Is this to be the case for Traditional Media channels?
The work of those in public relations is described as “The planned persuasion of people to behave in ways that further its sponsors objectives…” So said Trevor Morris and Simon Goldsworthy in their book, PR – A Persuasive Industry?: Spin, Public Relations and the Shaping of the Modern Media. In the past this work was carried out utilizing traditional media channels, principally communicating through the use of mass media. However in recent years, trust in the media has begun to decline. Last year Edelman’s Trust Barometer (2009, p.5) found that the UK had the lowest level of public confidence in its media out of the twenty countries surveyed. So, with members of the public questioning the reliability of what they read in the print media and what is reported on television, this situation has had an adverse effect on the value which practitioners place on the usefulness of traditional channels. “In the age of mass media, the press was able to define the sphere of legitimate debate with relative ease because the people on the receiving end were atomised but connected ‘up’ to Big Media, but not across to each other, and now that authority is eroding”. (Professor Jay Rosen, 2009)

While Q2 2010 has shown some signs of improvement (KPMG Survey 2010), a Media Outlook report has noted that media firms are remaining cautious and are not expecting to see a speedy recovery (Media Outlook Q4, Barclays, 2010). In general the move away from paid traditional, or mainstream media, continues to accelerate as more and more people switch to the Internet for their daily information and entertainment. With regards to print media, newspapers have recorded an overall decline in readership of 6.4% year on year (MediaTel, 2010). While the BARB (2009) (Broadcast Audience Media Board) table below demonstrates the decline in television viewing, radio is proving to be more resilient. However, while the number of listeners has grown over the last decade, the amount of time people listen continues to fall (RAJAR, 2010).

The primary reason for the overall decline has been the growth and development of various social media platforms. The 21st century consumer is no longer content with the traditional mass media channels, rather he/she seeks a two-way interaction. In a recent interview in The Independent, the former head of BBC News, and now Edelman’s Chief Content Officer, Richard Sambrook (2010) said, “Big companies are going directly to the consumer to engage with them now, rather than through display or spot ads and the traditional means of trying to reach consumers. You can’t just be out there shouting at people about your brand, you’ve got to engage with them.” Communicating through traditional media allows for very limited engagement with the party receiving the message, and this is something which can cause frustration amongst the recipients of that message. In order for Public Relations practitioners to meet their client’s objectives, they have had to interact more with their audience and gain a better understanding as to whom they are dealing with in order to achieve results. In his book, Putting the Public Back in Public Relations, Brian Solis (2009) wrote, “For too long, PR operated behind the curtain, hurling over news bits in waves instead of focusing on individual conversations. Social media and user-generated influence has changed the very foundations on which PR is built, forcing communications professionals to step from behind the curtain to engage with the people they’re trying to reach.” (p.70).

We can say with certainty that the use of traditional mass media will never be as effective or as widespread as it once was, since customers have become more accustomed to the freedoms offered by social media and the ability to provide feedback and make their opinions felt. However, while this may be generally accepted, traditional media tools can still be very effective in communicating with ones target group, hence many practitioners and clients still value them highly. In the PRSA 2009 Digital Readiness Report: Essential Online Public Relations and Marketing Skills, it was found that traditional media is still a vital tool for practitioners with 82% of organizations looking for new employees skilled in the so-called old-fashioned media (Shwartzman et al., 2009). Furthermore, although overall trust in the media sector has fallen, it found that “In a volatile year, it seems that an informed public values guidance from credentialed experts” (Edelman’s Trust Barometer 2010). For this reason, during the 2010 UK General Election – the first in which social networking played a significant part – traditional media (mainly television) was seen to have played a more influential role in the public’s decision making (Rory Cellan-Jones, 2010). It is clear that traditional media has lost its monopoly, particularly with consumer generated content playing an increasingly important role in the distribution of news and information, but nevertheless it still has a critical part to play within the PR industry. In a recent interview with Richard Ellis (2010), Head of Communications for the PRCA, he said, “The Sunday Times, The Financial Times, the broadsheets and the Tabloids have always been the thing. They remain the prestige coverage that you put at the top of your press cuttings when you show the CEO or the head of communications what you have successfully delivered”. Whether this is more about prestige or good coverage is not clear however, but evidently those in the field continue to find old media to be of value to them and their organisations.

It should be noted that if it is to remain of value in the future, it is certain that traditional media as we know it will need to change and adapt in order to better meet the needs of the customer (Lloyd Gofton, 2010).

