The 2012 Election and the Emergence of "Identity PR"

The analysis among political scientists continues in the wake of the election of 2012, and it’s not just centered on the presidential race.  Many congressional seats and senatorial positions were won and lost according to the same dynamics that decided the presidential race.

Because the political sphere is a highly charged atmosphere where the media, issues, messaging and breaking events all come to play to create a final narrative, it also serves as a good laboratory for public relations.  It is with this in mind that one observation that is starting to emerge in the analysis is that “identity politics” won the day.  This could have a significant impact on the practice of public relations, leading to a higher emphasis on “identity PR.”

Before getting into the PR trend, some background is necessary, and to keep it simple, I will focus on the presidential race.

In 2012, the two candidates spent billions on advertising.  The polls at the outset of the campaign showed which states were “red,” which ones were “blue,” and which ones were considered “battleground” or “swing.”  The swing states were assumed to be persuadable through the traditional means – TV advertising, mostly on local stations; well-orchestrated and aggressive scheduling of “stump speeches;”  and of course, “the ground game” of using your campaign staffers in localized markets to turn out the vote.  The states that received most of this attention were Florida, Virginia, Colorado, Ohio, New Hampshire, North Carolina, Nevada and Iowa.

By the end of the campaign, only North Carolina and Indiana changed from their pre-campaign leanings in the polls which means that in the end, there were only two, true swing states.

What it also means is that when the campaigns focused primarily on geography – the swing states – they wasted massive amounts of time, money and resources.  The candidates hardly if ever visited the remainder of the country.  Their primary focus was on these states.

The first lesson here, then, is that by targeting localized and regionalized markets generally, the candidates missed the mark.

The politicos have credited other factors for determining the outcome and closeness of the campaign.  They cited the presidential debates, the economic recession, high levels of unemployment, and voter fears of change, or losing certain government programs.  The polls indicated consistently that foreign policy was not a major factor in voters’ criteria this time around.

The race was not a landslide for the incumbent, but it wasn’t close enough to give the Republicans enough comfort to assume that their current campaign strategies will work in the future.

Clearly, the Democrats made gains in the Senate and won the White House because they got more votes from their base than the Republicans did.  Over three million fewer Republicans voted in this election than did in 2008.  Mitt Romney received 1.8 million fewer votes than Republican John McCain did in 2008.  In fact, the Republican turnout in this election was lower than in 2004 when George Bush defeated John Kerry.  Experts are saying that to best understand the outcome the key not to focus on why voters who voted made the choices they did, but rather to find out why some went to the polls and some stayed home.

But here’s what’s clear for us.  When the campaigns garnered support, they did so not along geographic borders but on demographic ones.  In this election, it mattered less on the state in which you lived and more on which demographic group to which you belong.

Post-election research revealed the president received his votes from: 93 percent of African Americans; 70 percent of Hispanic Americans; 60 percent of men and women under the age of 30; and 62 percent of all unmarried voters.

Romney’s base consisted of white men and women who are married, particularly those over the age of 30.  It is not yet clear where the senior citizen block came down.  On social and economic issues, it is believed that the 65-and over demographic would have leaned Romney, but the big question-mark was whether that campaign’s plans for reforming Medicare had a significant impact on the actual vote among seniors.

Each of these demographics viewed the election, and their votes, through the prism of their own self-interest, what they had to personally gain or lose with each candidate.  While this is not a new concept, their self-interest was as much defined by the campaigns as themselves. 

Two examples: The Romney campaign spoke consistently to the self-interest of small business owners and middle class families.  The Obama campaign spoke consistently to the self-interest of younger, single women.  In the process both campaigns didn’t stop short of trying to prove they could meet voter needs, but they went further to essentially tell those targeted voters what they should need, want and expect as members of a particular social interest group.

What are Identity Politics?

The basis of identity politics is to center on the self-interest of the targeted audience as it identifies itself in a social interest group context.  Do I define myself by my age, by my religion, by my marital status?  Or, do I define myself by my current economic class – blue collar, white collar, professional, etc.?

Identity politics emerged in its current form in the 1960s when smaller sub-sets of voters increasingly defined themselves along the lines of sexual orientation; gender; race or ethnicity; or religious affiliation.  Since then, the number of groups that might fall under the “identity politics” realm has exploded.  Just about every activist and lobbying organization represents a group that can be targeted with the identity political appeal.  By 2012, the electorate appears to have evolved to the point that the vast majority of voters have fallen into some category.

