Marsahll McLuhan was wrong, in my opinion, when he said "The medium is the message". OK, he may have been right at the time (1967), but he's been quoted so many times since, his phrase is regarded as a truism.
These days, many people (me included at times, to be honest) are focusing on tools like Twitter, Facebook, LinkedIn, Ecademy, and many others. There are races to get large numbers of friends or followers, or a campaign to get only "quality contacts".
There are many experts, including some of my good friends in here, who are helping people to learn how to use these tools. They're doing a good job too.
But I'm increasingly feeling that there's something missing. Having gazillions of followers, or being linked to global communities of potential customers, is all well and good. However, you need to be able to offer them something they need, in a way that they appreciate.
There seems to be very little focus on the message right now. Knowing how to use the tools is no use unless you have the right message.
Don't get so busy using the tools that you forget what you do.
Friday, June 19, 2009
Tuesday, June 09, 2009
Gordon Brown - is it just a communication issue?
With one bound he was free. Well, free for a while. Gordon Brown escaped relatively unscathed from his meeting with the Parliamentary Labour Party last night. However, some of the MPs who were at the meeting have emerged to tell the press that "Gordon will be changing his presentation style". Well I never. He's been in politics for most of his life, reached the highest office in the land,and it now appears that his presentation skills don't pass muster. His fellow MPs seem to think that better communication is the answer.
As a professional speaker, I look at speeches with a critical eye. There's no doubt that Gordon Brown is not a great orator. Comparisons are always invidious, but Barack Obama has won justified praise for his speeches and delivery. Unlike many of the great orators of the past, he often uses an autocue, and is still not completely comfortable "off script", but he's head and shoulders above Gordon.
The prime-minister-in-waiting, David Cameron, is a reasonable speaker, and I'd place him somewhere between Brown and Obama. Cameron's famous "no notes" speech to the Conservative Party Conference a couple of years ago was actually a piece of clever TV editing by the local director (every time there was a cutaway to the audience, Cameron consulted his notes). Nonetheless, his style is much better suited to delivering a message than Brown's.
Politics apart, Brown is a poor speaker. But I don't think communication training can save him now.
As a professional speaker, I look at speeches with a critical eye. There's no doubt that Gordon Brown is not a great orator. Comparisons are always invidious, but Barack Obama has won justified praise for his speeches and delivery. Unlike many of the great orators of the past, he often uses an autocue, and is still not completely comfortable "off script", but he's head and shoulders above Gordon.
The prime-minister-in-waiting, David Cameron, is a reasonable speaker, and I'd place him somewhere between Brown and Obama. Cameron's famous "no notes" speech to the Conservative Party Conference a couple of years ago was actually a piece of clever TV editing by the local director (every time there was a cutaway to the audience, Cameron consulted his notes). Nonetheless, his style is much better suited to delivering a message than Brown's.
Politics apart, Brown is a poor speaker. But I don't think communication training can save him now.
Monday, June 01, 2009
Susan Boyle - victim or heroine?
Like a third of the UK population, I watched the final of "Britain's Got Talent" on Saturday night. The eventual winners, Diversity, probably came as a bit of a shock to the organisers, as evidenced by Sunday's press conference at the headquarters of Sony Music. Clearly, they were expecting a singer. According to reports on the BBC, Simon Cowell did not appear at the press conference.
The story of Susan Boyle has generated astonishing publicity, showing how social media can now spread fame far and wide in an instant, particularly when combined with a rags-to-riches story. However, instant fame can also disappear instantly. It looks as though Susan is caught up in a media whirlpool that has left her senses reeling. I'm not in the least surprised that she needs to take a few days out of the limelight.
Far be it from this old hack to sniff a PR stunt. However, the headlines on the UK papers today are about Susan Boyle, not Diversity. As I write this, she is top of the trending topics on Twitter. When she emerges from her sojourn in hospital, I suspect her fame will be enhanced. Provided she can cope with the publicity roller-coaster, and is treated sensitively by her PR minders, her story will run and run.
The story of Susan Boyle has generated astonishing publicity, showing how social media can now spread fame far and wide in an instant, particularly when combined with a rags-to-riches story. However, instant fame can also disappear instantly. It looks as though Susan is caught up in a media whirlpool that has left her senses reeling. I'm not in the least surprised that she needs to take a few days out of the limelight.
Far be it from this old hack to sniff a PR stunt. However, the headlines on the UK papers today are about Susan Boyle, not Diversity. As I write this, she is top of the trending topics on Twitter. When she emerges from her sojourn in hospital, I suspect her fame will be enhanced. Provided she can cope with the publicity roller-coaster, and is treated sensitively by her PR minders, her story will run and run.
