A new Spielberg?

Last week, a journalist pal in Northern Ireland alerted me to a YouTune video made by a student in Lisburn. I didn't get round to watching it. Last night, I was listening to the Stephen Nolan show on R5 when the topic came up again, and the young film-maker, Matt Good, was interviewed.

I took a look at the video. Considering it was made in a 90-minute shoot, on a zero budget, it puts many professional film-makers to shame. I'm hoping to feature Matt in my web radio show on Friday. Take a look at his remarkable video and see what you think.

Pitching a feature

The power of feature article is immense. It may run to several pages in a magazine, or a double-page spread in a newspaper, nearly always accompanied by pictures. It's the sort of publicity that you can't buy, as it comes with the implicit editorial endorsement of wherever it appears. If you believe you have material for a feature about your business, review the possible journals where it might appear. It doesn't have to be a national paper or magazine. It's possible that the best place may be a low-circulation trade journal which is read by your ideal potential customer. These local or special-interest publications are also easier to persuade to take a story. 


Always remember that an editor can spot a thinly-veiled publicity pitch. Your story must have human interest or local interest, and preferably both. There should also be some obvious photo opportunities. It's often a good idea to contact the deputy editor, since they may have more time to speak to you, and if they have any ambition, they want the Editor's job, so are always looking to place impressive copy.
Here's what to do:

1. Read the journal to get a feel for the sort of features they publish
2. Create a one-line hook which includes an interesting angle
3. Contact the deputy editor by phone initially
4. Ask if you can send backup material by email
5. Be prepared for rejection. Try again a few months later
6. If they say they will consider the story, follow up politely
7. Note the name of everyone you speak to
8. Thank everyone for their consideration of your pitch
9. Take their advice if they suggest another publication
10. Don't give up. As long as you have a good story, someone will publish it

Ed Milli Brand. The tiny brand of a party leader

Ed Milliband is all over the airwaves this morning. I followed him onto BBC Radio Sheffield where I spoke about his performance and brand. Having watched his speeches and media interviews as party leader, and met him briefly, my view is that he's a nice enough chap, but far from statesmanlike.

Leaders of the Opposition have a basic problem, which is that they receive a salary from the state in order to - er - oppose. It's part of our democratic system that we have a loyal opposition who act as a counterbalancing force to the government. That inevitably means that the opposition leader spends a lot of time saying what they don't like, and little time saying what they stand for.

Ed Milliband has a further problem in that he's opposing a government of two parties, which together have both the majority of seats and popular votes. A recent YouGov poll gave Mr Milliband a rating even lower than Nick Clegg (yes, even lower than Nick Clegg), at a time when the government is pursuing an austerity agenda.

However, I think that the real problem is that few of us really knwo what Mr Milliband is about, or what he stands for. His background in financial matters should make him an informed and interesting advocate of - er - whatever he believes, but there's scant evidence of it. In short, his personal brand is so small it's hard to spot. If there was a scale of branding, his score would be just one millibrand.

SEOh No....

There's a lot written and said about Search Engine Optimisation (SEO). I know a number of companies who pay substantial monthly fees to raise their position in the search engines (OK, the search engine). But is it money well spent? I think it's arguable.

It seems to me, and it's certainly my experience, that customers arrive on a site after hearing about it from someone else, not from a Google search. It may be word of mouth, a link in an email or article, or a chat on a social network. Recommendation is a powerful driver of traffic.

I think it also depends on the nature of your business. Speakers, for example, charge thousands of pounds for a single speech. It's unlikely that anyone will contract a speaker they've found through a web search. People want recommendations and referrals, or will go to a broker (a speaker bureau).

In addition, a high rank in a search engine can be achieved without employing SEO companies at all. Regular blogging, coupled with frequent use of sites like YouTube and Blogger will all boost your ranking (whether or not you think it's important).

There are some very good SEO companies around, who will explain exactly what they can do, and advise you whether you need it or not. It may be a good investment. But if someone promises they can put you on the front page of Google for any search term you specify, turn around and run away.

Radio Days - And your point is?

I sometimes meet people who tell me excitedly "I was on the radio last week!" I congratulate them warmly, and ask them why. The answer is often "because someone asked me". That's fine too. I then ask "What did you achieve?". That often produces a frown and a puzzled look. "Er - publicity?" may be the answer, delivered as a question rather than a statement. 


Don't get me wrong. It's great to be on radio or TV, or be quoted in a newspaper or on a website. But it's worth taking a little time before your interview to think what you want to achieve. If you don't have an aim in mind, your interview will lack focus, and as a result, will achieve little benefit for your business. Of course, you can't use a media opportunity to sell your products or services. A reporter will see through that immediately.

What you can, and should, do is to write down your objective before the event. Keep is simple, such as mentioning your website twice, or delivering your core message three times. Tell someone else what your objective is, and after the interview, sit down with them and assess your performance.

There needs to be a reason for you to speak to a journalist. That reason should have some benefit. Otherwise, what's the point?