What this Means for PR

For those of us in PR, this means that when we work for companies or organizations, we have to be even more mindful of the identity groups within our own targeted audiences.  Consumer PR has always been rather sophisticated demographically. I think we’ll find that more frequently, all PR programs will be more mindful of demographics and social identities within such audiences as customers, vendors, employees or investors.

Let’s say we have an employee communications project encompassing five regional hubs across the country.  Instead of making assumptions that all employees in the rank and file will react the same way to the same news, it’s more likely that a group of employees from Texas will react differently than their peers in California on the basis of how they identify themselves when they are away from work.

This is slightly exaggerated to illustrate, but over the years, you might have met an old friend on the street and asked her, “So what do you do?”  Back then, she might have said, “I’m a banker and I live in Springfield with my husband, two kids and a dog.”

Today, that exchange could go differently.   You may ask again, “So what do you do?”  And under this new era of identifying ourselves as who we are outside of work, she could respond, “I’m a marathoner, and I like to travel to races with my family in our hybrid. We all run and like to volunteer at the local food bank on Sundays after church.”

While the people involved may be doing the same things they’ve always done, what’s changing is how they identify themselves and more readily use that identity to make choices.  In the example above, exercise is not just exercise, a car is not just a car, family life isn’t just family life.  It’s a statement.

And all of this is amplified on social media, where social interests are showcased by the millions each day, along with the sharing of opinions on everything from the latest news to a new decorating idea.

Like its political cousin, identity PR will have to take into account the self-interests of targeted audiences beyond the business at hand.  Here are some examples:

·         Announcement of natural gas drilling project in West Virginia will likely be seen by that region as a positive economic development in that jobs are being created, while in parts of New York it will play out as a threat to the environment.

·         The mere act by the CEO of a consumer goods company of accepting an invitation to speak at an evangelical Christian college could be characterized by special interests on Twitter as an endorsement of all of that college’s positions on social issues.

·         And if the same CEO announced the hiring of a celebrity spokesperson to do a few commercials for the company, and that celebrity happens to be in a same-sex marriage, the CEO could come under fire from others on allegations of supporting same-sex marriage.

We have entered a new era of identity PR, one that will only get more supercharged as social media becomes more prevalent than it already has become.  Looking ahead, it will be more the norm for PR programs to break audiences down according to more narrow and sometimes fragmented demographics.  And it will be more routine to anticipate possible issues management and crisis situations that could result from disparate groups reacting differently to the same developments.

"Newsjacking" Highlights the Power and the Limitations of Social Media

As Hurricane Sandy approached land last week, Sears knew there would be demand for many of its products, from generators to chain saws.  The retailer has seen this before during times of natural disaster.

Only this time, the company’s marketing people decided to do some storm preparedness of their own. They created a special Web page that allowed for easier one-stop-shopping for anyone taking measures to prepare for the impact of the hurricane, or further inland, the “super storm.”

The company then used Twitter as part of its effort to create awareness of its Web page and its position as a supplier of storm preparedness and recovery items.

Here’s what the company’s official Tweet said:

“Did Hurricane Sandy affect your city? Get your generators, air mattresses & more in one place: http://spr.ly/6018py14  #HurricaneSandy”

In a pre-social media world, Sears may have advertised this on TV and perhaps radio.  If there was time, it may have taken out newspaper ads, but it wouldn’t have “tweeted” this.  And most likely, it would not have caused concern if the ads were of the same general tone.

But in today’s social media environment, the company’s tweet sparked backlash against Sears by those on social media accusing the company of “newsjacking.”  This is a relatively new term that’s based on the idea that if a person or company tries to use a major news event for personal or corporate gain, it’s guilty of newsjacking.

There were some pretty extreme examples of this around Hurricane Sandy.  One apparel retailer tried to use social media to promote a discount on products over the Internet for those who may suffer “boredom” as the hurricane wears on. Obviously, social media has done nothing to inhibit insensitivity. 

To be sure, Sears’ situation was different.  For many decades, the retailer has been a major resource for just the kind of tools and supplies people need during times of natural disaster.  It could easily be argued that the company was doing people a great service by creating awareness of its products, and by offering discounts on those products, which it did.

But Sears came under fire in social media on accusations of trying to use the storm on grounds of “corporate greed.”  The comments were all over the board, some in favor of Sears, and some which complained of the timing and nature of the content.  Quite a few believed the company should have put a moratorium on advertising or even given the products away.

From a PR standpoint, there are a couple of issues going on here that need to be addressed.  One is the whole notion of “newsjacking.”  Another is whether Sears deserved the social media backlash. 

