In this episode of PRobecast, Renatta Siewert and Caitlin Smith join me in discussing Milwaukee Health Department’s new co-sleeping ad campaign, O.co reverting back to Overstock.com and Justin Bieber’s paternity suit being dropped.

Milwaukee’s Co-Sleeping Ad Controversy – The city of Milwaukee’s Health Department is under scrutiny after its recent ad campaign warning parents about the dangers of co-sleeping. Their advertisement shows a baby sleeping next to a knife – not the normal picture you get in your head when thinking about an infant dozing off. The Commissioner of Health says that while the image is shocking, what is more shocking is the fact that 30 developed and underdeveloped countries have better infant death rates than the city. However, some parents are outraged and think that co-parenting is a good bonding ritual between mothers and their child. Is Milwaukee in a PR-mess that it can handle? How should the city move forward?

Overstock Backs Off O.co Name Change – About six months ago, Overstock.com started branding it O.co – in online ad, tv ads and during sporting events. They’re reverting their branding and bringing back their Overstock.com messaging because a “good portion” of those watching to o.co ads, started going to o.com. Obviously, that is a problem. Some experts are saying that by going back to Overstock.com branding, for the time being, is going to cost a lot of brand confusion with their customers. What do you think?

Justin Bieber’s Baby Drama– Looks like Justin Bieber might not have as much baby mamma drama going on as he has had in recent weeks. Mariah Yeater, the 20-yr old that accused Biebs of fathering her 4 month year old child, has quietly dropped her lawsuit. According to Yeater’s lawyer, his client was receiving death threats and decided to pursue privately. How do you think Bieber’s PR camp handled the allegations? Is this girl just looking for 15 minutes of fame?

Now it’s time for the PRobecast PR Power Ranking – which is when we go around the room and pick the story that we think ranks the highest PR-wise – meaning any aspects of PR could be the reasoning behind the pick. Is it the story itself, good data that was used, what’s getting the most pickup, was it a good PR move the company made, etc.

This week’s winner was Overstock. Too often brands have messaging that doesn’t work, and instead of addressing the problem – the messaging is never altered. While Overstock is still keeping O.co, they are addressing the problem by bringing back the more well-known Overstock.com URL. It’s a win-win for them. People know it and now consumers can get to their site.

Who do you think should have won?

Share on Facebook

Technorati Tags: Justin Bieber's baby, milwaukee's co-sleeping campaign, o.co, Overstock.com

Share/Save

The horror of the emerging Sandusky/Paterno/Penn State scandal holds many lessons for PR people and marketers (don’t do PR for fill-in-the-blank.) One which may not seem important now, but which should not be ignored, is the risk of blurring the lines between personal and institutional brands.

Joe Paterno clearly viewed himself as a super-set of the Penn State brand, larger than life and the institution he served, unassailable. In his arrogant, tone-deaf retirement announcement he admonished the University’s Trustees: “At this moment the Board of Trustees should not spend a single minute discussing my status. They have far more important matters to address. I want to make this as easy for them as I possibly can.”

The University, which for decades had encouraged the development of Paterno’s brand as a proxy for the institution’s, finally took action. But it was too little, too late – for those boys, for the administration, for the students and alums, perhaps for Penn State.

Of course Penn State isn’t the only organization to ignore the risk of letting its brand ambassador’s power eclipse its core brand. Many consumer brands have been bitten by endorsements – think of Nike and Tiger Woods, Michael Vick and Nike, Michael Jordan and Coca-Cola, and Britney Spears and Pepsi.

While many of the examples above deal with consumer brands, tech companies are not immune. Many hire community managers or social media experts to mediate interactions between users and the company. Community managers are powerful people. They may serve as brand ambassadors, but they also have an investment in maintaining their personal brands. Check the Twitter feeds of community managers and nine times out of 10 you’ll see the individual’s name, not the company they work for. It’s a risk, and an opportunity lost, for the organization, and a diminution of its brand.

Brands are a huge responsibility. They are the lens through which prospects, customers and employees see an organization. They need to be built carefully and maintained scrupulously. To surrender an organization’s brand to a brand ambassador or other proxy is to be blind to risk, and to surrender responsibility.

Share on Facebook

Technorati Tags: brand ambassadors, community managers, Joe Paterno's retirement announcement, Penn State

Share/Save

In this episode of PRobecast, Renatta Siewert joins me in talking about the idea of voting via smartphone, Disney and YouTube’s $10M deal and social media not being one-size fits all.

Voting with a Smartphone – Did you vote on Election Day? A Mashable writer suggested that many people don’t vote because voting is inconvenient. There’s the time limit, the specific locations as to where you can vote – all these things can often be roadblocks and the reasoning behind people not voting. He suggests the idea that smartphones could change all that. With all the apps available, a secure application could be created allowing people to vote directly from their mobile device. With people now being able to purchase things via their smartphones, why not vote?

Disney’s Deal with YouTube – Disney and YouTube have put together a deal to produce co-branded video content. Disney is trying to attract a bigger audience by teaming up with the video giant. On the other hand, YouTube is trying to better their reputation with parents by teaming up with this family-friendly company. Is this a good move for both players? Will we see more companies trying to partner with YouTube?

Social media: Every Channel Doesn’t Need to be Tapped – An article in PRWeek discusses how when it comes to social media, don’t jump in blindly. Companies need to be strategic as to which forms of social channels they decide to join – and have a plan as to what their ultimate goal is. Having a twitter account that isn’t geared towards your target audience is not going to help your presence. Being on Facebook, but not having any information about your company isn’t going to grow your “like”ers. When it comes to social media, brands need to be smart.

Now it’s time for the PRobecast PR Power Ranking – which is when we go around the room and pick the story that we think ranks the highest PR-wise – meaning any aspects of PR could be the reasoning behind the pick. Is it the story itself, good data that was used, what’s getting the most pickup, was it a good PR move the company made, etc.

This week we chose the Disney/YouTube deal as the story that comes out on top. This deal makes perfect sense for both parties, bettering the images of both parties. Disney needs to expand their audience and seem “cooler,” whereas YouTube wants to better its sometimes explicit image with parents concerned about what their children are viewing.

Who do you think should have won?

Share on Facebook

Technorati Tags: Disney and YouTube deal, How to use Social Media, Voting via Smartphone

Share/Save