Am I talking about professional wrestling…or social media?

Maybe a bit of both.

You see, there are huge similarities between the online world and the male-oriented athletic soap opera that you know you secretly still watch. 

1)      Characters – Oh, this can go in so many different directions!  But let’s keep it simple.  The best professional wrestling characters are extensions of the real people playing them.  The Rock is Dwayne Johnson turned to “11.”  (Bonus points for getting the reference!)  In the social space, people “play” characters to some degree – but it’s mostly their own personality amplified.

2)      Crowdsourcing – Imagine an arena filled with 20,000 people giving you instant feedback on everything you say or do.  Reactions are instant, visceral and, to an extent, protected, since you are in a crowd.  Imagine a world filled with billions of people giving you…yeah, you get the picture.

3)      Merchandise – Wrestling fans buy t-shirts and other items to support their favorite star.  Example: I’ve been considering purchasing WWE’s latest shirt for CM Punk, proclaiming he’s the “Best In The World.”  These exist so you can see someone walking down the street and say, “Dude, I’m a Hulkamaniac, too, brother!  Let’s be friends!”  In the online space, the equivalent is hashtags and links.  We try to associate with people and discussions that allow us to connect with new people and ideas.

4)      Experts – Wrestling fans the inner-workings of the industry are called “smart;” those who still believe it’s real are called “marks.”  Most fans are somewhere in the middle, or “smarks.”  They enjoy the show and appreciate the performance, but don’t need to know the name of every move or how two wrestlers figure out what they want to do.  How does this apply to social media?  The people who make Facebook are “smart.”  The people who use Facebook are “marks.”  And if you are reading this website, you are probably a “smark.”  You know how to maximize the networks and platforms, but you likely couldn’t code them into being.

5)      Recovery – A long time ago, a wrestling company created a character called “The Shockmaster.”  He wore a Stormtrooper helmet (yeah, like Star Wars…) and was built up on TV as being a big deal.  But when he made his debut on live TV, he literally tripped and face-planted on the ground.  That was pretty much the end of the The Shockmaster.  Social media, however, allows us the ability to recover when we stumble.  Be it Red Cross, Chrysler, Kenneth Cole or even Netflix, brands don’t have to disappear if something goes wrong.  Maybe that’s a difference, not a similarity, but the video of The Shockmaster falling is hilarious.

One idea that I haven’t seen — until now — is intriguing, but controversial: selling ad space on player’s jerseys. And as the New York Post reported recently, more than $230 million in annual advertising revenue is up for grabs if the NFL is willing to go the way of European soccer teams, NASCAR and other leagues that have opened up the most valuable advertising real estate in sports.

Personally, I have mixed feelings about this idea.

On the one hand, $230 million is a lot of money to have dangling out there and not capitalize on. That’s nearly as much money as the entire valuation of baseball’s Florida Marlins. (Forbes has the Marlins valued at $270 million.)

But the NBA, NHL and NFL already allow teams to place corporate logos on practice jerseys. Granted, that’s not the same as having YOUR LOGO HERE on Tom Brady’s jersey on Sunday afternoon in front of 20 million captive eyeballs.

As The Post rightly pointed out, there is another contentious point to keep in mind: marketers may not take too kindly to having their brand’s logo on Tom Brady’s jersey only to have a network simultaneously touting a competing brand via on-air ads.

To get a better sense of what all this means, I turned to PRBC’s resident sports marketing experts, Mike Schaffer and Jeff Esposito, for their thoughts:

Jeff’s take:

Selling advertising on the jerseys brings out an interesting dynamic and one that is not foreign to the NFL. Currently teams can sell sponsorship on practice jerseys, but not on the game unis.

While I think this could work, it presents an interesting dynamic. For example, can teams sell their own ads, or is it something league-wide?

With a team by team model, companies might be able to get a better bang for their buck by getting sponsorship on someone like the Bengals or Panthers, where as a team like the Cowboys or Steelers would demand a large premium. This could also hurt when it comes to revenue sharing and also finding sponsors that mesh with the jersey provide, currently Reebok, but soon to be Nike.

