Archive for January 2012

When organisations join Twitter

25 January 2012 admin Communications, Social Media 2 comments

There are a couple of clues around the place which show how much I like Twitter. The regular articles about it, the previous appearance on the #socialstudent list but mostly the active timeline.

One reason I like it is that it is genuinely changing the way we communicate, particularly with organisations. In the past if we were unsatisfied we would write a complaint letter, maybe contact the local press in extremes. If they wanted to sell to us they would create an advert or write a press release. Now we can interact directly, easily and most importantly publicly with each other. We can share our frustrations or praise and they can solve our problems or sell to us, all on one social platform.

To illustrate how important Twitter is to organisations I want to look at three recent Twitter stories.

Snickers

I wrote an entire post on their Twitter activity so I will try not to repeat myself. Their recent campaign has received mixed opinion, and from the community I follow and interact with it is generally negative. People have found the campaign feels cheap, makes them uneasy and generally does not improve their opinion of the brand. On Tweeter even said she would be put off buying the bar by the campaign!

Having said this, fans of the celebrities promoting Snickers via Twitter may find the campaign less offensive and perhaps it has met it’s objectives.

McFail

A rather amusing story about the fast food chain. While trying to engage their audience on Twitter through the hashtags #McDStories and #MeetTheFarmers it ended up encouraging a flood of negative responses attached to its hashtags.

This is a simple reminder that we cannot control Social Media in the same way we can control other methods of communication. You can try and predict human behaviour but that’s not always possible.

As the PR Daily article notes very little damage will have been caused by this hiccup. McDonalds already had its share of haters and this simply gave them opportunity to partake in light activism and others to have a laugh at McD’s expense.

LA Fitness

This is a case of when social media turns against an organisation. After the story of … was shared by the Guardian (read here). Twitter declared war on the organisation leading to them dropping the charges completely and sharing a string of Tweets trying to explain themselves (@LAfitnesstips) but is it a case of too little, too late?

Customers of LA Fitness have reportedly already cancelled their contracts in protest and they are suffering from some severe reputation damage. There is never a good time to lose custom but this is a particularly bad time.

They will probably recover, but this story is on the net forever, they can’t undo it and it may come back in the future to haunt them!

I doubt there are many out there who still doubt the power of Twitter, but personally it still fascinates and sometimes surprises me just how important it has become for communicating.

Are you a Twitter lover or still not convinced? What are your favourite Twitter stories?

Related articles

Continuing the PR definition debate

25 January 2012 admin Communications, Public Relations No comments

Continuing the PR definition debate

I’ve written about it here. The PRSA have tried to solve it here. And multiple bloggers have it discussed it all over the place.

Now my friend and fellow PR student Abigail Johnson has written a great article discussing different views and definitions of PR from the perspective of the students studying PR. Have a read of it here.

Related articles

Twitter gets its nuts

23 January 2012 admin Communications, Public Relations, Social Media 3 comments

Image via @MissKatiePrice

Perhaps as a follower of Katie Price you were somewhat confused by a selection of Tweets about the economy. Or maybe you were bemused by Amir Khan’s sudden interest in stamp collecting and Sir Ian Botham’s passion for the cello. These bizarre Tweets were all revealed to be part of a stunt for Snickers with the three personalities posing for photographs with the chocolate bar as an explanation for the change of topic in their Tweets.

Was this an example of a successful social media stunt? It encouraged conversation, gained media coverage and promoted the brand recognition, so in that respects it seems to have been a success.

On the other hand Sean Walsh on the Freestyle Interactive blog raises an interesting point about the ethics of this stunt. The Office for Fair Trading previously released the following statement about companies using celebrities to promote their products online:

“Online advertising and marketing practices that do not disclose they include paid for promotions are deceptive under trading laws.”

As noted by Freestyle Interactive it is unclear whether the celebrities were paid for their Tweets, however I agree with Sean Walsh that the stunt does make me feel uneasy, it feels cheap and generally I would not be happy to see many campaigns like this on Twitter.

It raises an interesting question about what celebrities and significant personalities on Twitter should be able to promote. Are they able to promote charities, small companies and other organisations which benefit from their backing but are unable to talk about brands that pay them money without making it clear that they are being paid to say this. This seems the best solution, however I am sure that Twitter includes many violations of these guidelines.

What are your opinions on this stunt? What do you think about promotion on Twitter?

Related articles

I’m a celebrity….write about me

22 January 2012 admin Communications, Interests One comment
Newspaper

Image via Wikipedia

I was listening to Desert Island Discs the other day when the historian and writer Paul Johnson raised an interesting point. He was talking about a newspaper article which exposed his alleged adultery, Kirsty Young asked him on his opinion between “pruriency and exposing things of importance”. His reply was that you need to differentiate between those who run for public office and those who do not.

It raises an interesting question of newspaper ethics (particularly relevant at the moment), when is it right to share scandalous news and when is it not? As an audience we love to read the juicy details about the selected few but it is important to define who that chosen few should be.