Friday, May 29, 2009
Do you know what you're talking about?
Forgive me for being so blunt, but I have a very simple view of speeches. Imagine two circles on a page. One contains all of your knowledge. The other contains everything that your audience is interested in. If those circles overlap, then you should deliver a speech to that audience, on the topic(s) in the area that overlaps. If the circles don't overlap, you shouldn't even consider delivering a speech.
Of course, you wouldn't be as foolhardy as some speakers I've heard, who have no connection with their audience at all. I'm sure you only speak when you have a topic that is of interest to your listeners. However, problems can arise if you stray out of that overlapping zone, and start talking about things that you don't really understand, in order to please (or rather in an attempt to please) your audience.
From time to time, all speakers can suffer from the "edge effect", where they reach the borders of their expertise, but then stray over the line because the audience seems to like it. In fact, it's being disrespectful, and could lead to disaster, especially in any Q&A session. The best way to avoid the problem is to ask the event organiser to give you contact details for a few likely audience members, and have a chat with them a few weeks beforehand. Then base your speech solely on the overlap of your knowledge and their interests. It works every time.
Of course, you wouldn't be as foolhardy as some speakers I've heard, who have no connection with their audience at all. I'm sure you only speak when you have a topic that is of interest to your listeners. However, problems can arise if you stray out of that overlapping zone, and start talking about things that you don't really understand, in order to please (or rather in an attempt to please) your audience.
From time to time, all speakers can suffer from the "edge effect", where they reach the borders of their expertise, but then stray over the line because the audience seems to like it. In fact, it's being disrespectful, and could lead to disaster, especially in any Q&A session. The best way to avoid the problem is to ask the event organiser to give you contact details for a few likely audience members, and have a chat with them a few weeks beforehand. Then base your speech solely on the overlap of your knowledge and their interests. It works every time.
Friday, May 15, 2009
It's not who you know, it's who they know
Social networking is not just about who you know. It's much more about who they know. My good friend Jan Vermeiren points out in his excellent book "How to Really use Linkedin" that it's your second level contacts who can really help you. When you have a mutual, trusted friend in common, it is often very easy to effect an introduction. And assuming an average of just 200 first-level contacts, your second-level contacts will number 40,000, which is a large pool of potential business partners, employers or clients.
It's the same on Twitter, although the numbers are even larger. For example, I have around 2,500 followers. Assuming an average of 500 followers for each of them, I can reach over a million people in two steps. It's this, in my opinion, that is making Twitter the "collective brain" of the planet. Once, I used to turn to Google if I had a question I couldn't answer. Now I turn to Twitter. In the last week alone, It has helped me find the source of an obscure quote, located a cosy bed and breakfast in Sedona, Arizona, and allowed me to set up an interview with an innovative PR company. All of the responses came back within ten minutes.
It's not who you know, it's who they know (and what they know, too).
It's the same on Twitter, although the numbers are even larger. For example, I have around 2,500 followers. Assuming an average of 500 followers for each of them, I can reach over a million people in two steps. It's this, in my opinion, that is making Twitter the "collective brain" of the planet. Once, I used to turn to Google if I had a question I couldn't answer. Now I turn to Twitter. In the last week alone, It has helped me find the source of an obscure quote, located a cosy bed and breakfast in Sedona, Arizona, and allowed me to set up an interview with an innovative PR company. All of the responses came back within ten minutes.
It's not who you know, it's who they know (and what they know, too).
Friday, May 08, 2009
A huge PR gaffe - MP's expenses affair gets worse
The Daily Telegraph has been having a field day with its revelations about the minutiae of MPs expenses. Although the revelations are hardly of a scale to prompt resignations, they are embarrassing for the Government. Note that the opposition parties have kept fairly quiet on this issue, since their MPs have no doubt been claiming for similar trivia. Of course, the Telegraph is more interested in Labour-bashing than "outing" the Tories. Maybe the next few days will see things change.
The sensible thing, in PR terms, would be to ride out the storm, point out that nothing illegal happened, mention that all parties have used the same system, and promise to change the rules.
However, sensible behaviour is not a hallmark of politicians at present. Now the matter of how the expenses were leaked has been referred to the Metropolitan Police. A Commons spokesman is on the radio blustering about "serious offences" and "a possible breach of the Official Secrets Act". What idiocy this is. No-one cares how the Telegraph received the details, and no-one is denying their authenticity.
As an example of how to make a PR drama into a crisis, this is a classic. When you're in a hole, you should stop digging.