“Newsjacking” is a new term for a very, very old idea.  The whole PR industry is based in large part on the idea that companies, organizations and individuals find a way to tie their messages and themes into the current events of the day. This is how they achieve relevance, and you can’t do effective PR without it.  The key is to do it ethically, credibly and tastefully.

It would appear that those who live their lives on social media are discovering for the first time  the issues we’ve dealt with in PR for many decades.  They’re conjuring up new terms that also bring with them value-judgments, oftentimes based on an altruistic worldview, devoid of a deep understanding of the societal value of business, commerce and industry. 

In the social media world, most all newsjacking is bad, particularly if there is a business component to it because that would suggest corporate greed. 

On the other hand, because of the lightning speed and very informal systems and tone of social media, examples of tastelessness have escalated with the numbers of social media users.  So there is some basis for skepticism on the motives of corporate social media users.  It is perhaps for this reason that Sears almost unknowingly put a social media target on its back.

As the water gets pumped out of the New York subway system, and as New Jersey begins the long rebuilding process in the wake of Hurricane Sandy, those of us in PR and social media are left with a number of issues.  We need to come to terms with the possibility that some social media initiatives tied to current events could lead to accusations of newsjacking.  Companies should have pretty clear communications strategies and policies so that when companies venture into the world of breaking news, they do so with clarity on their best of intentions. 

At the same time, the social media business, as fragmented as it is needs its leadership to step up and start to provide a higher level of professional standards.  The current mindset in social media is to let the tail wag the dog.  Comments are largely un-moderated.  Well organized social media mobs tend to make the most noise and rule.  As a result, there has emerged a social media groupthink on Twitter and Facebook. 

Corporate interests tend to be the group’s easiest and most common targets.  Social media activists know that the traditional media these days gives unusual weight to the volume of tweets as opposed to the legitimacy of the comments or concerns on Twitter, for instance.  You can’t expect the users of social media to be attracted to or adhere to higher standards of behavior on social media.

But the time may now be right for the social media discipline to begin to self-police and establish its own more professional standards for the management of social media sites and pages.  This would not be unlike the standards and codes we adhere to in the public relations and journalism professions.

Cutting Down on Acronyms and Jargon

Some of the most common edits a PR person needs to make when working with source material provided by others is the handling of acronyms and jargon.  Unfortunately, there are times when even the communicators themselves can fall into a rut of over-using certain acronyms and jargon.

Since the goal of all writing is to be understood by as many people as possible who might read the content, it’s never a good idea to include such short-hand without explanation.  Consider this excerpt from William Strunk, Jr., and E.B. White’s “The Elements of Style:”

“Do not use initials for the names of organizations or movements unless you are certain the initials will be readily understood. Write things out…A good rule is to start your article by writing out names in full, and then, later, when the reader has got his bearings, to shorten them.

“Many shortcuts are self-defeating; they waste the reader’s time instead of conserving it.  There are all sorts of rhetorical stratagems and devices that attract writers who hope to be pithy, but most of them are simply bothersome.  The longest way round is usually the shortest way home, and the one truly reliable shortcut in writing is to choose words that are strong and sure-footed to carry the reader on his way.”  

It couldn’t be said any better.

What Exactly is a Picayune?

I can’t trace back to when this little disorder started for me, but it’s a safe bet it happened sometime in my early PR days after I put together a lengthy media list for a client.  But ever since, it’s almost impossible for me to hear the name of a city and not immediately conjure up the name for the big newspaper daily from that town.

Take New Orleans, for instance.  While others might immediately think of Bourbon Street and Dixieland jazz when they think of New Orleans, the first words that come to my mind are, “Times-Picayune.”  It just so happens to be one of my favorite newspaper names.

But it’s no longer a daily.  As of September 29^th, just a couple of weeks ago, it published its last daily edition.  It now comes out only three days a week in print.

Here are some other newspaper names that for whatever reason come to mind when I think of great media monikers:

·         Sacramento Bee

·         Atlanta Journal-Constitution

·         Rocky Mountain News (Denver)

·         Boston Globe

·         Allentown Morning Call

·         Cleveland Plain Dealer

·         Baltimore Sun

·         Portland Oregonian

·         Wheeling Intelligencer

·         Philadelphia Inquirer (Not Enquirer)

·         Canton Repository

·         Somerset Daily American

·         San Jose Mercury News

·         St. Paul Pioneer Press

·         Nashville Tennessean

·         Norfolk Virginian-Pilot

·         Akron Beacon Journal

·         Toledo Blade

·         Harrisburg Patriot-News

·         Rochester Democrat

·         Springfield (Mass.) Republican

Many newspapers tag themselves with “Chronicle,” “Times,” “Tribune,” “Dispatch,” “Star,” “Journal,” or “Post,” so I didn’t mention any specific ones here.