It could be argued that the lives of politicians should be in the public domain. We choose them to represent us, and therefore we need to know that they live lives of which we approve. Having said this even politicians are entitled to their private lives, so where do we draw the line at what we should know and what we should not?

Another area of media interest is the lives of celebrities. Only this week you may have seen the certain story of a singer who has unfollowed her soon to be ex-husband on Twitter. The story seems rather unsavoury and we could ask is it right to publish this information. All the stories sharing this news have then followed with promotion of her recent work. Could it be that this story was shared for her to take advantage of the situation? Or is it indeed an unsavoury sharing of a heartbroken women’s actions?

Celebrities rely on fame to make a living, and many people have shared their lives in order to make a profit. Have they then sold their right to a private life?

The publicity from the media can be a blessing as well as a curse, so perhaps it is a question without a right answer and just a matter of opinion.

Related articles

Should I be paid for my time?

17 January 2012 admin Career, Opinion, Placements 4 comments

English: [Ladies] Suit, as worn in standard co...

Image via Wikipedia

I recently wrote about the story of Cait Reilly looking at the affordability of a personalised welfare state. In the comments section Ruairidh Pritchard brought up an alternative view of the story and I would recommend reading Ruairidh’s article  on the story.

An important thing that he highlighted is that if you strip the story to its bare bones, removing any “middle-class job-snobbery”, the real issue is the ethics of having people work for free. Working for free is an accepted part of many students and graduates lives however it is a topic which has been under scrutiny recently.

I have personally worked free for a range of reasons from charity and voluntary work, work trials but most relevant to my blog is my unpaid PR experience. Many of my classmates have also taken on unpaid roles within PR agencies and departments in order to build up our CVs and portfolios as well as helping us to develop our skills and experience.

Is it right that we are not paid? I personally believe that an unpaid placement alongside studying is completely acceptable. It is important to remember that money is not the only compensation for your time. Gaining key skills, work experience and a good reference can be far more valuable, particularly for a student. I believe one of the best places to learn about a job is by working in that industry and role. I have a huge appreciation for academic education but for it to be effective it does need to supplemented with practical experience.

If organisations are demanded to pay for their placement students or interns the threat is that they will not be able to afford to take them on and as such it will be the students who are disadvantaged.

Having said this, there is a line. If by taking on a placement a student is not being compensated adequately, for example they become the tea maker and office photocopier, and are not given the opportunity to gain the skills they require over a significant period with the organisation, then I think they have crossed the line. Another issue is organisations asking students to work for 12 month or long but indefinite periods unpaid then again this is unfair.

It is an interesting subject and in many cases open to interpretation. I absolutely believe that unpaid placements have been invaluable to my education and career however I also understand the argument for legislation demanding payment for working.

I would be very interested to hear your views on the topic. Should we pay people for their time? Or is the experience adequate compensation?

Related articles

Why Leeds Met?

16 January 2012 admin Career, Education No comments

Student House Hunting Advice

16 January 2012 admin Student Life No comments
Estate Agents

Image by gusset via Flickr

It is that time of year when first year students start to panic about finding somewhere to live.

From my experience here are five tips that I offer to first-time student house hunters:

1) Plan your house hunting

I am something of an obsessive planner but there is definitely a lot to be said for planning your house hunting before you meet an estate agent. After choosing who you want to live with you need to decide:

  • What areas you want to live in
  • How much you are willing to pay a year (I find it most useful work out the annual cost rather than weekly cost)
  • What you expect from your house, do you want space for a bicycle, double beds, modern furnishings etc.

2) Use all 5 senses

When viewing houses what you see is not always the whole picture. I probably would not recommend using taste however do smell and touch. My current house looks perfect at the moment, but this is due to freshly painted walls hiding the damp. In areas of the house you can smell the damp and several of the walls are wet to the touch.

Your sight can be deceptive, you could see a messy student house when in reality you are in the perfect house. Try and look past the clutter and mess of the current residents.

3) Do not expect to move into your parents house

Luxury student accommodation does exist, but it is accompanied by luxury price tags. If you cannot afford this you may need to lower your expectations. If you want a house furnished like your parents you are most likely going to be disappointed and if you have had the luxury of ensuite halls, again you may need to prepare for a lower standard of living.

4) Know what you are paying for

Depending upon what your estate agent provides you will be offered bill included or excluded. Both have their advantages and disadvantages and which you choose to take is down to personal preference. It is important to know exactly what you are paying for, what bills are paid by the landlord and what are you expected to pay. This should be included in your contract but if you have any doubts do not hesitate to ask your estate agent or landlord.

5) Look for Unipol

You do not have to rent from Unipol but it is recommended that whoever you rent from belongs to Unipol Code or the Supporter of the Code. This can make life easier in the future if there are any issues with the property. Many estate agents and landlords do support the code so there should be no trouble finding one with your perfect house.

Have a look at some of the links below for other great advice.

Related articles

We Cannot Afford a Personalised Welfare State

13 January 2012 admin News, Opinion 8 comments
English: Poundland in Cremer Mall

Image via Wikipedia

Today a degree does not guarantee a job. Despite all the money and time invested in gaining an education many graduates will face a period of indefinite unemployment. Anyone who has suffered from this position will know how frustrating and demotivating it is to not be working when you really want a job. I personally spent just under 6 months in such a position, and I would do anything to avoid it again.