The sensible thing, in PR terms, would be to ride out the storm, point out that nothing illegal happened, mention that all parties have used the same system, and promise to change the rules.
However, sensible behaviour is not a hallmark of politicians at present. Now the matter of how the expenses were leaked has been referred to the Metropolitan Police. A Commons spokesman is on the radio blustering about "serious offences" and "a possible breach of the Official Secrets Act". What idiocy this is. No-one cares how the Telegraph received the details, and no-one is denying their authenticity.
As an example of how to make a PR drama into a crisis, this is a classic. When you're in a hole, you should stop digging.
Thursday, May 07, 2009
Is it Spin, or is it Media Mastery?
No-one likes a spin doctor, but everyone admires a good communicator. Is there a difference? Maybe it depends on your point of view. Politicians of all persuasions try to ensure that their audiences, and particularly their supporters, know what they stand for.
So how do politicians ensure that they really do deliver a clear message, and what can we learn from them? Like him or loathe him, George Galloway MP demonstrates communication skills of the highest order. His advice for interviews? “Know exactly what you want to get across in the interview, and don’t be diverted or put off in any way by the questions that you are asked. In a very real sense, it doesn’t really matter what the question is. You have a few moments on the media, and you want to make the most of that opportunity, to get across the message you want to deliver. Now, if you can make it fit the question, it is much better, since the message will be better received and understood, but don’t be sidetracked by an interviewer trying to take you down a siding you don’t want to go down, because then you will lose the opportunity of getting across your unique and important message.”
Jo Swinson, the UK’s youngest MP, adds “When doing an interview, it is important to control your nerves. I always take a deep breath and smile, even on radio. When I appear on ’Any Questions’, I have one-page briefing sheet about the issues, and at the top it says in big letters ‘Slow down and smile’, since I do have a tendency to speak rather quickly. You also need to be authentic. If it’s something that you aren’t passionate about, or don’t even care about, are you the right person to do a media interview? Particularly in politics, but also in business too, if you are passionate about something, people will engage with you and relate to what you say”
So much for those in the front line of politics. But what about those in the background? Political blogger Iain Dale says that a sense of humour comes in handy during tricky interviews. “Often if David Cameron is asked a tough question by John Humphries or Jeremy Paxman he dismisses it with a laugh. The questions can get quite personal, but he doesn’t get upset, he just giggles. Nick Clegg on the other hand, will do the same interview and he’ll start getting tetchy at the tough questions. At home, the listener or viewer will see him start to lose his temper. Whereas Cameron doesn’t let himself get riled.”
So it’s all down to technique. Whether you laugh it off, slow down and smile, or use the question as a prompt to deliver your message, the important thing is to know what you are doing. Very few of us are natural communicators, but learning a few simple strategies can make us sound like one.
So how do politicians ensure that they really do deliver a clear message, and what can we learn from them? Like him or loathe him, George Galloway MP demonstrates communication skills of the highest order. His advice for interviews? “Know exactly what you want to get across in the interview, and don’t be diverted or put off in any way by the questions that you are asked. In a very real sense, it doesn’t really matter what the question is. You have a few moments on the media, and you want to make the most of that opportunity, to get across the message you want to deliver. Now, if you can make it fit the question, it is much better, since the message will be better received and understood, but don’t be sidetracked by an interviewer trying to take you down a siding you don’t want to go down, because then you will lose the opportunity of getting across your unique and important message.”
Jo Swinson, the UK’s youngest MP, adds “When doing an interview, it is important to control your nerves. I always take a deep breath and smile, even on radio. When I appear on ’Any Questions’, I have one-page briefing sheet about the issues, and at the top it says in big letters ‘Slow down and smile’, since I do have a tendency to speak rather quickly. You also need to be authentic. If it’s something that you aren’t passionate about, or don’t even care about, are you the right person to do a media interview? Particularly in politics, but also in business too, if you are passionate about something, people will engage with you and relate to what you say”
So much for those in the front line of politics. But what about those in the background? Political blogger Iain Dale says that a sense of humour comes in handy during tricky interviews. “Often if David Cameron is asked a tough question by John Humphries or Jeremy Paxman he dismisses it with a laugh. The questions can get quite personal, but he doesn’t get upset, he just giggles. Nick Clegg on the other hand, will do the same interview and he’ll start getting tetchy at the tough questions. At home, the listener or viewer will see him start to lose his temper. Whereas Cameron doesn’t let himself get riled.”
So it’s all down to technique. Whether you laugh it off, slow down and smile, or use the question as a prompt to deliver your message, the important thing is to know what you are doing. Very few of us are natural communicators, but learning a few simple strategies can make us sound like one.