These companies pay big money to get their logos on apparel so taking away real estate from the vector or swoosh will be a tough sell. This would also become a tough sell for sponsors overall and might lessen the value of the uniform sponsorship.

One way that it might work could be something similar to the college bowl series to maximize profits for the league by selling specialized event weekends and the Super Bowl. For example, Opening Weekend, Thanksgiving games (Purdue anyone?) or the playoffs. Would give sponsors exclusivity and more exposure and well maybe the uniform supplier gets first right of refusal.

I think it could work but would take a lot of wind to make it work. There would just have to be parameters to keep up the integrity of the league and sponsors.

Mike’s take:

For decades, the NFL has tried its darndest to promote an image of the game as being above all else.  Remember, the Super Bowl became an advertising mecca because it was the freakin’ SUPER BOWL . . . not the other way around.

It’s funny that a league so focused on its moneymaking machine (video games, licensing, obstructed-view seats, etc.) would resist a way to make more money, which could, in turn, solve a giant chunk of their current labor issues. Two-hundred-thirty million dollars is not chump change.

Having logos on uniforms reminds some people of European soccer and others of beer-league softball.  But at the end of the day, those sponsored teams enjoy the support of their sponsors, be it in trade or cash, and they willingly share space on their players’ backs and/or chests to show that.

Remember: The NFL and ALL of it’s teams are businesses first and foremost. You find me one fan who would stop watching if jerseys had logos and I’ll find you the strangest fellow on the planet. This is a good thing. This is not the 800th billboard in a DMA; it’s coveted, highly-valued inventory that the league should strongly consider utilizing.

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

Well, if you haven’t been living under a rock and you pay attention to sports, or news for that matter, you know that the league is facing a major PR issue that may tarnish their image. This doesn’t concern the looming lockout of the players (a PR conundrum for another day), but rather folks who fill their coffers – the fans. You see, there were over 90,000 fans who purchased tickets to come to the game, problem was the seats weren’t available for over 1,000 of these ticket holders to be sat in during the big game. This was because the seats were not completed and did not pass muster of the fire marshal.

The league knew a week before the game that the seats wouldn’t be ready. Instead of alerting the ticket holders, they decided to roll the dice and wait for the fans to find out at the game. While the league did attempt to make amends, the effort was not enough.

The root of this issue is greed. Jerry Jones and the Cowboys wanted to set Super Bowl attendance records in the first Super Bowl held in the new Cowboy Stadium. You can’t blame the guy for trying, but when the seats weren’t completed, they needed to reach across the proverbial aisle to make amends. Their initial response was (via FanHouse):

“Those fans that are affected by this will be directed to the Party Plaza area while the matter is resolved. Fans who are not accommodated with seats inside the stadium will each receive a refund of triple the cost of the face value of their ticket. We regret the situation.”

Fans who couldn’t be accommodated with these moved seats were ushered to lounges within Cowboy Stadium and the neighboring stadium of the Texas Rangers- a higher priced version of the ticket holders’ living rooms

To make this PR headache a wee-bit worse, the fans that didn’t get to watch the game in the seats that they paid $900 (face value) for have now retained a lawyer for a class action suit. They are currently seeking $5 million in damages – roughly $4,000 a fan.

From an outsider’s point of view, there is little chance for the league to come out with at least somewhat of a shiner. One way I could see the NFL winning is to offer these folks Super Bowl tickets for life and use them as some kind of new legacy comparable to the never-miss-a-Super Bowl club. This group could also be facilitated with the means to discuss their experiences in the host city on a platform like NFL.com or SuperBowl.com to maximize their exposure and benefit the city.

To gauge more opinions on how the league could come up like roses, I reached out to fellow PRBC authors Mike Schaffer and Keith Trivitt.

Mike’s take:

Normally, I am a pure fan advocate.  Teams and leagues can always treat their fans better.  But allow me to defend the NFL for a second.  While they NEVER should have sold tickets for seats they weren’t 100% confident in being able to fulfill, I think they did a decent job in this situation.