Unemployment does not have to mean all doom and gloom, it is a great time to work on improving employability skills and exploring alternative career paths. During my job-seeking period I also volunteered and was fortunate enough to be able to take up some temporary jobs meaning I could sign off for a couple of weeks. Ultimately the skills that I developed from these experiences led to me gaining my first real job.

Cait Reilly was doing the right things; she was pursuing her dream job by increasing her employability through volunteering in a museum. Then the Job Centre stepped in and demanded she volunteered temporarily at Poundland. At this point Cait decided to sue.

This is a story that has got a lot of people talking with very different views on the situation. I have read articles supporting and others that are outraged at her reaction.

The reality is we cannot afford to personalise the welfare state. Cait may have been working to develop her skills and attain her dream career, however this does not mean that she can be excused from the responsibilities placed upon job-seekers. The scheme she was placed on offered job-seekers the chance to gain employability skills within the retail sector, which in turn could be transferred to alternative roles and dare say, skills she could use in her own future career. In an ideal world the Job Centre would be able to personalise plans for each individual, but in that same perfect world we would all walk into our dream jobs without the need to be unemployed. The reality is while Cait was working to gain her career, other job-seekers are not able or willing to do the same and therefore schemes such as this one offer them the opportunity to improve their skills and employability.

On the other hand this raises questions on the ethics of Poundland. If they want the employees, why are they not paying for them? Working for under minimum wage certainly seems tough, particularly if the alternative is to lose all money and as such you feel forced into taking the role. If this scheme was encouraging job-seekers to work for non-profit organisations, or was offering either to pay job-seekers minimum wage, or a real chance to gain a job on good performance then perhaps there would be less outrage.

Whether it is decided that this case has breached human rights or not, what it does do is to encourage us to talk about our welfare system and the dire employment situation at the moment. What is your opinion on Cait’s case? How can we work to improve the current job market?

Related articles

What is PR?

13 January 2012 admin Communications, Interests, News, Public Relations 2 comments
P question

The Public Relations Society of America (PRSA) have recently been working on a project to produce a conclusive, up-to-date definition for PR.

As a PR student this is certainly a very interesting project, from day one of our course we were introduced to just some of the hundreds of current definitions. This can certainly be extremely confusing and for the first few weeks many of us were a little bit lost about exactly what we were supposed to be studying. A year and a half later we are a lot clearer however if you asked me to give you a definition for PR I would probably struggle to produce a definitive answer.

Is it possible to define PR? Thousands of people work in PR  roles, are we to understand that all their jobs can be contained under on umbrella definition? Highly unlikely. One person’s idea of PR is going to differ from other peoples.

This does not mean this project is a waste of time, it has encouraged practitioners into thinking about how the PR industry is defined and also how it is understood by the public. And a clear definition would certainly clear up questions my family have about just what it is that I study!

The PRSA have now narrowed their definitions to three candidates:

  1. Public relations is the management function of researching, engaging, communicating, and collaborating with stakeholders in an ethical manner to build mutually beneficial relationships and achieve results.
  2. Public relations is a strategic communication process that develops and maintains mutually beneficial relationships between organizations and their key publics.
  3. Public relations is the engagement between organizations and individuals to achieve mutual understanding and realize strategic goals.
What do you think about these definitions? Which one would you choose? Or would you choose to define PR in a completely different way?
Related articles

How can we control social media?

9 January 2012 admin Communications, Human Resources, Internal Communications, News, Social Media 2 comments
Texting on a qwerty keypad phone

Image via Wikipedia

Reading about the social media restrictions placed on Olympic volunteers had me thinking about the ways we can control the information that is shared on social media.

Social media has encouraged us to share our lives openly with many people but there are things that organisations can not have shared for a variety of reasons from security to competition.

How do we control information that has been unofficially put on social media? The simple answer is inevitably it is extremely difficult, but there are two important approaches that can be taken, proactive and reactive.

Proactive: Naturally it is important to ensure as an organisation that you have policies in place to ensure that staff or individuals know precisely what they can share and what information is prohibited. Most organisations have these in place but there is plenty of advice on compiling such a policy. As we know the online world moves very quickly so it is important to ensure that the policy is regularly reviewed and updated.

Reactive: I also believe it is important to have an official presence on social media platforms. If a fact is released which is inaccurate this source can react and correct the mistake. In other cases when information is released without permission while they may not be able to prevent it, it does mean that the organisation may receive the news sooner and therefore have more time to react. A social media presence does not necessarily have to be an active poster, it could simply be used to monitor information for use during a crisis or as an aid for general organisation activity.

The two approaches are most effective when combined. Human nature means we love to share information and therefore even if an individual is aware of a policy and the repercussions of sharing information they may still not behave as desired. In this case it is important to be able to react effectively.

Related articles
Related Posts Plugin for WordPress, Blogger...

« Older Entries