Monday, May 04, 2009
Mind Your Language
You may find yourself speaking in a country where you are not too comfortable with the language. If you are at an international conference, then sessions will probably be conducted in English, or simultaneous translation will be provided. Whatever the circumstances, you may wish to include a phrase or two of the local language in order to "please" your audience. If you do, then make sure that you practice and deliver it accurately. US President John F Kennedy, on a visit to Berlin during the cold war, uttered the memorable phrase "Ich bin ein Berliner". In fact, he meant to say "Ich bin Berliner" ("I am a Berliner"), since the former phrase means "I am a doughnut". However, being who he was, he got away with it.
Your audience may not be so forgiving. Talk to a locally- based colleague to find out what would be a useful phrase, and what behaviour is acceptable. I can tell you from experience that having advance knowledge of a culture is a tremendous help when faced with a roomful of foreign dignitaries.
If you use an interpreter, here are a few tips -
* Meet the interpreter in advance
* Find out whether the translation is simultaneous or consecutive
* Avoid idiomatic phrases, such as "right on the money"
* Talk to the audience, not the interpreter
* Speak in short sentences
* Avoid humour
Your audience may not be so forgiving. Talk to a locally- based colleague to find out what would be a useful phrase, and what behaviour is acceptable. I can tell you from experience that having advance knowledge of a culture is a tremendous help when faced with a roomful of foreign dignitaries.
If you use an interpreter, here are a few tips -
* Meet the interpreter in advance
* Find out whether the translation is simultaneous or consecutive
* Avoid idiomatic phrases, such as "right on the money"
* Talk to the audience, not the interpreter
* Speak in short sentences
* Avoid humour
Thursday, April 16, 2009
Wednesday, April 01, 2009
Twitter pushes the TV buttons
I don't know about you, but I'm a great fan of Twitter. Now that the service has announced plans to be delivered via digital TV, I think it will soon outpace Facebook as the social network de nos jours. I'm not clear exactly how the new service will work, having heard about it in a fragment of a leaked report last night. However, being able to use your remote control to bring up a keyboard on your TV screen is hardly rocket science.
The prospect of being able to tweet about complex plots like "Damages", and have an on-screen discussion with your followers is very enticing. Apparently there are even plans to interact with characters in live "Tweetdramas". I can't wait for the announcement at noon today.
The prospect of being able to tweet about complex plots like "Damages", and have an on-screen discussion with your followers is very enticing. Apparently there are even plans to interact with characters in live "Tweetdramas". I can't wait for the announcement at noon today.
Wednesday, March 25, 2009
Why People don't listen to Podcasts
Hang on, don't I have a successful weekly podcast that's been running for three years? Well, yes and no. "Podcast" is a term that was coined a few years ago to describe audio content placed on the web which could be downloaded onto an mp3 player. Since the Apple iPod was, and probably still is, the dominant brand in the mp3 player market, the audio files became known as "podcasts", because that is what they are called on iTunes.
For some time, I called the audio version of my email newsletter "The Media Coach Podcast". Then I spoke to some friends at a conference in New York. They showed me some research which indicated that the vast majority of Internet users had no idea what a podcast was, or that they could listen to it without downloading it to an iPod. I changed the name of my podcast to "The Media Coach Radio Show", and instantly found that the number or downloads tripled.
By the way, if you don;t know how to create an Internet Radio show, I wrote a guide to help you.
Creating a podcast is easy, and worthwhile, but what you call it is important too.
For some time, I called the audio version of my email newsletter "The Media Coach Podcast". Then I spoke to some friends at a conference in New York. They showed me some research which indicated that the vast majority of Internet users had no idea what a podcast was, or that they could listen to it without downloading it to an iPod. I changed the name of my podcast to "The Media Coach Radio Show", and instantly found that the number or downloads tripled.
By the way, if you don;t know how to create an Internet Radio show, I wrote a guide to help you.
Creating a podcast is easy, and worthwhile, but what you call it is important too.
Monday, March 23, 2009
How to Promise and Deliver
You must promise something to your audience at the start of your speech, and you must deliver it before the end. That's because speeches are not like conversations. When we have a chat with someone, they get the chance to talk every few minutes. Our audiences, however, have the dubious pleasure of having to listen to us for up to forty minutes at a stretch. In order to make it worth their while, we have to give them something valuable.
We may give them new information, a new insight, or the motivation to change their behaviour. We may give them a combination of things. What is important is that when the applause dies down, they feel as though their time has been well spent. Some speakers prefer not to signal their intentions at the start of a speech. That's fine, as long as your message gets through loud and clear. I prefer to tell my audience what to expect, partly to ensure that they enter a state of eager anticipation.
