Chick-fil-A’s Concession to Political Correctness Is a PR Train Wreck

Chick-fil-A has long been one of my favorite restaurant chains. It’s a cheerful, wholesome and clean environment, where the employees seem happy to be there and eager to serve customers. The food is pretty good, too. Chick-fil-A also has been a terrific corporate citizen and good neighbor, helping local charities and giving out free food when natural disasters strike.

There is much to admire about the company, which has risen to become one of the top fast-food chains in America despite being closed on Sundays. It has been a model of how a corporation that adheres to Christian values—and that creates a family environment while being inclusive and welcoming of everyone—can garner incredible loyalty that translates into financial success.

A couple weeks ago I stopped by one of our local Chick-fil-A restaurants, and the place was packed with people who were greeting each other and happily sharing experiences. A portion of that evening’s proceeds was going to help a person in need. It was an uplifting experience just being there, which is part of the reason for company’s strong attraction to so many of us who share founder Truett Cathy’s faith and values.

Chick fil A Photo 1

Truett Cathy, who passed away several years ago, was the real deal. After reading an article about how his Christian values guided him through life, I wrote a brief letter expressing my appreciation for his testimony and faithfulness. A short time later I received a copy of his book, How Did You Do It, Truett?, with a personal inscription thanking me for my note and listing Proverbs 22:1: “A good name is more desirable than great riches; to be esteemed is better than silver or gold.”

Chick fil A Photo 2
In 2012, a boycott of Chick-fil-A bombed badly. As I noted in a blog post, which was subsequently picked up by Baptist Press, the boycott was a classic PR backfire that scorched the boycotters when Gov. Mike Huckabee launched a special Chick-fil-A Appreciation Day. Millions responded to show their support of the company, resulting in a huge day of sales for Chick-fil-A.

Billy Graham and Rick Warren were among scores of leaders who joined Gov. Huckabee in defending the embattled chain. Ted Cruz, who had just won the Republican nomination in the Texas Senate run-off race, served Chick-fil-A at his victory party. A major Wendy’s franchise owner put, “We stand with Chick-fil-A” on his restaurants’ signs.

Chick-fil-A didn’t have to lift a finger to defend itself; instead, a panoply of supporters did that for the chain.

Seven years later, it’s a much different story. Chick-fil-A is once again in the midst of a firestorm of controversy, but this time it’s from some of its most loyal customers—the ones who have consistently supported Chick-fil-A and made the fast-food chain the success it is today.

Many feel betrayed by the company’s recent announcement that it will discontinue corporate donations to faith-based organizations like the Salvation Army, apparently because they believe in the biblical definition of marriage between one biological man and one biological woman. This, of course, is offensive to the LGBTQ community, which portrays such beliefs as bigoted and discriminatory, even though the Salvation Army serves all people in need.

Chick-fil-A’s announcement has been met with widespread disappointment and anger.

In a statement the Salvation Army said it is saddened by Chick-fil-A’s decision, noting, “When misinformation is perpetuated without fact, our ability to serve those in need, regardless of sexual orientation, gender identity, religion or any other factor, is at risk. We urge the public to seek the truth before rushing to ill-informed judgment.”

Gov. Huckabee called the decision “such a disappointment,” saying that after being so successful it was bewildering that the company would “surrender to the bullies.” He warned that the implications are “far broader” than Chick-fil-A. Similar sentiments were expressed throughout the Christian community.

Christian Post contributor Mat Staver, an attorney and chairman of Liberty Counsel Action, reported that one of the places Chick-fil-A is now funding is Covenant House, which he alleges is an LGBTQ activist and “takes girls to abortion clinics.”

[Update: Townhall.com reports that as far back as 2017, the Chick-fil-A Foundation donated to the Southern Poverty Law Center, which designates conservative organizations like the Family Research Council as “hate groups.”

As noted in a Washington Times article, the gunman who attacked FRC in 2012 told the FBI that he found the organization on SPLC’s list of “anti-gay groups.” FRC President Tony Perkins said in a statement, “Not only has Chick-fil-A abandoned donations to Christians groups including the Salvation Army, it has donated to one of the most extreme anti-Christian in America.”]

