Photo credit: gwilmore

If you’re baffled by the jargon from the 2,300-page Dodd-Frank financial law or the Medicaid and Medicare reforms, don’t worry … so are federal judges. A recent Wall Street Journal article discussed how legal authorities across the country are lashing out against poorly written, “tortuous” legal texts. From sentences that take two paragraphs to reach the first period … to the overuse of footnotes … to content that requires a thesaurus word hunt, the judges criticize the incoherency of these documents.

Some legal experts say that we live in a complex world and this is just par for the course.  I agree, but there’s a difference between tackling difficult subject matter and abusing words to escape being understood.

Author William Zinsser of the book On Writing Well said that “clutter is the disease of American writing” and verbal camouflage is a national epidemic. Lawmakers and lobbyists should really read his stuff.

As public relations professionals, we strive for clarity in language to help clients benefit from clear messaging. But I don’t live in a bubble. I know that language is abused by many people (including some people in the PR industry).

One of my favorite quotes about language is by author and research fellow at MIT Sloan School’s Center for Digital Business Michael Schrage:

“Let’s never ever forget that language has evolved as much as a medium for ambiguity and misdirection as a vehicle for clarity and explicitness.”

I applaud these judges for standing up for our laws and our language. What’s your ruling?

Doreen Overstreet does not like to read the tax code and commends those who try.

Kenneth Gronbach, a noted demographer and author of the book “The Age Curve,” recently spoke at PRSA Orlando about trends in demographics and how changes in our population translate into value for your business.

He shared an interesting example about work he did with a motorcycle maker in 1979 relating to demographics. Business was booming for them and all of sudden … splat! Sales bottomed out – dropping 80 percent over the next five years, to be exact. The product hadn’t changed, advertising and other communication was steady and customers were happy with the product. So, what happened to cause such a dramatic dip in sales?

Here’s a question: Who buys fast, flashy motorcycles? Men ages 16-24. When the now 78.2 million Baby Boomers were in that age range, motorcycle sales were sky high. But once these men approached their mid- to late-twenties (and “sold their bike to buy a ring,” claims Gronbach), the motorcycle market was left with a tremendous void that Generation X just could not fill.

As communicators, we’re always looking for the next trend. Gronbach’s advice is to get in front of the market that’s coming – not the one that’s shrinking away from you. Take a look for yourself and think about the industries you or your clients are in. What does this mean for you?

At Costa DeVault, it’s no secret that we are big fans of Peter Shankman’s Help a Reporter Out (HARO). Dubbed the “largest source repository in the world,” HARO sends out approximately 210 media opportunities daily. For down-to-the-wire deadlines, it’s a journalist’s best friend … and a PR professional’s dream. But, with more than 120,800 active sources receiving the thrice-daily email, competition can be stiff for that coveted placement.

When you find a fitting query, having the perfect resource is just half the battle. The following are a few of our favorite HARO tips that we’ve learned from personal experience:

• Keep it short. When you mix a tight deadline with a high volume of replies, multiple paragraphs of text – while relevant and informative – might be overlooked in favor of short and to-the-point bullets. (In fact, People Magazine’s Steve Helling is a big advocate of the 250-word pitch.)

• Provide all the information. Some of the most coveted queries request particular information. Often times you’ll be asked to include common details, like the name of the source, company name and contact information. But sometimes, the reporter might want even more information – like a headshot, the source’s age or highly specific quotes and comments. When compared to another expert resource, if your email lacks any of the requested information, it might be the difference between being included and being ignored.

• Subject lines are valuable. Use them wisely. Our friends at HARO automatically add “New Pitch –” to your email’s subject line (at least when you reply to an auto-generated HARO email, like “queryxyz@”). Don’t waste valuable subject line real estate by including something similar – instead, get right to the point.

• Omit bold text to avoid “screaming.” In the past, I’ve used bold text to call out specific statistics and relevant information when responding to a HARO query. Sounds like a smart idea, right? When a reporter replied to me recently, they included my original pitch and I was surprised to see that my “courtesy” bolding had actually translated into SCARY CAPITALIZATION. Eek! Often times, people read capitalization as screaming … which is definitely not something I want to portray to a reporter.

For more best practices – from Peter, himself – visit Shankman.com. Please share your own favorite tips in the comment section below.

If you’re looking for good public relations case studies, just open a history book. Recently, Gary McKechnie, author of USA 101: A Guide to America’s Iconic Places, Events and Festivals, spoke at an event for one of our clients. He gave an excellent historical example of a phenomenal fund-raising effort.