Steve Ballmer (2010), Microsoft Chief Executive has said, “All content consumed will be digital, we can [only] debate if that may be in one, two, five or 10 years… Static content won’t cut it”. In recent years there has been a great deal of emphasis placed on the importance of social media and the wide variety of communication channels it has made available. Coupled with this, there has been a decline in the consumption rates of traditional media, principally newsprint. There is now a great deal of debate amongst many within the PR industry as to the value of either traditional or social media. In a recent interview in PR Week, Ian Monk (2010) is quoted as saying, “Blogging and social media have rightly become an important element of PR campaigns. But because of the unedited, unbranded, and often anonymous nature of the new media forums, their value is at best uncertain”. James Warren (2010), of Weber Shandwick, believes the decline in influence of traditional media is being overstated by some within the industry. “Young consumers don’t read traditional media, right? Wrong. Exactly half of UK consumers under the age of 35 believe magazines and newspapers to be influential. The myth that (traditional) media is not the best way to reach young adults in the UK must be destroyed.”
Given the state of flux in the industry it is difficult to know the direction in which it is going. As a practitioner, the ability to land a positive story in a print publication for ones client was always seen as an achievement and considered a dark art, and those with the ability to do so were valued highly, and consequently traditional media was seen as being of central importance to the industry. However, today print readership is on the decline and with most mainstream print media now producing online versions, this poses the question, is it now seen as being of less importance? “Access to the press and the public is no longer limited to the rich and powerful. Anyone with something to promote or criticize can set up a website to get their message across.” (Richard Bailey, 2009). And if this is the case, this will lead to uncertainty amongst practitioners as to what their role will be in the future. Hence the reason as to why some disagree with the views of social media experts who argue that communication in the near future will mainly be carried out through online platforms. On the other hand, it is necessary to note that although there is no doubt that social media will continue to develop and grow over the coming years, people such as Steve Ballmer and many other experts may take a biased stance when it comes to new media developments.

Max Clifford has helped to derail a Government, he acts as a protective barrier between front-page headlines and his high profile clients, and on countless occasions he has made untalented individuals household names.

I have been looking for a clip of Max Clifford being interviewed by Pat Kenny a few years back on the Irish talk show, The Late Late Show, but unfortunately I can’t seem to find it. One statement which the PR guru makes epitomizes everything about him and the powers which he possesses over the media. The interview took place shortly after the David Beckham – Rebecca Loos ‘affair’, and Max was asked how he would have handled the situation had Beckham sought his help before the news broke. In a brash and assured tone he replied by saying that quite simply, we would never have found out about it.

Max Clifford & Rebecca Loos

“Max Clifford is a deeply controversial figure but there can be little doubt that as a man who decides what goes into newspapers and what stays out of newspapers, he is one of the most powerful men in British society today”. (http://www.unoseis.com/)

The Power of PR – The Agency

In the late 1970’s Saatchi and Saatchi was hired by the Conservative party to handle their election campaign. Tim Bell was the firms Managing Director and became Margaret Thatcher’s personal spin-doctor. The agency played a pivotal role in the election, following which Thatcher was named Prime Minister…Maybe David Cameron believes the same can happen to him.

“Investors, customers and other stakeholders want companies to address social and environmental concerns. Organizations are beginning to recognize that they should develop strategies to meet these needs while remaining profitable. At the same time, many of the most effective non-governmental organizations (NGOs) recognize that they can achieve widespread and lasting change by harnessing the power of the market. To achieve these goals, companies and NGOs are finding ways to work together”. – Global Environmental Management Initiative (GEMI) and Environmental Defense Fund.

In the past, Nike has been heavily criticized over their labour practices and has at times appeared totally unconcerned about acting in a socially responsible manner. In 1996, CEO Phil Knight famously told Michael Moore during an interview for the film The Big One, that if he (Moore) was willing to invest in and build a factory in the U.S. that could match the price of footwear made overseas, Nike would consider buying shoes from him.

However, more recently they have taken steps to improve their image by getting involved in different CSR activities, which will act as a very effective means of creating positive PR. Last year they launched (Nike) Red, in which they designed among other things, red laces, worn by many of their high profile sponsors, carrying the message ‘Lace Up. Save Lives’.  The campaign was set up to fight AIDS in Africa, with 100% of the profits going to the Global Fund and to Nike football-based programs. Leo Sandino-Taylor, Nike UK Head of PR & Communications said, “With the continued support of our athletes and clubs, we can play a major role in amplifying this important issue”.

Without question activities such as this has helped Nike (the business not the brand) to regain some of the credibility and trust which it has lost during the mid-nineties, whilst at the same time making a real difference to those in need.