While CEO Dan Cathy insists that the company was not giving into the demands of LGBTQ activists, the perception of Chick-fil-A’s actions certainly seem to be a step in that direction.

The loss of confidence in Chick-fil-A was further eroded by Tim Tassopoulos, president and COO, who was quoted as saying, “as we go into new markets, we need to be clear about who we are.”

So who, exactly, is Chick-fil-A these days? A whole lot of people would like clarity.

As has been demonstrated time and time again, appeasing anti-Christian groups leads to nothing but further demands. Just ask the Boy Scouts, who are now reportedly considering bankruptcy.

Or, try making friends with ADWEEK’s Rigel Cable, who writes, “Dear Chick-fil-A: The LGBTQ+ Community Is Not Behind Your Latest Publicity Stunt.” It turns out that stopping corporate donations to what Mr. Cable terms as “anti-LGBTQ+ organizations” and instead giving funds to an alleged LGBTQ activist organization just isn’t enough to make him a customer.

There may be exceptions, but for the most part people like Mr. Cable are as likely to eat at a Chick-fil-A restaurant as the people who buy Nike’s new Colin Kaepernick shoes are to purchase patriotic American apparel.

Chick-fil-A could never do enough to placate the LGBTQ community at large because they will not accept anything less than total capitulation of its values and full embrace of the LGBTQ agenda. Tolerance of other views is a foreign concept to them, and it’s hard to imagine them being a significant part of the company’s customer base.
Chick fil A Photo 3

In going down the path of being all things to all people, Chick-fil-A’s leadership has made the mistake that has caused so many brands to stumble, and in the process lose their identity and distinctiveness. The result: Sarcastic skepticism from the LGBTQ community at large, and a sense of acute disappointment and betrayal by scores of its traditional-values customers.

Forbes contributor Dawn Ennis, who reports on the fight for transgender equality and other LGBTQ issues, writes that the company is now getting “grilled by both sides.”

It appears Chick-fil-A took this action to make it easier to expand into new markets, but the opposite is likely to happen. Now that LGBTQ activists, abortion-rights advocates, far-left college professors and liberal news media outlets have seen a crack in the company’s values’ foundation, new demands will surface, which Chick-fil-A will have to meet—or else.

It’s a slippery slope. Detractors will demand more and more, until the company’s culture is no longer recognizable. If Chick-fil-A resists any of these demands, the backlash and outcry will be enormous. They know that if they can get the company to blink once, they can get it to blink again.

At the same time, it will be far more difficult to rally support from people who feel they’ve been burned. Chick-fil-A still has a significant amount of brand equity and goodwill, but the reality is that a lot of us just don’t feel the way we used to about the brand.

How did Truett do it? It wasn’t by caving to political correctness and taking for granted the patronage of people who have made Chick-fil-A such a great American success story.

Don Beehler is a public relations consultant in Franklin, Tennessee.

Sometimes the Best PR Successes Never See the Light of Day

Organizations that make mistakes and are quick to apologize will find that most people are quick to forgive. (Of course the apology must be sincere to be effective, and an apology without corrective action will ring hollow and likely be counterproductive.)

On the other hand, digging in and refusing to acknowledge a mistake—hoping that people won’t notice or care—generally makes matters worse. One of my career mentors gave me a piece of PR advice I’ve always remembered: “Never deny the obvious.”

It’s amazing, though, how many companies and individuals do that very thing. Sometimes people see a problem coming long before it actually hits and could be easily corrected. The situation can become a “smoldering” crisis, which is a potentially damaging condition that’s known to one or more individuals.

Smoldering Fire Thomas James Caldwell 47982720322_e4bf53bd75

Most crises start out as smoldering issues that could have been anticipated and minimized—or averted altogether—had appropriate action been taken in the early stages before the problem gets out of hand and wreaks havoc.

Some of my best PR successes are those that never saw the light of day—they had potential to turn into a crisis but were averted by dealing with them in the smoldering stage.

Such “saves” don’t show up in the PR “stats sheet,” but they can save a client or an employer millions of dollars in bad publicity and untold damage to a brand.