With so many newspapers going out of business, I fear that the media landscape will not only lose all that goes with having these large newsroom staffs covering the events of the day in corners of the country from Toledo to Los Angeles, but we’ll also lose these colorful names that give our culture a little bit of added dimension.

By the way, according to Merriam-Webster’s dictionary, a picayune is a Spanish coin or “half dime;” or “something trivial.”  The Times-Picayune got its name back in 1837 when it was founded because the price of a newspaper then was one picayune.

Television is Still King of the Media: Print lags way behind online

Harris Interactive recently conducted a poll of over 2,000 participants that indicated that television is still the king when it comes to news consumption trends.

While social media and the Internet has come on strong over the past 15 years or so, television remains the preferred source of news and information for most Americans.

According to Harris, which conducted the poll in August of this year, 50 percent of participants said they prefer to receive their news via the television.  Online took second place with 36 percent of participants saying that’s where they like to get their news.  And print media took third place with only 10 percent saying that’s where they want to get their news.

Still, Harris reported that 69 percent of participants had a “moderate interest” in the news.  About 18 percent said following the news is something that doesn’t really interest them as something they do with their free time. While 13 percent described themselves as “news junkies.”  

Men are two times more likely than women to describe themselves as “news junkies.” 

For those of us who do call ourselves news junkies, here’s a rather bothersome sign for the future.  Harris said that younger adults are more likely to say they have a lack of interest in following the news at all.  About 31 percent of “echo boomers” or millennials said they’re not interested in following the news.  Gen Xers came in at 23 percent of those saying they don’t follow the news.  Baby boomers came in at 10 percent, which means 90 percent of boomers surveyed said they do care about the news. 

Whether you’re a news junkie or not, it seems online is fast becoming the preferred medium of choice. While TV edges out online media for those who are actively interested in the news, online news consumption habits among news junkies and those less interested is about even – 42 and 43 percent respectively.

Experts say that as we age, we become more interested in news and information, so according to that there is hope that today’s less interested millennials will someday become more plugged in to the news.  If that is the case, it’s good news for online.  Most millennials get their information online (55 percent from the Internet; 34 percent from TV).

Taking a page from print media, a catchy headline is still the main attraction to a story online.  54 percent of participants said a good headline is the top reason they’d read an online or print article in full.  The use of photos and data or research graphics also help.

Did Facebook Jump the Shark?

Back in May when Facebook went public, I posted here that the company would have life a little tougher as a public company.  You didn’t need a crystal ball to see that, particularly if you’ve ever worked for a public company on the investor relations side. 

It’s not enough for a publicly traded company to simply do a good job or even be the best at what it does.  No matter what, if it doesn’t make its quarterly earnings estimate, it fails.  And if it fails, it’s stock valuation goes down and shareholders (owners) lose money.  Since no one likes losing money, that puts management’s job security at risk, particularly if such performance doesn’t turn around.

Looking back, all of this came down hard on Facebook when immediately after the IPO, the stock started to drop and has never really recovered from that launch price.

The other thing I brought up just before the IPO was that Facebook would have to answer the question from investors: ‘What will you do with all that data on those millions of ‘free’ members?’

Actually, as an update, today Facebook announced the company now has over one billion members.  But as impressive as it sounds, shareholders want to see financial returns ASAP, and that's where that data comes in.

Earlier this week, Facebook announced some of its plans for the data.  The company has started to let marketers target ads to its members based on member email addresses and phone numbers, and based on their individual  web browsing habits to other sites.  Yes, other sites, not just on Facebook.

This means that if you are a member of Facebook, you can now be targeted based on your Internet habits and your phone number and email address will be used to identify you.  Now, the company has said it will “aggregate” the data, meaning that your data will fall within groups of targeted consumers, and that you, personally will not be singled out.

But given Facebook’s track record, including here, of never seeking member permission for how it wants to handle data, there are no guarantees as to how your personal identifying information will be used or sold in the future.

The company is also selling ads that will follow Facebook users beyond the boundaries of Facebook.  This idea isn’t totally new. Google does the same thing.  The big difference, however, is Google uses your IP address and doesn’t really know who you are.  That firm just knows the patterns of usage followed by anyone who uses your computer.

