As an accredited PR professional, I take my job very seriously.

My clients know that when they speak to the media or in a public forum, that honesty is a must. I recall an incident where a client was being interviewed by a local business reporter. Unfortunately, the client got a bit carried away and started touting the capabilities of a product that was not yet finished (nor was the capability yet proven possible). After much consideration and discussion among my staff, we determined that for the credibility of the reporter and the client that the story needed to be killed.

I fell on the sword that day and took my verbal beating from the reporter. He even went so far as to publish an unflattering editorial about me (name withheld) in that next issue.

I still agree with my decision, because, I am a PR professional. According to the Public Relations Society of America’s Code of Ethics we shall:

• Be honest and accurate in all communications.
• Act promptly to correct erroneous communications for which the member is responsible.
• Investigate the truthfulness and accuracy of information released on behalf of those represented.
• Reveal the sponsors for causes and interests represented.
• Disclose financial interest (such as stock ownership) in a client’s organization.
• Avoid deceptive practices.

Dana Perino, former Bush White House Press Secretary, was a keynote speaker at Denver’s annual PRSA conference in Denver last year. Her speech, (obviously written to benefit an unrevealed client), took place during the brutal health care fight in congress. When the opportunity came, I asked her to speak about how she, as a practioner and employee of one for the largest PR firms in the country, upholds our Code. Her response? A pathetic mumble of clients’ right to discuss their issues. I further asked her the important of truthfulness and accuracy. She again mumbled some answer about “what is the truth”. Really? Are we having a discussion about truthiness?

More recently, we had an incident of malfeasance when Fox News broke an erroneous story on USDA official Shirley Sherrod. Their misreporting of comments she made about a white farmer during a speech led to Sherrod’s hasty firing. Keith Olbermann’s news-making commentary on the Sherrod incident stated that “Fox News’s manipulation, is not just a story, not just on behalf of a political philosophy, [but] of a society”

After that, I just blew.

Fox News’ number #2 man is Roger Ailes, a Republican PR strategist. He, like Karl Rove, is a master at manipulating the media (note that I did not use the word “journalist”) Ailes’ constant rewriting of facts, not just for Fox viewers, but in an attempt to overcome public policy has become intolerable. I don’t want my profession to be looked upon as “designers of lies”.

It’s time for my profession to get fired up!

To read more on Keith Olbermann’s commentary visit: http://newsbusters.org/blogs/noel-sheppard/2010/07/22/olbermann-sherrod-was-assassinated-fox-news-and-scum-breitbart#ixzz0y6SpMx8G

Social media relations continues to rage among the the marketing community. I do believe that this medium can work when used appropriately. But I also feel that Twitter is one of the more overhyped sites that may not be delivering the goods.

Jon Swartz – a topnotch technology reporter for USA Today writes the following:
“Tweets aren’t always sweet – sometimes they’re just “pointless babble.”

Actually, they are over 40% of the time, based on a study of 2,000 random tweets over two weeks by Pear Analytics, which released a report Monday. The researcher deemed 811 tweets as babble, compared with 751 (38%) as conversational, 174 (8%) as moderately interesting and 117 (6%) as self-promotional.

Spam accounted for only 4%, or 75, of the tweets.

The results surprised Pear researchers, who expected a preponderance of self-promotional tweets.

As the purpose of this blog is educational, we will now be adding stories which we feel are worth reading and may get missed based on all of the activities we manage are part of our daily lives.

This is a recent editorial from USA Today on the healthcare bill.

Here’s a little secret: Government already pays more than insurers.

Depending on who you listen to, a central feature of President Obama’s health care overhaul — a government-run insurance plan known as the “public option” — is either dead or on life support. That it is in trouble at all reflects the Alice-in-Wonderland nature of the medical discussion.

In health care politics, down is up, right is left and the sun rises each morning in the West. When lawmakers try to be frugal with taxpayers’ money, their actions are labeled as Big Government intruding. When they try to bring some compassion to end-of-life issues, uncontroversial until it was included in a medical proposal, they’re accused of promoting euthanasia. And when they ignore the unsustainable amounts of public money pouring into a broken system, they call themselves pro-market.

This last illusion was illustrated in 2003 when Congress, then under Republican control, passed a Medicare drug benefit estimated to cost about $500 billion over a decade. Even though every dime was taxpayers’ money, the government was barred from using its clout to negotiate the most advantageous deals with pharmaceutical companies. Borrowing trillions from future generations was OK. Trying to get taxpayers the most for their money was not.

Something similar is happening with the public option. This entirely voluntary plan — that’s why it’s called an “option” — would bring some cost control to health care by applying government’s purchasing power as leverage against medical providers and insurance companies. Yet the idea is cynically cast as a “government takeover of health care” — rhetoric worthy of the Mad Hatter.

Even if tens of millions of people chose the public option, which is possible in some circumstances, tens of millions more would retain private insurance, which would get cheaper. And that could happen only if the program was wildly popular.

This is something to fear?

The dirty secret of our health care system is that it already is dependent on government or, more precisely, government waste. More than 46% of all medical service in the USA, about $1 trillion annually, is paid for directly by taxpayers. Private insurers cover 42%, and the remainder is paid out of pocket. In addition to what government pays directly, it pumps in more than $200 billion a year in tax subsidies.