If something is smoldering at your organization, deal with it now because chances are it won’t go away or improve through neglect. More often than not, the smoldering crisis will turn into a consuming fire, devouring valuable time and resources and impeding your organization’s ability to function.

One of the best ways to identify potential smoldering situations in advance—and help you maintain control and minimize damage if a crisis strikes—is to have a flexible crisis management plan in place.

The plan should:

Contemplate the types of crises that could occur
Set forth policies and procedures to deal with them
Identify all audiences and the best ways to communicate with them
Have a pre-selected crisis management team in place
Establish a system for communicating accurate information quickly and effectively

The only thing worse than not having a crisis plan is having one that is not communicated, reviewed or tested by those who ultimately will have to implement it. That’s about as effective as having a fire extinguisher that’s hidden away and no one knows how to use if they manage to find it.

If a crisis strikes, you’ll be glad you took the time to plan ahead and prepare for the worst—and that others know what to do as well.

photo credit: Thomas James Caldwell Home of Pele via photopin (license)

Is Subsidizing the Newspaper Industry a Good Idea?

Charlotte business coach Steve Gatter is on a laudable mission to save journalism.

A mutual friend put Mr. Gatter in touch with me recently to discuss his idea of creating a foundation to raise money to subsidize newspapers. The concept, as I understand it, is to supplement their lack of subscription and advertising revenue with what essentially would be a bailout so that newspapers in need of financial help won’t go under.

Bundle of newspapers

He was inspired by a July 15 editorial from Leonard Pitts Jr., a national opinion columnist with the Miami Herald, titled, “What will we do without newspapers?”

In an email explaining his efforts, Mr. Gatter invited readers to share their thoughts and ideas as to whether newspapers should be financially supported.

No doubt about it, newspapers have taken a huge hit with massive layoffs throughout the nation and many of them going out of business. They have traditionally played an important role in American society, though for quite a few media outlets that role has shifted from reporting to advocating.

Citing a 2018 report that found the U.S. has lost nearly 1,800 newspapers since 2004, Mr. Pitts lamented what he called a “devastating” impact on the coverage of local events.

“Decide quickly,” he warned, “because that future is being born right before our eyes, thanks to shifting economic realities and the rise of social media.”

Note where Mr. Pitts places blame for the industry’s decline: “shifting economic realities” and “the rise of social media.”

This is an excellent example of the type of thinking that has put so many papers in a bind: Playing the victim card and blaming external elements rather than trying to understand why this is happening and finding ways to reverse the trend.

Question mark

Instead of asking “What will we do without newspapers?” here are three other questions I think would be much more productive for Mr. Pitts to ponder:

Why are so many people abandoning their local papers?

Is journalism, in its current state, worth saving?

If so, how will providing additional funds improve the situation?

When I was in graduate school, one of my professors made the point that newspapers are first and foremost in business to make a profit.

Markets tend to be efficient, and if a business isn’t meeting a need—or doing so sufficiently to satisfy its customers—chances are that business will simply not survive in the long run.

Blaming others for lack of sales and interest is a sure-fire way to expedite an entity’s extinction.

Perhaps if journalism adapted to the new realities and became more market-driven, the industry wouldn’t be in decline. But that would mean quite a few journalists would have to get to know and understand their readers better.

As a starting point, how about some focus groups to see what readers want from their local paper, and make adjustments to the content and areas of coverage accordingly?

Many journalists and editors also would have to set aside their bias and re-orientate their reporting to inform the public about what actually happened (i.e. the facts), not what they want the public to think about what happened.

The media bias problem extends beyond newspapers, as evidenced by a new study that found a whopping 95% of Americans are “troubled” by the current state of the media, with more than half citing “reports on fake news” as a concern.

Wow. Now that’s what I call devastating.

Pollster Frank Luntz points out that the media has the lowest level of credibility in more than half a century–which is when polls first started asking about that issue.

Noting that “judgmental journalists” now include their own political bias in their accounts—especially in their coverage of President Trump—a Washington Times article quotes Mr. Luntz as saying such hostility toward Mr. Trump is “turning people off against the media.”

“That’s not their job. Their job in not to label. Their job in not to condemn or criticize,” Mr. Luntz said. “Their responsibility is to present the language as it is used.”