Facebook, on the other hand, knows your true identity.  And it knows who you are by your phone number and email address.  The company has instant access to all of the personal information you’ve decided to share on your individual Facebook page.  It has access to content you have deleted.  And it has access to data and information that’s been posted about you so long as you were “tagged.”

Now, multiply that by one billion.  And then consider some scenarios where someone is willing to pay Facebook to drill down, not just for marketing, but for any other purpose that you can imagine. That can be a scary thought.

The Electronic Privacy Information Center last week filed a complaint with the Federal Trade Commission over this sort of thing.  Part of the group’s argument is that while Facebook users may have anticipated receiving marketing messages from Facebook or while on Facebook, they never agreed at the outset to give Facebook voyeuristic access into what they do off of Facebook in “the real world.”  David Jacobs, the group’s lawyer, told the Wall Street Journal, “’Now the rules have changed and this information is being matched or cross-referenced. There is an issue with changing the rules on people.’”

This is all academic now, but as a publicly traded firm, Facebook will be forced to find new and more creative ways to meet Wall Street’s expectations.  The company will continuously run into new ethical challenges.

At the very least, this can be a distraction.  At worse, it could cause competitive problems for Facebook. Sure, it has one billion members today, and its presence on the Internet is everywhere.

But MySpace has recently reinvented itself.  I wouldn’t be surprised if its strategy is to position itself as a viable alternative when millions of users decide they no longer want to put their privacy in the hands of Facebook.

To Tweet or Not to Tweet, Often There is No Question

I’ll never pretend to be an expert on social media, but those of us in the PR business can’t avoid learning a good bit about it if not through effort, maybe through a form of working osmosis.

It’s with that in mind that I do want to touch on a Twitter topic.  The social media site has made more than a few headlines for its role in everything from helping people involved in natural or man-made catastrophes, to being a platform that celebrities and others use to get themselves into trouble.

It seems the topic most people talk most about when it comes to Twitter is about the fiascos people can create for themselves.

I read a blog post recently about “Tweets that will incite a PR Firestorm.”  It was on Ragan’s PR Daily site, and it listed some “real-life” examples of these kinds of tweets.  I’ll list a couple from the blog post here:

“True confession but I’m in one of those towns where I scratch my head and say ‘I would die if I had to live here.’”

That tweet was authored by a Ketchum staffer who was in Memphis for a meeting with Ketchum client FedEx.  According to the report, the client spotted the tweet and didn’t like it.  The agency had to apologize.

As an aside, during my time at Ketchum, I made that trip weekly for a period of time and really liked the people and the town.  Still, if you ever find yourself in town you don’t like, you have to expect you’ll offend your hosts if you tweet about it.

“I find it ironic that Detroit is known as the #motorcity and yet no one here knows how to f*** drive.”

The originator of that tweet was a social media manager from an agency that worked for Chrysler.  He actually tweeted that by mistake, not from his personal Twitter account, but rather from the official Chrysler Twitter page. 

Two lessons here.  If you manage more than one account, keep them straight.  And second, it’s just not a good idea to slam your host city where your client lives (once again).

This one is my favorite.  It’s from a Secret Service employee: “Had to monitor Fox for a story.  Cant’. Deal. With. The. Blathering.” 

First off, according to the blog post, Fox News “had a field day” with that.  The Secret Service had to apologize.  Not sure what happened to the no-longer-secret-Secret-Service-agent.

And that brings me to the master lesson of all these examples.  There are some people who should never tweet.  There are some things that should never be tweeted.  And there are some times when we should never tweet.

I read some of the comments after the blog and the one that stuck out for me was the one that asked why anyone with the word “Secret” in the name of his or her employer would even think of going public with his gripes on Twitter.

I’d take it a step further.  Think of all social media, including Twitter, as your own personal Super Bowl commercial.  Once you tweet the most innocent of things, it has access to millions of people.  Sure, most may not see it, but if it’s precisely stupid enough, it could rival a Super Bowl ad in terms of readership.

So, if you are in a job where it wouldn’t be a good idea to do a Super Bowl ad about it, you may want to avoid Twitter and other social media altogether.  If that’s too difficult, consider a career change. 

And if you feel it would be good to get the kind of visibility a Super Bowl ad would create, then put the same amount of care and caution into the content of your Tweet.  Think of the worst thing that can happen before you click on that blue “Tweet” button.  If you hesitate in any way, delete the tweet.  Chances are you made the right choice. 

Keep in mind, all attempts at humor are just that - attempts.  They often fail, sometimes to disastrous results.  Plus, you weren’t going to win a Pulitzer Prize for your opinion of the local dinner fare anyway.