UK Cops to Cops: Don't Sit Too Close to the Media

OK. Now I’ve heard everything. A new 50-page-plus guide has come out in the UK for how the police should deal with the media. Right up at the top of the list? Don’t flirt. According to a story by Gil Rudawsky at prdaily.com, there are caveats against “late-night carousing,” and not sharing a bottle of wine “because it might make you spill the beans.” Laughable to us in the U.S., of course, because there’s long been a fine line between journalists and the people they cover. In fact, some of our best have even gone to jail to protect who they write about. But apparently in the UK, things are a little different. Seems the media knows how to ingratiate itself with the innocent people who keep the peace, and will do anything to get their story. Imagine that! So why am I telling you this? Don’t we know better than that? We’d never tell journalists who are nice to us things they shouldn’t know. . .right? OK, so this isn’t the UK. And in this country, we don’t routinely hack into phone calls, or hang around in the bushes until we see a Congressman go get his morning paper in his briefs while his lover waits at the front door. Well, maybe… I guess all the cops are trying to say is respect each other’s rights, and know the boundaries. Hmm….Not bad advice for any of us. Deborah Hirsch PR BLOGGER (deborah-hirsch.blogspot.com)

Blogger Beware: Companies, Take Notice

Martin Holladay at greenbuildingadviser.com blogs that Allison Bailes, a frequent contributor to his site, recently posted a blog on his Energy Vanguard website about the difficulty of installing fiberglass batts well (http://www.greenbuildingadvisor.com/blogs/dept/green-building-news/guardian-fiberglass-threatens-blogger-legal-action#comment-34824). According to Holladay, Bailes wrote that fiberglass batts “get a Grade III in the typical installation. That’s because it’s so difficult to install them well.” Holladaywrites that the lawyers brought out the big guns. In his story, he says, “But the lawyers at Guardian Fiberglass didn’t like what they read.” (He notes that, looking closely at Bailes's photos, it can be seen that the batts in the photos happened to be manufactured by Guardian.) Now I don’t know a batt from a boot, but apparently, these were fighting words. “In a letter written to Bailes on October 21, Holladay writes, “Michael Metz, a Guardian lawyer, informed Bailes that ‘Guardian disagrees with [the] assertion that it is difficult to install fiberglass insulation well. … It is Guardian’s position that these comments by your company together with the picture of Guardian’s products constitute libel, slander, and commercial disparagement.” The letter goes on to say that Guardian demanded a response within 10 days that included the blog’s agreement to “cease its negative advertising.” If not, Holladay writes, the company promised to “’aggressively pursue its remedies to the fullest extent permitted by law, and any further conduct by Energy Vanguard of a similar nature will be dealt with accordingly.’” Scary words for a simple blog. Bailes ultimately hired a lawyer and then edited his photo to remove the Vanguard name. Moral: What happens when a company tries to suppress a story? Holladaywrites, when will public relations employees learn that any attempt to suppress a story only turns it into news? Thanks to Guardian’s heavy-handed attempt at censorship, Bailes’s blog will now get more readership than ever. Deborah DiSesa Hirsch PRblogger.blogspot.com

A Marketing Miss by a Mile

Recently, an interesting clash of ideas set off a cultural and religious war in Manhattan. A truly tasteless (and thoughtless) billboard blared: "CHRISTMAS QUALITY, HANNUKAH PRICING!" What were they thinking, indeed? As completely understandable, and expected, a number of people took offense. The Anti-Defamation League called it "crude and offrensvie," and said that it reinforced anti-Semitic stereotypes. “Particularly with the long history of anti-Semitic stereotypes about Jews and money, with the age-old notion that Jews are cheap, to use the Jewish holiday in dealing with issues of money is clearly insensitive and inappropriate,” the Anti-Defamation League’s New York Director Ron Meier told CBS. Here's the company's astounding response: “The inspiration for Hanukkah’s inclusion was anything but anti-Semitic – in fact, we’re likening ourselves to the Jewish holiday,” said Brian Gordon of Miami MG in a statement. “Simply put Hanukkah represents a better value because you get 8 nights for the price of 1 – much like Wodka, more for less.” “Hopefully this response will help re-focus you on all of the serious places where anti-Semitism does exist – however it doesn’t exist anywhere in our marketing,” said Gordon. The ad, for Wodka vodka, was down Tues. at 4 p.m., CBS reported. Anyone, comments? Deborah Hirsch PRblogger.blogspot.com

Buzz-SAWED

Recently Chapstick blew it. Thinking it had a great idea for using social media, it posted on its Facebook fan page, "Where do Lost Chapsticks Go? Be heard at facebook.com/Chapstick." Scintillating, right? But they botched it further because the ad showed a woman with her hind end in the air presumably searching for her Chapstick. Tone deaf, anyone? Fans were "heard," all right. Chapstick was flooded with posts about its "sexist" ad. And guess what the company did? Deleted them as fast as they came in. The more negative comments increased, the faster they were deleted, this all from Stuart Elliott at The New York Times on Monday. According to Elliott, Adfreak, a blog that's part of adweek.com, "denounced the brand's 'silent war against its Facebook fans', as an 'example of 'a social media death spiral.'" When will we learn? Let our critics speak and respond appropriately, or step into the buzz saw. Think Chapstick learned its lesson? Guess you could say it bombed? Deborah DiSesa Hirsch PRblogger.blogspot.com b2bstoryteller.biz