into each other in the hallway.

For example, if CompanyX has identified it really needs to be in the National Post to reach its demographic, the more cost-effective route of PR could lead the charge for coverage, and if that fails, Advertising could then kick-in for guaranteed coverage.

On a larger scale this can be done by combining real-time PR data and Advertising data, mapped out by date and publication. Advertising is already responsible for providing this type of information, so what we really need is to have PR step up to the plate with readily available statistics on its successes and failures.

I realize that there is a place for both Advertising and PR at the same time, but I really believe organizations would be much better off if each department knew what the other was up to. We’re already seeing more and more organizations create marcomms groups…hopefully we’re not too far off from admarcomms (perhaps we need a better name than that!).

29 January 2007 | General Information | No Comments

Last summer I came across a blog that suggested there is a bias against the Public Relations industry and PR professionals, because of the perception of PR as a ‘pink profession.’ There is solid evidence that the PR industry is female dominated.

Now, I’m not naive enough to suggest that biases do not exist in the corporate world, but I think these types of excuses mask the bigger problem in PR, that is, that the industry does not do enough to stress its own importance within the organization. In short, PR and PR professionals must expand their role and become intelligence gathers by turning news into knowledge.

Yes, I realize you might think I’m shamelessly promoting MediaMiser here by referencing our company slogan ‘Turning news into Knowledge.‘However, I can’t think of a more appropriate phrase to sum up what the PR industry must do to bring credibility to its craft through meaningful analysis of what it does, and offer real insight to an organization’s senior management by showing what is happening in the eyes of the media in near real-time.

So, I decided to formalize my theory in the form of an article now in the MediaMiser Resource Center. If you’re interested, please read Influencing Change Through Media Analysis.

25 January 2007 | General Information, Media Analysis | No Comments

Can a device ever have too much functionality?  That is the question I’m asking after reading an article in the Toronto Star about the new Apple iPhone.

On January 9, 2007, Steve Jobs unveiled the much anticipated iPhone at the MacWorld conference in San Francisco.  On word of the unveiling, stocks of the maker of the Blackberry, RIM, lost 7.68 per cent.

The iPhone promises to be the all-in-one device that you’ll ever need to carry around — the Swiss Army knife of electronics and communications.

Well, I love Apple products and currently own an iPod video and I’m even considering buying a MacBook laptop.

However, unless Apple wants to change my mind by giving me an iPhone to try, I’ll stick with my Blackberry for my communications needs.

Here’s the issue that I have.  I currently own a Palm T3, RIM Blackberry, and an Apple iPod video.

Each product has its advantages, and I use each one for particular tasks.

My T3 can play music and ebooks, take pictures, play games, retrieve email wirelessly, browse the internet, etc…

However, my Blackberry is superior when it comes to retrieving email and making calls.  In fact, I occasionally use the web browser to get the latest hockey scores or use our software, MediaMiser Enterprise, to get the latest news.

The T3 does not have a phone, but the Palm Treo series does.  My feeling on this is the same as the iPhone – sometimes there is something to be said for simplicity and doing a couple things well instead of a lot of things OK.  That being said, Palm can also send me the latest Treo to try to change my mind.

The advantage I have when I use my T3, is that it keeps my life intact.  It’s great for organizing my life and making sure I’m getting things done and I’m where I’m supposed to be.  Anymore than that and I’m working for the device instead of the other way around, and I have a dead battery. That’s why I’m skeptical about the iPhone.

I love my iPod video.  I even have kata videos saved on it so I can use it to help me with practicing Karate.  In my opinion, it’s the best device for music, work related podcasts, e-books for on the go, and the odd video that I don’t have time to see.

However, from what I understand, if I invest in an iPhone, in some cases, I have to stick with one telecommunications carrier for the life of the product.

Also, if I want to use the device for everything, battery life will become a major problem.  I can go the entire weekend without charging my Blackberry, and with that I’m receiving e-mail in real-time, answering phone calls, and getting information off the web.  Plus, I’m not obsessing over what else the Blackberry can do for me.

The bottom line is, I have limited time to do what I need to do during the day and I also want quality of life.  These devices need to work for me and not the other way around.

But if Apple wants to try to change my mind, I’ll be happy to test it for them.

23 January 2007 | New Media, Trends | No Comments

Welcome to Turning News Into Knowledge, the company blog of MediaMiser Ltd.

22 January 2007 | General Information, Media Analysis, Advertising, New Media, Trends | No Comments