I attended a debate the other week, looking at the role of women in Public Relations. The statement put to the panel was “Women will always work in PR but will never run it.”

I feel that one of the most difficult obstacles which women face in climbing the corporate ladder is the role of informal networking in the organization. “The old boys’ network is still alive and kicking, with a new form of informal male bonding reinforcing the glass ceiling against women” (Maxine Firth, The Independent). In the majority of cases it is not intentionally set up to do so, however it does prevent women and minorities from being truly successful in the business world, as they are not privy to as many opportunities. The old boys clubs tend to meet outside of office hours, building relationships on the golf course, at exclusive clubs, through private alumni’s and social clubs to name but a few. Those who do not belong to these elite circles of influence miss out on many career opportunities.

In an attempt to retain and motivate female employees, companies like American Express, GE, Johnson & Johnson and Time Warner are developing women’s networks that build skills, contacts and confidence. They provide an infrastructure within which women can earn recognition, and display their own talents.

“He who wants to persuade should put his trust not in the right argument, but in the right word. The power of sound has always been greater than the power of sense.” —Joseph Conrad, (Lord Jim, 1900. www.alternativereel.com)

Politics has become further mediatised as a form of public relations democracy has developed. The documentary War Spin (wrote about this documentary a few months ago) depicted the micro-managed Iraq war being fought on two fronts, one on the battlefield and one in our living rooms. We first became aware of this development with the US reporting of the Vietnam War in the 60’s and since then it has become common practice throughout the world.

Tony Blair and George Bush claimed that the war on Iraq was a war on terror and that Saddam Hussein was then still producing weapons of mass destruction. The Prime Minister said in 2002 that “the assessed intelligent has established beyond doubt…that he (Saddam Hussein) continues in his efforts to develop nuclear weapons”. (www.labouragainstthewar.org.uk). We now know, that the arguments justifying the government’s decision to go to war were based on deception. In a three-month intensive inspection of Iraq by the UN no weapons of mass destruction (WMD) were discovered.

The fall out from the spin relating to the Iraq war in particular has had a contagious effect tainting statements made by government officials. A skeptical public does not make for a vibrant democracy. Just last year, the Royal College of Physicians carried out a Trust in Professions’ survey and discovered that 82% of those questioned believe that politicians do not tell the truth. Out of all professions surveyed, they are the most mistrusted, even more so than last year’s least-trusted sector, journalists.

All democratically elected governments constantly claim to be open and transparent in their dealings with the public. However, there is always a temptation to conceal some unfavourable facts when it suits the government’s point of view. Government spokesmen/women are always very quick to come forward with a good news story however most people believe that when it comes to a bad news item we end up receiving selectively released information.

For example, Jo Moore, the former press secretary of Stephen Byers, sent a memo on the day of the 9/11 attacks, realizing that the public’s attention was else where, she suggested that it would be a good time to “bury” some controversial stories. This type of practice makes for a very cynical public.

It is widely agreed that a system needs to be put in place which ensures full accountability for all those involved, with a range of sanctions to deter any failings. To ensure our democratic system remains vibrant and relevant to our needs, the public must have full confidence that their elected officials will always act with the public’s interest in mind. Self-regulation has clearly failed us in the recent past and is continuing to do so.

There are almost seventy million people in the world who call themselves Irish or are of Irish heritage. The cycle of emigration, which is deep set in the nation’s psyche, has taken hold once more. Between 2008 and 2009 over 100,000 people have left, with the figure expected to increase further this year. Over the coming years, people will continue to leave the country because of the limited job prospects available, and will seek opportunities elsewhere.

Emigration carries with it a very difficult challenge, as we lose the intimate contact with family and friends whom we take for granted at home. The Irish abroad have traditionally sought out one another, in an effort to recreate the communities that we were accustomed to. At no time is this more evident than each year on the 17^th of March, St. Patrick’s Day. We come together with our host communities, and paint the world green as are landmarks lit up.

Although it is amazing to see the enthusiasm people have on Patrick’s Day, and the masses who get involved, it is important to enhance this community spirit even further. This is what the video is trying to get across, it illustrates the celebrations taking place in different cities throughout the world. It shows us coming together as a global community, and the message is that it should not take place just once every year.

I believe the answer is yes. The majority of practitioners go about their business in an ethical manner, however, a minority will always ensure that the question of whether there are any ethics in PR will continue to be asked.

“The fact that corporations and governments feel compelled to spend billions of dollars every year manipulating the public is a perverse tribute to human nature and our own moral values. The public relations industry has stolen our dreams, and returned them to us packaged as illusions.” (Toxic Sludge Is Good for You! Lies, Damn Lies and the Public Relations Industry, by John C. Stauber and Sheldon Rampton).