Mr. Luntz is not the only one noticing this bias. The Times article cited a recent Pew Research Center survey that found “68% of Americans say the press is both politically biased and covers up its mistakes, while 58% said news organizations ‘do not understand people like them.’”

“Gallup, meanwhile, found that 69% of Americans say their trust in the media has fallen in the past decade.”

No wonder so many media outlets are losing readers, listeners and viewers. When reporters no longer have credibility, the game is pretty much over because no amount of money can buy trust.
If Not Willing to Change 27847692823_dba5527a07

Someone has defined insanity as doing the same thing over and over again expecting a different result. My concern about giving money to newspapers to ensure they survive, without making some fundamental changes to how they approach their work, would only reward the biased reporting and agenda-driven behavior that causes increasing levels of distrust and disgust among the public.

Today there are numerous online news sources that give readers more choices than ever. Some even specialize in local news, so the idea that local coverage is headed for doom if the community newspaper vanishes is simply not borne out by reality.

I sincerely wish Mr. Gatter well in his efforts to help save America’s newspapers. As a former reporter, I believe they have an important function in informing the public, providing accountability in a democratic society and offering a forum for diverse opinions on the editorial pages.

Unfortunately, so many of them have lost their way and seem unable or unwilling to make the kinds of changes that are needed to respond to market demand and restore trust.

Until those issues are addressed and corrected, I suspect we’ll continue to see newspaper layoffs and closures in the years to come.

photo credit: NS Newsflash via photopin cc

photo credit: atomicity ? via photopin (license)

photo credit: symphony of love Author Unknown If you are not willing to change, then don’t expect your life to via photopin (license)

How to Maximize Your Agency’s Opportunities for Publicity

photo credit Richard Masoner Cyclelicious via photopincc Having worked with reporters and editors throughout the world during the course of my career—as well as being on the other side of journalism as a correspondent and editor—I’ve made and received my share of media pitches.

I’ve seen what works, what doesn’t work and what downright annoys reporters no matter where on the globe they reside. I’ve also experienced first-hand how publicity can help small- and mid-sized agencies and other businesses—even one-person operations—level the playing field with larger competitors.

The beauty of publicity is that it not only generates awareness and extends your agency’s reach at no cost, but it also gives you something no other marketing tool can replicate: credibility.

That’s because publicity allows a secondary source–the news media or bloggers–to tell your story to the people you most want to hear it.

However, before contacting a reporter with a story idea, it’s important to understand how the news media operate and what they want.

Here are eight publicity tips to consider before making a call or hitting the “send” button with your story idea:

#1: Define your media focus.

Limit your pitches to only those outlets that directly serve your target audience. The more you can demonstrate you understand the reporter’s audience and the better you can explain why your story idea would appeal to them, the greater your chances are of being considered. When I was on the editorial side of a healthcare magazine, I never ceased to be amazed at some of the obviously inappropriate pitches PR people sent my way. It was pretty easy to tell who had taken time to read our magazine and understand our audience and the types of stories we covered, and who had taken a shotgun approach in hopes of hitting something somewhere.

#2: Get to the right person at each media outlet.

Whether you’re dealing with your local paper or The Wall Street Journal, it’s important to take the time to find out which person covers the particular area you are interested in targeting. For example, don’t pitch a manufacturing story to a business reporter who covers healthcare or retail. It’s surprising how often this happens because people don’t take the time to do their homework.

#3: Research a reporter’s previous stories before making contact.

Now that you’ve found the right person to contact, learn all you can about what that reporter covers, his or her interests and reporting style. Media directories are very helpful resources for getting such information, as is the Internet. In addition to having reporters’ names and contact information, the more detailed directories have helpful contact notes such as:

Works from home, but prefers all materials be sent to the paper.
Prefers to be contacted by e-mail and hates follow up calls.
She is interested in the ideas behind technology, not the products.

#4: Know what makes a good news story.

Reporters are busy people who work under constant pressure and deadlines. When pitching a story, get right to the point. The most important things you can tell a reporter about your story are who will care about it and why. Your pitch has to pass the “so-what” factor, as well as be timely and relevant to their audience. Put yourself in the reporter’s shoes and ask: “Would this story be interesting to my audience?” If you can’t honestly answer yes, you need to rethink your pitch.