The fans were moved from virtual bleacher seats to box suites, given TRIPLE the value of their overpriced tickets and invited to next year’s Super Bowl, where I’m sure they will be given world-class treatment.  Plus, they now have one of the greatest stories in sports.

To recap: They are suing for $4,000 when they get $2,700 and the ability to see TWO Super Bowls in person.  Sounds like the league has given the mea culpa and adequate compensation.  Don’t get me wrong, the league dropped the ball, but, in my opinion, they’ve responded appropriately…in this situation.

Keith’s take:

I’m not sure the NFL has many options in terms of coming out rosy in this situation. The timing, at least from the NFL’s standpoint, couldn’t have been worse, as it faces a multitude of PR challenges in the months ahead.

Let’s look at it from a macro level. The League is already staring down a potential March 4 lockout, which many in the public, fans and media have pinned on its owners’ greed and egos. Add to that the fact that the Super Bowl is essentially the world’s largest single-day economic booster. With all that in mind, the NFL simply could not afford for something of this nature and at this level to happen, especially on its most vaunted stage. This problem will likely only add fuel to the NFL Players Association’s PR playbook against the league in the coming weeks as a lockout looms.

At the end of the day we’re flacks who happen to be NFL fans and will be interested to see how this plays out. How do you think the league could get out of this incident without further PR incident? We’d love to hear below.

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

However, I do live and work in Washington, DC, where it is impossible to NOT get pulled into the machine from time to time.

Over the course of my career, I’ve dabbled in a few political events.  I’ve met politicians from “my” persuasion that I didn’t enjoy spending time with and had terrific encounters with officials from the “other team.”

I’ve spent the majority of my career in sports, where there is a clear winner and a loser.  (We won’t get into the head-scratching NFL overtime rules here.)

Politics has, sadly, become a little too much like sports, in that respect.

It’s become “me” vs. “you;”  “us” vs. “them;” and a lethal dose of “good” vs. “evil.”

The conversation may be most popularly held over TV shows that try to present themselves as news, but it also takes place in taxis, restaurants, board rooms and street corners around the country.

And while this type of debate is just fine when, say, picking a vampire or a werewolf (my 13 year old cousin is werewolf.  I’ll hang with her), it’s become an unhealthy zero-sum game when it comes to governing the United States.  All sides want what’s best for the country and citizens should embrace different viewpoints, as we are democratic, not autocratic.

A huge spotlight has been turned on “Toxic Talk” following the horrific shooting at a congressional event in Tucson, leaving many dead and millions scarred.  Our culture – which WE have full control over – developed into an environment where a young man (allegedly) interrupted a discussion with violence.  I am not so naïve to think this was the first time such an event has transpired, but that fact doesn’t make it any more acceptable.

The old Spider-Man quote goes, “With great power comes great responsibility.”

As marketers, journalists and communicators, we have a measure of power.  Whether we are lobbying for a bill on Capitol Hill (thank you, School House Rock) or trying to convince people our restaurant is the best in town or critiquing the latest indie flick, we have the ability to develop, shape or interpret a message.  Shouldn’t that power come with the responsibility to keep our civilization…well…civil?

Aren’t we, as a nation, and an industry, better than zero-sum?  Why is compromise a dirty word?

Most of the posts you read here provide answers and insight.  This one will leave you with one more question, which I hope you’ll answer below.

How do we, as communicators, maximize our power and responsibility to be a part of the solution to “Toxic Talk?”

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

I’ve seen him at a stadium show, which was not the right venue to enjoy his music, since there were no dancefloors or lattes within reach.  But his performance was incredible.

So what the heck does Moby have to do with PR?

Simple: A Moby song is like a bad story pitch.

Say what?

Follow me.

Moby’s songs are catchy because they are repetitive.  Very repetitive.

Take a listen to one of my favorites from Moby, “Natural Blues:”

See how repetitive that is?  Same words, same melody over and over again.