Most people know that the French built and funded the Statue of Liberty. However, many forget that America was tasked with raising money for its pedestal. And it cost a lot – almost as much as the statue itself. Traditional fund-raising campaign strategies to erect the statue faltered. After all, it’s hard to get excited about this call to action:

Raise money for

The Statue of Liberty’s

pedestal fund

Enter Hungarian immigrant Joseph Pulitzer, successful journalist and owner of the New York World newspaper. In an editorial, he chastised the wealthy for not getting behind the project. He also challenged the middle class to raise money, because he proclaimed this was America’s statue – not just a rich man’s gift. In a clever PR move, he promised to publish the name of any contributor to the fund-raising campaign.

Regardless of whether you were an aristocrat who donated $500 to the cause, or a paperboy who donated five cents, your name was printed in the paper – in equal point size.

The result? 120,000 people contributed a little more than $100,000. It brought the country together to show that Lady Liberty wasn’t a “New York statue,” but an American icon. As an ROI side note: It also increased Pulitzer’s newspaper circulation by 50,000.

The successful approach of bringing small and large donations together for a common cause rings true today. Just look at the Haiti text messaging effort, which has already raised more than $800,000, and the Obama fund-raising campaign model. History repeats itself.

Photo credit: Itinerant_wanderer

Toyota has spent decades, not to mention billions of dollars, spreading the message that their vehicles are superior – in safety, style and value. The recent PR debacle facing the automaker goes to show the vulnerability of a brand. Years of maintaining a solid reputation can be shattered in less than 24 hours.

Consumer confidence in Toyota is definitely at a pivotal point. First, the floor mats. Next the sticky accelerators – linked to 19 deaths. Then, with the promise of a “fix” on the horizon, Toyota announced last week that there is a problem with the Prius’s brake system. Where does it end?

Some think that the Toyota brand is done – that they should throw in the towel and start anew. After the contamination issue in 1982, Johnson & Johnson had to repair the Tylenol brand, but no need to scrap it all together. Neither did Firestone or Exxon after their respective catastrophes. Toyota’s major problem, aside from the obvious engineering flaw, in my opinion is the mixed messages being disseminated, further fueling consumer anxiety. Drive. . .Don’t drive. . .It’s electrical. . .It’s mechanical. . .We know. . . We don’t know. . . Get your message straight! This lack of clarity is just further aggravating an already fragile situation.

To a certain extent, loyal patrons are forgiving and would be willing to trust Toyota again. But when is enough, finally enough? As a Camry driver myself, I am waiting (and waiting. . .and waiting) to see if the company can pull a U-turn and boost my confidence or if the crisis will continue to go down hill.

If you were in the driver’s seat of Toyota’s messaging during this fiasco, would you have done anything differently?

Photo credit: Robert Vinet

Very rarely does an ad generate editorial media coverage. Generally, advertising is confined to its paid space – until the ad itself becomes the news. This is what’s happened for one controversial Super Bowl commercial: gay dating site ManCrunch.com. The ad depicts two men kissing and was denied by CBS.

Since the rejection, the company has received an enormous amount of publicity. Stories in news outlets, blogs, television and radio have created discussions in numerous public forums. This just adds value to the nearly $3 million price tag CBS is charging for a 30-second spot.

But why the uproar? Controversial subject matter always strikes a chord and advocates on both sides of an issue will make their voices heard. In fact, it was reported that CBS believed ManCrunch submitted an ad they knew would be rejected in an effort to generate free publicity. ManCruch denies the accusation.

And while ManCrunch is receiving a fair amount of free publicity, are they better off? As of today, the ManCrunch commercial on YouTube.com has been viewed more than 400,000 times. Last year, Wikipedia reported that the Super Bowl was watched by 93.2 million people. Would the aired ManCrunch television commercial create the same level of conversation? Would the controversy have as much value without social media?

Think print will ever make a come back?

I don’t know what it is about print publications, but I love them. I love spreading newspapers out over my office desk or dining room table on Sunday mornings. I love dog-earing magazines with good exercise ideas or ripping new recipes out of my favorite cooking publication.

This got me thinking …online media is in…but so is “retro,” right? If that’s the case, how long until print becomes retro and explodes again? Will it ever? Which publications will survive long enough to find out?

Photo credit: bravenewtraveler