#5: Respect their deadlines.

When contacting a reporter by phone, I suggest first asking if this is a good time to talk briefly. If not, ask when would be a convenient time to share a story idea. (Be prepared to be asked to send your idea in an email, though some reporters will give you a minute or two to hear your pitch if they’re not on deadline.) If you’re contacted by a reporter on deadline, do everything you can to respond within that timeframe; otherwise, you may miss out on a golden opportunity. Even worse, if you don’t respond promptly, the reporter may contact and quote a competitor.

#6: Think, write and speak like a reporter.

When the time comes to make your pitch, be sure you not only think like a reporter, but that you write and speak like one as well. For example, don’t advertise or editorialize your story idea (reporters are very sensitive to disguised advertising). Whether you write your pitch or give it verbally, be as objective as possible by emphasizing the news or human interest aspect, or your expertise to comment and provide insights.

#7: Make their jobs easier.

The more you can provide reporters with relevant, factual information that is meaningful and targeted to their audience, the more likely they are to take you seriously and provide coverage. Plus, if they know that you know their audience, area of coverage and deadlines, when they see a pitch from you in the future, they’ll realize you’re credible and will be more likely to give you serious consideration.

#8: Customize your pitch to fit their audience.

When I first started my agency, I had a female client who was launching a residential steel framing business, which was a new concept for our area. While the basic story was the same—the benefits of steel framing for residential homes—I segmented my pitches:

To our local business journal, I emphasized the entrepreneurial side of her business.
To our local daily paper, I got a front-page feature story that was part of a broader article about alternative materials in housing.
To women’s publications, I focused on a female entering the construction business, which traditionally has been dominated by men.
To her hometown paper (which ran a front-page story), I pitched a “local lady” angle and tied it to an award she had recently won.

One final thought: Consider giving the place you’d most like to receive coverage the first shot at a story whenever possible. Reporters like to be the first break a story, and not just report the same news that others have. This is a very competitive business and like any other profession, reporters enjoy getting recognition and praise for their stories, especially when they are the first to report them.

photo credit: Richard Masoner / Cyclelicious via photopin cc

Why off-the-Record Conversations Should be off Limits for Agencies

One of the things I stress when doing media training is the importance of not speaking off the record in interviews.

There may be exceptions–such as if you really know and trust the reporter–but generally it’s not a good idea to tell a news media person anything about your agency or clients that you wouldn’t want repeated on radio or TV, in a publication or on the Internet.

Some news media outlets have policies forbidding off-the-record conversations. That’s a good, ethical policy, but unfortunately not all adhere to it.

There are lots of examples of why talking off the record is so risky, but I’ve yet to find one that drives home the point better than this headline titled “India’s nuclear identify unclear.”

Check out the subhead: “‘Off the record, we are totally unprepared’ says one of its top military strategists.”

Off the Record Newspaper Comment

Wow. This subhead makes a pretty clear statement beyond the quote: Don’t trust us because we won’t keep an off-the-record remark confidential. Need I say more?

The best practice is to assume everything an agency spokesperson says in an interview is on the record and may be used.

Understanding the different levels of speaking with reporters is important for PR success in agencies as well as other organizations. A number of years ago, a reporter for The Tennessean newspaper described these levels in a column. They provide helpful guidance to anyone preparing for a media interview:

Off the record: “To have an off-the-record conversation means that the information will not be used in any way in a story. Many editors, including mine, don’t allow reporters to have off-the-record conversations.”

On background: “To have an on-background conversation means that the information may be used in a story, but the person who is talking will not be named in connection with the information that is ‘on background.’”

On the record: “This is the standard conversation with reporters. However, reporters should identify themselves as working on an article before beginning an interview…once a statement has been made on the record, it cannot be taken off-record.”

Is Truth Still the Most Important Factor in a News Story?

A number of years ago, the senior editor for our local newspaper authored a column about the paper’s policy for using anonymous sources and its commitment to accurate reporting.

“The most important factor for us in using an anonymous source is that the information given us by the source is true,” she wrote.