Four resolutions for speakers

I don't know about you, but I don't really make New Year resolutions. They only seem to last a few weeks, or even days. However, I do a few things at the start of each year with regard to my speaking that seem to work and pay dividends, so let me share them with you now. You may find them helpful too.


1) Note what worked well last year. You will know what worked in your speeches from the audience reaction, both during and afterwards. I hope you made notes. if not, sit down and recall what those elements were. They may have been stories, case studies, or simply a line or move on stage. If it works, keep doing it.


2) Review the content of speeches. I change at least a third of the content of my speeches every year. Stories go out of date, new ones appear, and the attitudes of audiences change too. Using the opposite of the above (what didn't work last year), you should note those moments of confusion and glazed eyes in your audience. That content has to be changed or dumped.


3) Look at new research. You need to stay current in your topic. That means reading research, talking to colleagues and making sure you know what is happening globally. Google alerts make it easy to do. If you're not using them already, you should be.


4) Look at new markets. I'm looking east this year (from where I'm sitting that is). That means visiting countries like China to meet people and do more research. There are also new industries to consider. Look at where your expertise would be most valued and most in demand, and then go there.

Small is beautiful

Many years ago, I read a book that made a great impression on me. It was by the economist E F Schumacher, and was called "Small is Beautiful". He set out a number of principles, including one called "appropriate technology". This phrase came back into my mind recently when I was "researching" (a phrase that sounds so much better than randomly noodling about on the web).

There's a common belief in social networks that "bigger is better", All of the networks make announcements when they reach milestone numbers like a million or ten million. But are bigger networks better for the people in them? Is a Twitter following of ten thousand people better than a thousand? As with all these things, it depends on what you want. If you're in the business of promoting something to huge numbers, in the knowledge that a small percentage of purchasers will make you rich, then big networks are great. If you like making loads of connections, and believe that randomness leads to serendipitous business, then connect away.

However, if you're in the relationship business, where you need to build a trusted connection over time, then a small, focused network may be a much better option. In my opinion, that's where the focus will be going for most users of social media this year. I believe people will be gathering in small private groups on Facebook and Linkedin, and cutting the number of people they follow on Twitter. Niche networks, perhaps with only a few hundred people in, will be seen as very valuable. For many of us, small really is beautiful.

Are you a TMI speaker?

Here's a speaking characteristic I suspect you don't want to demonstrate. TMI. Too Much Information. It might appear to be a good problem to have, especially if you are being paid to deliver your knowledge. However, it is not at all helpful to your audience to overwhelm them with facts and figures that they have little time to absorb, let alone use. I see the TMI phenomenon often at events all around the world. Some speakers fear that they are not getting enough information across, so pack their speeches with detailed evidence to back up their messages (yes, they deliver a whole bunch of different messages too). 

The symptoms of TMI can be observed in the audience, by watching people getting increasingly frustrated, and saying to each other "Did you get that?" There are several possible causes. Firstly, the speaker may be rushing through their material in order to finish on time. That's never going to work, since the audience will feel cheated. Secondly, there may be way too much information on the slides, accompanied by the speaker saying "You probably can't see the detail on this slide, so I will talk you through it". (Oh dear).

In most cases, however, it's simply a case of trying to deliver too many messages in one speech. Here's my rule of thumb; one speech, one message. That's it. It's simple, clear and prevents any confusion. The thing is, a week or two later, people in your audience will remember just the one thing that made the greatest impression on them.

So the cure for TMI is obvious and simple. Focus on one message only, and provide plenty of time for your audience to understand it.

Please don't ask me for a testimonial...

...unless I've seen the quality of your work.

If I know you, and I know how good you are, I will happily give you a testimonial. You won't even have to ask, since I always write testimonials for people I work with (or see working with clients) that impress me.

Alas, I receive requests on a regular basis from people I've never met, or hardly know. Sometimes they have written a testimonial for me (often on LinkedIn), and ask for one in return. It's tough for me, since I don't wish to appear ungrateful, but I often reply explaining why I can't reciprocate. I often delete their testimonial for me too, since it's not based on any real evidence.

I believe that the practice of recommending and doing "testimonial deals" between individuals who barely have a relationship is devaluing testimonials in general. I'm not impressed by the number of testimonials on a profile. I rely on personal recommendations.

What's your view?

The OOPS Factor

TV presenter Dennis Norden used to front a show which featured clips of things going wrong on TV and in films. On one occasion, he mentioned the "oops factor", which he defined as "Objects Only Perform Sometimes". I believe it's a corollary of Murphy's Law, which states "If something can go wrong, it will" (to which I will add Stevens' variation "especially in front of an audience"). In short, you need to have a plan B. 

It's impossible to anticipate every possible cause of problems on stage. There may be technical issues, venue problems or external factors that cause disruption. However. you can greatly reduce the chances of embarrassment by taking some simple precautions in advance.
The best advice I can offer is to stay calm. Your audience will understand that things can go awry, but as long as you deal with them with patience and a little humour, they will forgive you. In fact, you can make a huge impression on them by taking problems in your stride and not panicking. Here are a few things to reduce your oops factor.