A Moby song, for the most part, has only Plan A.  Thus, you know within the first 30 seconds if you like it or not.  At that point, you can pretty much stop listening, because your mind is made up and there is nothing the song will do to change your perception.

When you, Mr. or Ms. Publicist, are pitching a reporter, you have a stated goal – to get the story placed.

In a good pitch, if Plan A doesn’t work, you should have Plans B, C and sometimes even D queued up.  When you are selling a story, you need to have different angles to look at it, because you never know what will motivate a reporter to cover your story in tomorrow’s edition.  I mean, your story is worth readers and viewers learning about it, right?  Anticipate the roadblocks.

This isn’t to say Plan A isn’t going to work the majority of the time.  Your strongest pitch should be your first shot, but if you don’t prepare for the roadblocks with different ways to explain your story to a reporter or editor, you are losing coverage.

And that’s some REAL blues…

(CC) Image Courtesy stevenjgarner

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

There is no one way to measure the return on investment of social media. None. Each campaign is kinda like a thumbprint…or a snowflake…totally different from start to finish.

The National Restaurant Association Marketing Executives Group asked me to give them ways to increase their ROI at a recent conference. So I came up with the following presentation, affectionately entitled “Show Me The Money.”

I hope you can use some of the tips here to maximize your online presence! And if you have any questions, feel free to leave it in the comments below or reach out to me directly.

(As an aside, did anyone else think they would never ever ever listen to talk radio when they were kids?)

I don’t recall the exact topic of conversation, but it was insignificant until the host’s last line: “You’ve gotta be careful.  Twitter, Facebook, social media will hurt you.” At that point, I started making odd faces at my digital dial, because there was obviously a disconnect between the host and the actual concepts he was discussing.

You see, social media platforms like The Twitter (thank you, Betty White, for making that an acceptable phrase), The Facebook (thank you, Justin Timberlake, for reminding us why they dropped the “The”) and others are tools.  Tools can’t hurt you unless you make them.

For example, let’s examine the hammer.

The hammer is one of the most ancient tools mankind still uses.  It’s an old invention, right up there with the wheel, fire and the aforementioned Betty White (ouch, I hate myself a little bit for that joke). We’ve been using the hammer for nearly all of recorded human history, from the time we started walking on two legs.  (If you don’t believe in evolution, just read the first half of that sentence.)

If you’ve used a hammer, you know that, if used properly, it does a fantastic job at multiplying your force to maximize the impact on the object you intend to strike.  If you’ve used a hammer, you know that, if used improperly, you’ll hit your thumb and cry like the “leave Britney alone” guy.

Did the hammer cause your sore thumb?  Or did you inflict the pain by misusing the tool? That’s exactly what is going on in social media.  Too many people are blaming Facebook and Twitter for their “sore thumbs” and not considering their own actions.  And, if I can be brutally honest, that kind of switches the paradigm and makes them the tool.

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

Hint: If you haven’t seen the movie, this is where you should say “Stay here, I’ll be back.”  I’ll wait.

Now that we’re all on the same page (and friends again), you are quite familiar with Judgment Day, the day where the robots take over and life as we know it ends.

Catastrophes and crises happen, especially in the PR world.  Every publicist has a “war story.”  Or ten.  Some of the juicier ones I’ve been a part of: a mall fired their Santa, 90% of media passes were revoked by the client 24 hours before a major-name hiphop/R&B concert, and a basketball team’s two biggest stars basically sat out a full-season injured.  Oh, there are more.

In crisis situations, playing the intermediary becomes a challenging role.  Sometimes, you are forced to make a decision such as: Which relationship is more important to you: the media or the client?

This is Judgment Day.

I remember one “judgment day” vividly.  Two nights before a big charity fundraiser, I was at Target doing a little shopping when my phone rang.  It was a very prominent reporter from a national-scope daily newspaper.  (For the record, they still run a print edition!).  I had worked with this reporter several times over my career and trusted her to bring the facts and do her homework.