If Washington does nothing, this government role will only get a lot bigger as the population ages, providers hike prices and private coverage becomes increasingly unaffordable.

The do-nothing critics avoid this reality through the strange logic that says government’s presence is harmless as long as it is dumb. It can mortgage the future. It can bankrupt itself. If everyone just closes his eyes, maybe no one will notice.

Senators opposed to the public option are promoting non-profit state cooperatives as an alternative. But such co-ops are likely to be too small, and take too long to establish, to provide competition to private insurers.

The public option is no boogeyman. It is a way to save taxpayers money while empowering people to make the choices Congress cannot. Without meaningful efforts to control costs, health care overhaul will simply turn into another exercise in sending trillions of dollars down the rabbit hole.

Posted at 12:22 AM/ET, August 19, 2009 in USA TODAY editorial

One of my dearest friends died in April. This has been one of the longest and hardest experiences of grief I’ve ever endured. Now that I’m finally feeling a bit better I have been enjoying getting in touch with old friends via Facebook – one of the social media sites I have actually liked – until recently.

Imagine my shock a few weeks ago, when my dear deceased friend’s name appeared as a “possible friend”. I couldn’t believe it. As my fried died terminal cancer, she probably did not think to delete her Facebook page, as one of her last acts toward the end of her life.

It took me several days to contact her widower and ask if he knew anything about this situation. He is not very computer literate and had no idea she even had a page on Facebook. Given my knowledge and background in technology, he asked me if I could take care of it.

Well – having searched the Facebook site and researched online I have come to the conclusion that there is no way to contact Facebook. Are there actually people that work at Facebook, or is this some alien planet interacting with our cyber world?

Great technology companies are known for having great support. So I find Facebook’s lack of standard customer communications to be a big disappointment.

If anyone knows how to get in touch with them, so I can have my friend’s page taken down, please let me know. This is a bit of communication that is greatly needed, and I’m sure I’m not alone in this situation (but it certainly feels that way).

Right now the U.S. is in a heated debate over healthcare. As a small business owner and professional communicator, with clients in the healthcare industry I am following this issue very closely. I find the amount of disinformation raging on all media fronts disturbing indeed.

In spite of what some people think, communications professional have a responsibility to help clients craft messages based on facts. It is to no one’s benefit to engage in dishonesty.

As a member of the Public Relations Society of America, I am required to adhere to a Code of Ethics, which includes the following:

A member shall not intentionally communicate false or misleading information and is obligated to use care to avoid communication of false or misleading information.

Healthcare is a serious matter that affects every American. Its costs are out of control and must be tackled before the largest segment of our population is at retirement age. Thus, communications based on facts, not prejudice or self-interest, must govern our actions. Communications professionals must take the lead to disseminate accurate information, regardless of personal points of view. To quote President Barak Obama, “I always believe that ultimately, if people are paying attention, then we get good government and good leadership. And when we get lazy, as a democracy and civically start taking shortcuts, then it results in bad government and politics.”

A few days ago, USA Today featured a story on the problems with security on Twitter. Trippe & Company is fortunate to work with one of the premiere security software companies and because of our work with this client, know only too well the security holes that can exist in social media applications.

Any firm promoting social media has an ethical responsibility to ensure that their clients understand the security holes social media can open. Working with IT organizations to ensure that proper precautions are taken prior to embarking on a social media campaign is a necessary step in any program.

Hackers are always looking for a way into a corporation. Some simply want to mess with a web page while others are looking to steal identities or money. This means that expertise in social media requires more than communications skills. Invest time in understanding the vulnerabilities in networking and operating systems and check on your client’s disaster recovery plans. After all, no client wants to be the lead in another story about a security breach.

A few days ago I bought a new car. Now this may not seem to be a reason for a blog posting, but the automobile industry has certainly been in the news and has one of the most established buying cycles in any industry. So, it was interesting to see how this market has evolved – or not.

As almost any shopper today knows, the process typically begins with an online search on the different models, prices and reviews. This is a critical opportunity for any dealership to build brand awareness. I was surprised at how few dealerships took advantage of simple search techniques or posted any ads.

Once I had narrowed my list, I went for the test drive. This was an earlier step in the cycle than previous car buying experiences and put me in the hands of a dealer much earlier than I typically like. I must say that test drives have really improved. This became the basis for my top choice. What happened next? Nothing. I didn’t hear from the salesperson, dealership or anyone involved in selling me a car. How strange!

Did my car buying process stop? No, I just started watching the Saturday newspaper for deals. So I had started online, moved up the evaluation process and then went back to a standard awareness practice. Finally, after about a month, I saw an ad for the car I had selected at 0% financing. I called the sales rep at the dealership and was sent to someone’s home voicemail. Huh? I checked back to the car brand website and was sent to a different dealership. Wait a minute. I’m trying to finish the process, not start over. I was really frustrated by this time. I went back to the originaldealership’s website and saw a button to contact an online sales rep. I did and within one day and after about four emails had settled on a car and a price. All I had to do was go to the dealership, sign the paperwork and pick up the car.