If you promise to show people "three techniques to improve their business", then don't provide two, or even four (because then they will be confused). If you can bear to do it (and you should, if you are a professional), then contact the organiser afterwards to ask "what did people learn from my speech?" If the answer surprises you, then change your first line. If the answer is "nothing", change your whole speech. And if the answer is what you told them they would learn, ask them how you can help them implement it.
We may give them new information, a new insight, or the motivation to change their behaviour. We may give them a combination of things. What is important is that when the applause dies down, they feel as though their time has been well spent. Some speakers prefer not to signal their intentions at the start of a speech. That's fine, as long as your message gets through loud and clear. I prefer to tell my audience what to expect, partly to ensure that they enter a state of eager anticipation.
If you promise to show people "three techniques to improve their business", then don't provide two, or even four (because then they will be confused). If you can bear to do it (and you should, if you are a professional), then contact the organiser afterwards to ask "what did people learn from my speech?" If the answer surprises you, then change your first line. If the answer is "nothing", change your whole speech. And if the answer is what you told them they would learn, ask them how you can help them implement it.
Whose copyright is it, anyway?
I'm prompted to write about copyright theft in the Internet following a series of sites publishing my book "The Pocket Media Coach" in digital format, for free download.
The response on Twitter to my experience has been interesting. Some people have been, like me, rather annoyed,and urged me to seek redress. Others have suggested that I focus on the positive aspects, such as wider name recognition and brand awareness. However, it is the third group that has puzzled me.
More than a few people have sent me messages suggesting that all content on the Internet should be free. One even suggested that it was an inevitable, and probably justifiable, outcome for "ripping people off with your digital products in the first place". I see.
So let's consider the position. Firstly, the book was published in traditional form. No digital version was published or marketed. The unknown copyright thieves have either re-typed it or scanned it in. Secondly, it is a piece of original work created by me, and it seems only fair that I should be able to decide whether to give it away or not.
But what about music copyright? Am I hypocritical for digitising my CD and record collection to put on my iPod? I think not. To begin with, I paid for the vinyl or CD in the first place. What's more, the digital version is only for my own use. I'm being consistent, in my view.
What's to be done? Probably nothing. Consider this an extended whinge. I just had to tell someone. I'd be interested in your view though.
The response on Twitter to my experience has been interesting. Some people have been, like me, rather annoyed,and urged me to seek redress. Others have suggested that I focus on the positive aspects, such as wider name recognition and brand awareness. However, it is the third group that has puzzled me.
More than a few people have sent me messages suggesting that all content on the Internet should be free. One even suggested that it was an inevitable, and probably justifiable, outcome for "ripping people off with your digital products in the first place". I see.
So let's consider the position. Firstly, the book was published in traditional form. No digital version was published or marketed. The unknown copyright thieves have either re-typed it or scanned it in. Secondly, it is a piece of original work created by me, and it seems only fair that I should be able to decide whether to give it away or not.
But what about music copyright? Am I hypocritical for digitising my CD and record collection to put on my iPod? I think not. To begin with, I paid for the vinyl or CD in the first place. What's more, the digital version is only for my own use. I'm being consistent, in my view.
What's to be done? Probably nothing. Consider this an extended whinge. I just had to tell someone. I'd be interested in your view though.
Tuesday, March 03, 2009
Are we human, or are we chancers?
I don't know about you, but I like to have a relationship with a real person, not a machine.
On lots of social networks, including Facebook and Twitter, I see more and more automated messages, whether as replies, or even worse, as automatic Tweets about what's happening on the Internet.
Frankly, I find the whole thing somewhat rude.
So I block the senders, a habit I'm having to indulge in several times a day on Twitter, where some users send up to 30 news-related tweets at exactly the same time, presumably with no knowledge that they are doing it.
You'd think that people who used social media regularly would know better than to take a chance on losing followers Fewer, more personal messages, would be much more effective. Sending hundreds of soulless messages is not raising your profile, it's just silly.
So are you human, or are you a chancer?
On lots of social networks, including Facebook and Twitter, I see more and more automated messages, whether as replies, or even worse, as automatic Tweets about what's happening on the Internet.
Frankly, I find the whole thing somewhat rude.
So I block the senders, a habit I'm having to indulge in several times a day on Twitter, where some users send up to 30 news-related tweets at exactly the same time, presumably with no knowledge that they are doing it.
You'd think that people who used social media regularly would know better than to take a chance on losing followers Fewer, more personal messages, would be much more effective. Sending hundreds of soulless messages is not raising your profile, it's just silly.
So are you human, or are you a chancer?
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)