• Take spares for everything - batteries, bulbs, memory sticks
• Rehearse every use of technology
• If there are handovers between presenters, rehearse those too
• Establish what happens if audio or video fails
• Practice in the same place, and with the same equipment you will be using "live"
• Bring spare stage clothes in case of spills or damage
• Always be prepared to give or finish your presentation without any technical aids at all
• Smile. These things happen

Mike Tindall and the muppets at the RFU

Mike Tindall's international rugby career is almost certainly over. His removal from the England elite squad, and fine of £25,000 has made it unlikely that he'll ever pull on the white jersey with the red rose again. His punishment comes after a grainy video of his behaviour in a Queenstown nightclub with a former girlfriend, the day after England's game with Argentina.

It's clear that Mike Tindall had been drinking. So had most of his team-mates, since there was no squad ban on drinking or going to clubs. He also hugged, and was kissed on the head, by a former girlfriend. Er...that's it.

I'm not suggesting that Mike Tindall should have gone unpunished for being the worse for drink in a nightclub at 2am, but the penalty seems extraordinarily harsh. I think it has far more to do with the shambles at the top of the Rugby Football Union (RFU), and the struggle for power between the blazered officials. It looks like current head honcho Rob Andrew is trying to make a point.

Two England officials committed a severe breach of the Rugby World Cup rules by switching the ball before a kick. Their penalty? They couldn't sit on the bench at the next game. So deliberate cheating in a game is a minor offence, compared to having a few beers and being kissed by a former girlfriend?

No-one expects our sports people to be always completely sober and celibate. Bobby Moore and most of his England football colleagues were legendary drinkers. I was at Stamford Bridge many years ago when Bobby Charlton played his last game for Manchester United. He was given an award in the centre circle before the game - a silver cigarette box. Apparently he received a gallon of whisky in the dressing room later.

Having a drink from time to time is not a problem. I have a thick head right now after our team won the school quiz night last evening, and we returned home and drank the prize (some very nice shiraz).

Of course, times change. We expect our sports people to set an example. When they transgress, they should be penalised. But the punishment should be fair and proportionate, not a grand public gesture by an official trying to keep his job.

Lest we forget

This is William John Godwin, my great uncle, and one of my grandmother's beloved two brothers. He joined the army in 1914, aged 20, and volunteered for the Machine Gun Corps. In 1916, he was posted to The Somme. On September 23rd, 1916, he fell in battle. All we have to remember him by is this photograph. His brother, Arthur, was in the Merchant Navy, and drowned on April 3rd 1917 when his ship, HMS Jason, was torpedoed.

My grandmother rarely spoke of her brothers. It was too painful. On the rare occasions when she did, it was with great sadness, but also great pride.

That's why I wear a poppy.

Is your presentation too linear?

I was in Mallorca for a few days last week. The railway line that runs from Palma to Soller is not what you could call a straight line. It runs through tunnels and winds through mountains, but gets to the right destination. Speeches don't have to be a straight line either. Traditionally, you tell people what you are going to tell them, tell them, and tell them what you told them (the traditional "business sandwich"). Often a series of slides takes you along the path from start to finish, making it tough to deviate at all.

Some display software, such as Prezi allows the creation of a presentation from chunks of information that don't need to follow in any particular sequence. However, delivering a non-linear presentation is not about software, it's about an approach which many speakers find uncomfortable. Increasingly, audiences are demanding a style which is more than just a procession of slides, so now is probably a good time to think about your speech structure.

Not every speech lends itself to a non-linear style. Not every audience will appreciate it. Furthermore, you must still have some kind of overall structure and aim, otherwise you will simply be presenting a mass of information with no overall message. Delivering in a non-linear way may demand more preparation and more subject knowledge than a linear narrative. It may also require what a pal of mine used to call "a big dose of brave pills".

Many stand-up comedians are masters of non-linear delivery. They can deviate for minutes at a time, but still return to a core message. They may tell stories in a different sequence each time they speak, responding to prompts or questions from the audience, or just how they feel. In my opinion, the more interactive and non-linear you can learn to be, the more people will want to see you speak. You can choose to ignore the trend, but the train may leave without you.

Liam Fox on the run

As I predicted in my email newsletter this morning, Dr Liam Fox MP has resigned as defence secretary.

Though he has remained dignified in the manner of his departure, and also in his resignation letter, his friends have already appeared on radio and TV to blame the media for his demise. It's a common plaint from politicians when they are forced to leave office after a series of indiscretions. However, there would have been no press interest had there not been some very odd goings-on. Speculation about Dr Fox's sexuality played no part in media reporting, nor should it have done. The damage was caused by a series of inexplicable events which grew more puzzling by the day. Alas, Dr Fox has only himself to blame.

Lessons for all politicians.

1) Don't misbehave
2) If you do, don't lie about it
3) If you get caught, apologise and admit everything.