Even if someone really is like Hitler, saying so in public doesn’t help your cause.
— This is an utterly depressing realization the first time you have it. And still relatively depressing each time henceforth.
While calling it the future of the press release may be a bit hyperbolic, Quora certainly offers great potential as a corporate communications tool.
It requires both a strong understanding of audience and an engaged team to manage it, but there is a lot to be excited about when it comes to Quora and PR.
— Very enlightening piece that really changed how I think about online music-streaming services. Conventional wisdom has framed Spotify as the much cooler, hipper service compared with the stodgy, old-school Pandora. And yet the very nature of what makes Spotify cool is also what places such troubling limits on its top-line growth. Pandora, on the other hand, has a potential market essentially the same size as traditional, terrestrial radio itself. And a more local and targeted approach to ad sales.
It’s been easy to dismiss Pandora since Spotify hit the scene; I’ve certainly been guilty of it. This changes that.
I thought that deal on fake eyelashes for your car headlights was the worst Groupon ever.
Then I saw the one for tickets to a Chicago / REO Speedwagon concert.
You know, I sort of get the idea behind it, but oy vey this ad.
Is this really the image Mazda wants readers of Wired (Wired, for god’s sake!) to take away about its brand and its products? An old guy holding a Zach Morris phone to his ear?
If you are having an internal discussion about how to handle a media inquiry, especially if that conversation is taken place via e-mail, it’s generally advisable not to share the contents of that discussion with media member making said inquiry. That would seem to be some pretty simple blocking and tackling, no?
Apparently not, given two examples this week of what would seem to be very smart people forgetting this very basic, fundamental rule of media relations.
Example 1: In responding to a FOIA request from an investigative reporter, the US Navy inadvertently shared with said reporter an internal exchange in which it strategizes ways to work around the request and not provide the documents he’s asking for. This one is particularly egregious, as it pulls the curtain back on a government institution working to thwart public access to what should be public information and documentation.
Example 2: While less serious than the Navy example, all it took for this one to blow up in Google’s face was one word: “ugh.” That was the response one member of Google’s press team sent to another upon receiving a media inquiry about the uproar the search giant’s private shuttles are causing in San Francisco and Oakland. The second member of Google’s press team subsequently responded directly to the initial inquiry, complete with “ugh” still included.
This shouldn’t be necessary, of course, but a couple of important reminders out of these snafus:
1) If you’re going to have an internal discussion about a media inquiry, especially a conversation that may not be entirely positive because you’re not a fan of the inquiry or inquirer, try to have it in person or over the phone if at all possible.
2) If that’s not possible, try to avoid including that conversation in your response and subsequent dialogue with the inquirer.
Is the security breach a big deal? Yes. That’s a whole lot of names and numbers to get out in the open.
Has Snapchat handled the fallout well? No. This is one of the case studies, actually, where you just do the opposite of everything Snapchat’s done to this point to handle the fallout from a PR/crisis management perspective.
Will it matter? Probably not, and that’s probably a big reason why they don’t really care what the fallout is. Because Snapchat’s core customers - young people - don’t particularly care about their user names and phone numbers getting into the hands of hackers. That’s because they don’t particularly care about most things in general. (This is a gross oversimplification, of course, but it helps make for a tidier argument.)
What does it ultimately mean for Snapchat, then? Not much, probably, which isn’t necessarily a good thing. Snapchat’s challenge still remains a monumental one - making money. Exactly how the service plans on generating revenue without negatively impacting the user experience for its core customers - those young people who don’t particularly care about most things, especially advertisers - is still a big mystery. And a big, big challenge.