“It’s too easy for people to hide behind anonymity, planting information with no accountability. And when you’re not accountable, isn’t it easier to stretch the truth?”

She wrote this column in 2009. A decade later, we’ve witnessed an amazing decline among numerous news media outlets when it comes to accurate reporting and vetting sources. All too many of them are just fine with stretching the truth—or outright misrepresenting it—to advance their agendas.

The latest example is BuzzFeed News’ reporting that Michael Cohen, President Trump’s former attorney, told Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s prosecutors that the president directed Mr. Cohen to lie about a potential Trump Tower deal with Russia.

Photo by Jon Tyson on Unsplash

A spokesman for Mr. Mueller disputed the lie allegation, hurling BuzzFeed’s “Russian bombshell” report into a fiery grave.

As reported by Reuters: “‘BuzzFeed’s description of specific statements to the Special Counsel’s Office, and characterization of documents and testimony obtained by this office, regarding Michael Cohen’s Congressional testimony are not accurate,’ Peter Carr, a spokesman for Mueller, said in the special counsel’s first comment on a media report since its probe started 20 months ago.”

The Daily Caller noted “CNN and MSNBC collectively used the word ‘impeach’ nearly 200 times on Friday” before the special counsel’s office discredited the BuzzFeed story.

The damage such irresponsible and speculative reporting does to the media’s credibility can hardly be overstated. While there still are a lot of honest, reputable journalists around who care about truth and fairness, the trend is not encouraging.

Sloppy reporting, lack of accountability and the pressure to be first to break a story are all contributing factors in the decline of journalism and its eroding trust among Americans. But surpassing all these is the willingness among an increasing number of reporters and editors to run with stories that have no basis in reality, and to not really be concerned about it because it appears that in their minds the ends justify the means.

Avoid These News Release Mistakes for Agency PR Success

Avoid These News Rel Mistakes 17353990342_d6ee53041e (1)

A common complaint among journalists is the lack of relevance of the materials they receive from corporate communications and PR professionals.

Much of this information, they lament, is written like advertising, not journalism.

As a former reporter and editor, I can attest that is a sure-fired way to have your news release discarded.

Here are 6 key mistakes to avoid when writing a news release:

Crafting a “no news” news release. This is where you’re trying to get your agency or client some media coverage but without a real news hook. It’s better to hold off on issuing a release until you have an appropriate angle to justify contacting a reporter.
Using puffery, vague generalities and exaggerated descriptions of people, events, products or services—followed by lots of exclamation marks!!!!!! Nothing screams amateur quite like that.
Being verbose. It’s usually harder to write short, concise copy than long copy, but journalism is all about being succinct and to the point.
Writing about “pseudo” events that are contrived to get attention but have no real news value.
Presenting statements that are subjective and opinion-based as facts. If you want to include a statement that involves an opinion or judgment, turn it into a quote and attribute the statement to someone.
Writing like an advertising copywriter instead of a journalist. To be considered credible by the news media, you have to write your release as objectively as possible, emphasizing its news value, connection to a trend or its human interest aspect. Use third-person pronouns and the active rather than passive voice.

photo credit: symphony of love Master Cheng Yen Do not fear making mistakes in life, fear only not correcting them via photopin (license)

A New Calling Card for Agency New Business

At one time or another, many agency principals have probably toyed with the idea of writing a book. And with good reason: They have plenty of relevant insights worth sharing.

Niche books can be a valuable new calling card for new business and help your agency stand out from competitors. That’s because writing a specialty book:

Increases your agency’s visibility
Helps market your agency to key audiences within a particular niche
Positions your agency’s leadership as subject matter experts
Reaches decision makers your agency might not otherwise be able to access
Gives your agency material to repurpose in blog posts, newsletters, articles, etc.
Provides an impressive way to conclude a new business presentation: handing prospects a signed copy of the book

Books 20431040803_a2a6aba7dd.jpg

Agency experts typically have busy schedules, and the thought of taking time to write a book can be a bit overwhelming. Plus, some people have a great deal of knowledge about a particular topic but dislike writing.