And, oh, boy, did she ever…she had tax records pinning the client who had the upcoming event to the wall for not having donated money in charity for three years.  Kind of a big thing, since registered 501(c)(3) organizations are legally obligated to give money annually!  It was something the client had never mentioned to me before so I was caught completely off-guard.

At that moment, several factors came into play: the reporter, the publication, the client (and, sadly, how much money they owed us), my then-company’s reputation, and the fact that I was pushing a red cart around aimlessly through the faux-vintage t-shirt section while being pummeled with ugly, ugly statistics about the legally-registered non-profit I had represented for three years.

After going through that morality play in my head, I came to a decision.  I would represent the client to the best of my ability for the event and resign the account immediately following.  Someone in a client service field should always stick up for their client, but in this case, I wasn’t going to let this client mess up this relationship with this reporter because they hid the most important fact about their organization from me for three years.  The media won here.

The fundraiser was a moderate success.  I resigned the account immediately afterward, saying a big “Hasta la vista, baby,” to the entire mess.

What are some “Judgment Day” stories you’ve survived?  What choices were you forced to make?

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

(CC) flickr // benuski

Last week, the University of North Carolina rolled out a new social media. Instead of increasing access to student athletes, the policy has coaches and/or administrators serving as the social media director for their team (read more here & here). Seems a bit extreme pulling folks more astute with X’s and O’s and game planning to monitoring 140 character messages.

Aside from tapping our resident sports guys, we also tapped into the psyche of a pair of UNC alumni to see what they thought of this new plan. For those of you counting at home, there are four contributors to this post, a first for PRBC.

True Engagement
Rebecca Denison – Class of ’09

I spent four years walking around campus just hoping I’d get to catch a glimpse of guys like Tyler Hansbrough and Danny Green. At Carolina, tests and presentations were often rescheduled because the team had made it to the next round of the tourney. I will forever bleed blue and cheer for Roy’s boys.

When guys like Marcus Ginyard started to join Twitter, I was thrilled because it was probably the best way for me to get to know UNC players and show the team support. Censoring and monitoring these guys only takes away the authentic interaction they have with fellow classmates who may not get the chance otherwise. Yeah, that sounds a bit lame, but wouldn’t you want to interact with a basketball legend one-on-one if you could?

Beyond this loss of authenticity, the spirit behind the new rules is also an issue. UNC’s undergraduate journalism program is considered one of the best in the country, and to have the school’s athletic department enact a policy like this is just plain embarrassing.

Unofficial Ambassadors
Aven James – UNC Class of ’06

UNC recently unveiled an updated social media policy that has been called “harsh” – and while the UNC alum in me might agree, the B2B PR pro has to admit the policy just makes good business sense.  And let’s be honest – isn’t college athletics really a business these days?

Though I admittedly haven’t seen the whole policy, it addresses a number of issues we’d advise a client to touch on:

●        Responsibility & Good Judgment: Student athletes, whether they like it or not, are representatives of their University.  As such, they need to exercise good judgment when posting on public forums and refrain from comments that could negatively impact the “organization.”  And the “organization” needs to pay attention to what’s being said.

●        Audience: Students and fans are an important audience for UNC athletics.  They’re the “consumer;” the buyer of UNC’s “product.”  Therefore, UNC has a responsibility to consider what posts/comments might alienate its fan base.  

●        Consequences: A sound social media policy should address the consequences for “bad behavior.”  UNC has experienced first-hand the risks associated with social media and they’ve created a policy that, they hope, will mitigate them.

All that being said, the devil is always in the details.  With the ability to monitor and even remove posts, UNC could take the policy too far – and if they do so, miss out on an opportunity to engage its fan base via social media.

Pro v. Student
Mike Schaffer

Congratulations, NCAA! The University of North Carolina has helped you further blur the line between enrolled student and paid employee. In Chapel Hill a coach or administrator will be monitoring players’ social media accounts for violations. Yes, that’s a public university chipping away at the students’ individual rights – sounds a little fishy to me.