There were several points in this process where I could have walked, and any good salesperson would have seen this and kept me engaged in the car-buying process. I didn’t want to contact someone online but it turned out to be the most pleasant and productive part of the process. If the automobile industry is going to recover, shouldn’t someone be taking a hard look at the buying process? Seems like an ideal place to improve.

People who create viruses have always been the bottom feeders of the Internet industry, closely associated with spammers. Because of the growing problem, laws now exist that penalize anyone sending unsolicited email, who doesn’t provide an opt-out feature to ensure that names/emails are not given away without your permission.

There is a new scourge in the Internet industry – social viruses – and the king of this segment is MyLife. Recently, while doing a research project for a client, I happened to visit this site, based on my Google search. Boy am I sorry I did!

MyLife takes data from sites such as Facebook, LinkedIn, etc and compiles the information together into a large database. They boast on their website about how many visitors they have. Well, let me tell you how they get those “visitors”.

When you enter the site their technology secretly enters your computer looking for your contact database. (This is the same method that a virus uses) It then begins sending messages to your contacts telling them that you would like them to join MyLife.

I spent almost half a day sending out apologies to friends and clients stating that I never joined MyLife and never authorized any communication. (How embarrassing!)

I have now learned that MyLife is sending emails to contacts who received my email, reminding them to accept my invitation! This is some pretty insidious technology.

I look forward to learning from colleagues in the technology sector how people can protect themselves from this new type of virus. In the meantime, do not click on the MyLife site and do not open emails with MyLife in the title.

More on this topic later.

One of the most important and difficult marketing lessons to learn is creative management. I spent many years focused on this specific skill, as I discovered the creative side of strategic communications is the one area in which corporate marketing people make the most mistakes. Unfortunately, creative mistakes can be the most costly (in a myriad of ways) to an organization.

In these fiscally challenging times, a lot of corporate marketing people have been asked to produce programs with less money. Sadly, many in senior management (particularly finance and legal) don’t realize that marketing is always a 1:1 ratio. You can’t do the same number of projects with less money. If you try, you will simply create more projects that don’t work. I believe that this mentality results in a bigger waste of money.

So here are five rules that will enable you to get the most from your creative budget:

Rule #1 Make sure you’ve got the financial resources necessary to do the project well.
Otherwise, kill the project.

Learning to work with creative people is a tremendous skill. I have actually found that brilliant engineers and brilliant creative people are very similar – they just work in different mediums. Therefore, to get the most out of your creative budget, you need to get the most out of your creative people (see Rule #5).

Rule #2: Have all aspects of the project in place and approved before bringing in the creative team.

Typically, the way to ensure your project is ready to roll is by having in place the all-important creative brief. If you don’t know how to write a creative brief, you should not be working with creative people. This is a fact, not a point of debate. Projects will always go over budget if there is no approved creative brief. If your senior management or approval points don’t know how to work with a brief, train them. That is part of your job. Because when the project is over budget, off track, etc., you will take the blame, not the knuckleheads at the top.

Rule #3: Don’t change the project mid-way through.

In the creative world, any time you change the project, you have to start all over. New creative brief, new concepts, etc. It is not possible to stay on budget if the project changes. It’s just a law of marketing.

Rule #4: Always work with the best creative person you can find. (And know that the good ones don’t come cheap.)

Sadly, I see way too many creative projects awarded on lowest price. That should never be the final decision criteria. Good creative people will evaluate the client and will bid according to how much time it will take to complete the job. This is based solely on the client. If it is obvious (and it usually is) that the client doesn’t have a good system in place, doesn’t have experience working with creative people, hasn’t trained their management team, etc., then the bid will be high. It has to be because so many hours will be wasted in meetings, on conference calls, etc. trying to get the creative work done. I recently worked on a project where it took three months just to get the client to explain the product and decide the creative approach for the project!

Rule #5: Do not frustrate the creative team.

Once you’ve frustrated the creative team the project is doomed. For the reasons already discussed above, creative people like to work in a well-organized environment which allows their creativity to flow. If there are too many discussions, too many changes of direction, too much non-creative stuff, they will mentally check out. Sure they will finish the project, but they won’t waste their creative energies giving you their best stuff.

A strong client/creative relationship will produce some amazing work that will improve the bottom line. But, hey, don’t take my word for it. Just ask Steve Jobs.

I’m the first to admit that I was born in the wrong century. I love dinner parties with fine china and Waterford crystal, dressing up and hand-written notes with beautiful stationary. I expect every proper lady to own at least one pair of white gloves (two is preferable because I believe lace is best for tea time).

I do not allow my daughter to text at the table, as I think it’s quite rude. So imagine my surprise when I was at a recent public relations function, and several attendees were tweeting rather than respectfully listening to the master of ceremonies, a big Denver media mucky-muck.

People, people, people – you cannot behave in such a manner. Ashton Kutcher texting while the president is speaking is not appropriate behavior. I understand that social media is about being “in the moment” but we must have some limits or we are going to devolve into beasts of burden.

So as we embrace social media let’s make sure it integrates with proper business etiquette. And don’t forget those thank you notes!