The good news is that your agency likely already has material on your blog, executive speeches, presentations, case studies, etc., that could jump start the book’s content. In addition, a talented ghostwriter can take a lot of the burden off an executive, while also bringing new thinking and perspective to the book.

The writer should learn as much as possible about how the executive thinks and speaks, and try to capture his or her personality. It’s vital that they work well together and have good chemistry. In some cases it may be preferable to have multiple authors from the agency each write a chapter to showcase the depth of your agency’s expertise.

A niche book truly can be a competitive advantage, and it may well be the best new business investment your agency makes in 2019.

photo credit: cogdogblog The “Networked” Shelf via photopin (license)

The Best Tool for Evaluating the Effectiveness of Your Agency’s Communications

A communications audit helps identify strengths and weaknesses in an agency’s communications, as well as perceptions that exist and barriers which prevent or inhibit effective communication. An audit also flags areas that may require more in-depth, quantitative research.

Comm Audit All Reverse Mort Checkmark 24379202246_5ca2770bdf_n (1)

What is a communications audit?

A communications audit is a management tool that helps agencies and their clients determine how effectively they are communicating with various audiences. It involves the collection and analysis of information about perceptions clients and influencers have about the agency. In essence, a communications audit is a snapshot of an organization at a given time. An audit may be broad or narrow, focusing on a particular audience or a variety of audiences. Likewise, the audit may address a single issue or a wide range of issues affecting an agency. The bottom-line goal for any audit, however, should be to improve the effectiveness of an organization’s communication with important audiences.

Why should an organization have one?

A communications audit can help agencies and/or their clients understand how well their messages are being received and accepted by audiences. While people may think that others understand and accept their messages, the fact of the matter is that we are often unaware of how the messages we send are received or understood. Equally important as sending a message is listening for feedback. A communications audit also can help identify barriers to effective communication and provide practical solutions.

How is a communications audit conducted?

The best way to conduct a communications audit is through an independent, third-part individual who thoroughly understands the communication process. Audits typically include a review of formal and informal communication processes; one-on-one interviews with community and industry leaders, influencers, customers and members of the organization; focus groups; and sometimes surveys.

What are the expected results?

An audit gives organizations an opportunity to find out what they are doing well in their communications and where they need to improve. The audit also may uncover important issues or perceptions that need to be addressed, and in some cases it will significantly alter the way an organization operates.

It’s hard to fix something if you don’t know exactly where it’s broken. A communications audit helps identify communication gaps, barriers and pitfalls, and it ultimately provides a roadmap to get communications back on track.

photo credit: All Reverse Mortgage Check mark via photopin (license)

Why PR Is Best Suited to Lead Social Media Initiatives

Marketing, advertising, new business, customer service, human resources and others have important business reasons for using social media. But when it comes to mapping agency or corporate strategy, I believe that public relations is the discipline best equipped for leading the social media charge.

Here’s why PR is naturally suited for this role:

PR people are storytellers who create content that is targeted, relevant and valuable
They are trained to converse with a variety of audiences
They are responsible for managing an organization’s image
They help an organization speak with one voice through clear and consistent communication
They know how to engage audiences and talk with (not at) them

The hallmark of good public relations has always been two-way communication, which is vital for social media success.

Social media allows us to start or participate in conversations with individuals we might otherwise not reach. We can communicate directly with our marketplace and answer questions, solve problems, have constructive debates and gain a better understanding of issues and concerns from the other person’s perspective.

But beware: a post from any department in an organization is seen as representing the entire organization.

Unfortunately, some entities operate in aimless social media silos instead of having a synergistic plan for search engine optimization, reputation management and business impact.

As a result, there is no unified message or purpose, and “Likes” and “Shares” are considered barometers of success rather than attracting and cultivating targeted leads and converting them into sales.

The real strength of social media is its interactive nature, which enables us to build relationships and enhance trust in ways that other mediums can’t match. Social media gives agencies, businesses and nonprofits unparalleled ways of communicating one-on-one with customers, donors, prospects, influencers and other interested parties.

It’s what PR professionals do every day.

photo credit: MySign AG Social Media via photopin (license)

The Art of Telling Your Story

PR tips, tactics and tools for communicating more effectively

Tag Archives: Don Beehler