How much control over a person does their university have over them? Should they have access to student-athletes’ social media accounts, as the policy demands?  And why just student athletes? What about student government, student media or student workers? Seems like the college is flexing their muscles to protect their revenue generating assets.

Do you actually think the star point guard will be judged on the same scale as the back-up women’s coxswain?

I’m all for educating players on how to be on their best behavior online, on the field and in daily life. However, the UNC plan, as it’s been presented, is all about “Big Brother Watching.”

Learning is Learning
Jeff Esposito

It may sound crazy, but this policy is a good thing. While my co-contributors raise some valid objections, they are missing the silver lining in this grey cloud. College is a place for kids to get an education and foundation for a future career. Sure some of the players affected by this new policy will play with balls for a living, but the vast majority of the student athletes will not.

Either way, they need to learn the professional implications of being a dumbass on social media. We’ve all heard horror stories of people getting fired and some of us even monitor what is being said about a company online and may see dumb things posted co-workers.

Sure getting to know these athletes may be cool, but they are representatives of a brand. How many brand reps do you know that really give 100% behind the scenes access? Twitter is big business and if that means some big brother so be it.

The athletes who do turn pro will have stricter regulations from their respective leagues. Just as Chad Ochocinco how much a tweet can cost.

Well there you have our in-house experts’ perspectives. What do you think of the issue?

Aven James

Rebecca, Mike, and Jeff are PRBC regulars.  You can get their contact info and details, as always, right here.  Aven James, a first time PRBC contributor, is a Senior Account Executive at Bliss PR (yes, Elizabeth Sosnow’s firm – another PRBC regular) where she focuses on media relations in the B2B and professional services sector.

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR

Tip #0.5: Have this song playing in the background while you read this. It helps.

Tip #1: Plan Start to Finish For a plan to be useful, it needs to go as far ahead as possible. Of course, it’s subject to change for any of a million different reasons, but it goes back to the old writing adage that it’s easier to edit than to create. The act of creating a long-term plan forces you to think about causes and effects of your campaign. Before you send out one release, make sure your entire team (and of course, any client contacts), know the next steps. From a client relations standpoint, having a plan reinforces your image as an expert.

Tip #2: Anticipate the Bad

Poop Happens. Know it, accept it, plan for it and be ready to deal with it at all times. Look at it with this analogy. If you take your dog for a walk and bring a plastic bag with you, when your precious pup does his…uhhh…business…you don’t end up with poop-covered hands and a smell that won’t go away. The more you think about, discuss and prepare for the inevitable moment when the stuff hits the fan, the more bulletproof you’ll be.

Tip #3: Be Honest and Transparent What’s one sure way to NOT be bulletproof? Get caught in lies and deceptions. Just look at the recent BP oil spill as a “How Not To” guide. Seemingly every day, there as been a report of the public being misled on the entire incident, from the initial explosion to the clean-up efforts. Sometimes the truth can hurt. A lot. Like to no end. However, if you tell the truth from the start, it’s ALWAYS better than being caught in a lie down the road. Protect yourself and your client by just not lying.

Tip #4: Know When To Stop Talking Perhaps the biggest lesson a PR pro can learn is when shut the hell up. We are a gabby sort, us PR folks. We like to talk, share, learn, etc., etc., etc. But knowing when to stop talking and sharing is critical. Every PR pro I know has inadvertently said something they shouldn’t have to a reporter. It’s OK to not pick up the phone or wait a little while before returning an email. I know it sounds like a direct contradiction to Tip #3 (be honest and transparent), but saying NOTHING is much different than misleading.

What other tips for Bulletproof PR do you have?

• 8 February 2012 : Drop the Salesman Mentality
• 7 February 2012 : Giant PR Lessons from the Super Bowl Champions
• 6 February 2012 : Video: Job Interview Conversations That Should Be Had
• 3 February 2012 : Considering Making the Switch from Agency to In-House?
• 2 February 2012 : Apple’s Positive Earnings Report Creates Bad PR