Of course there are unethical practitioners, as there are in every other industry. There are those within the PR field who have done little to improve the public’s perceptions, and only enhance the view that black PR, that is, spin and manipulation, are an entirely acceptable means of communication. ‘Spin doctoring’ is a “ package of trickery, economies with the truth, manipulation of public credulity, bullying of journalists and favouritism” (Melanie Philips), and is a term commonly used to describe the work of those in the industry. Unfortunately, because of recent experience in the lead up to the Iraq war, among other cases, many have painted the whole industry with the same brush.

“PR is the planned persuasion of people to behave in ways that further its sponsor’s objectives. It works primarily through the use of media relations and other forms of third party endorsements.” (Trevor Morris).

Some methods used are unethical and there will always be individuals who do not follow the generally acceptable codes of practice. Sadly, journalists among others, may not be able to, or want to, separate the bad apple from the rest of the bunch, making it very difficult to shake off the tarnished image caused by the minority. In the final analysis, practitioners are paid to convince the consumer to think in a particular way, be it to improve brand image, increase sales or whatever. Thus the industry will always be looked upon with a certain degree of scepticism by the public.

“Iconic figures from the world of sport or entertainment attract the kind of devotion once reserved for saints or prophets. Celebrities such as Tiger Woods, David Beckham and P.Diddy not only endorse brands, but are brands themselves with a market value most companies can only dream of.” Matt Haig, Brand Royalty.

Before the recent damaging revelations, Woods was seen as a true sporting professional who transcends the sport itself, and a perfect public relations tool to promote a brand. He has the ability to create increased media coverage and offer the brand credibility and recognition. “I thank him all the time for it because he deserves it, not just for the purses but the interest in the game of golf… Because that leads to increased revenue opportunities off the course, companies that wouldn’t be interested in golf, he’s helped bring to the game. So it’s been beneficial for every player out here, myself included.” So says Phil Mickelson. Today the shamed golfer is being ridiculed in the press, with many doubting the once idolized star’s ability to shake off this level of negative publicity. Clearly many of his sponsors also feel his brand appeal is no longer what it once was.

There are those however, who would also feel that some organizations were hasty in their decision to drop Woods from their list of sponsors. Yes, his image has been badly tarnished but it has not reached a point from which it cannot be recovered. There are a number of reasons which would support the fact that given time Tiger Woods can make a full recovery, and this is why Nike have kept faith in one of their most prized assets.

The Brand

Today anyone can be a celebrity, for example by simply appearing on Big Brother or X-Factor and you have a sure fire way of receiving media coverage for a few months. There is a big difference, however, between being a celebrity and being a superstar. In the sporting world, there are a handful who will really be remembered for being the best at what they did. Muhammad Ali, Michael Jordan, Babe Ruth, Pele and yes, Tiger Woods, would make the grade of the all time greats in their respective sporting fields. It is for this reason, that like Jordan, Woods is regarded as more than a player. With the announcement “Hello world” Tiger Woods burst onto the professional golf scene in 1996 and was quickly recognized as being more than just an outstanding talent, but a brand, and he has capitalized on this. Since signing his first deal with Nike, he has helped to break new grounds for their Nike Golf range as well as further enhancing the popularity of the sport. “He’s giving the game a broader appeal, especially from the ethnic and race perspective. I think he’ll change the game globally. That may be his finest accomplishment.” PGA Commissioner Tim Finchem. The impact Woods has had on the game can be seen anytime he does not partake in a competition. The televised viewing rates fall dramatically, “Without Woods, televised tournaments are like a major motion picture without a star’s name above the title — rarely do people go to see the flick,” said Bill Carroll, of Katz TV Group. Recent media figures from the States have found that there is a drop of around 50% in viewers when Woods is not playing in a tournament. This is because he is immediately recognizable to the golfer and non-golfer alike. The Tiger Woods brand is bigger than the game and he is recognized globally. Prior to his recent difficulties his image was used to promote products and services such as EA Sports, PepsiCo, Gillette and Accenture among others – all global companies.

Impatiently waiting

It is fair to say that the general public did not expect to discover the world number 1 golfer to be a serial adulterer and now many have lost a great deal of respect for him. He was portrayed as a true professional, a loving family man, he had a clean-cut image, and he was a scandal free sports star. Woods was admired the world over, kids looked up to him, men wanted to be like him and women wanted to be with him (and apparently many succeeded).

After stepping away from the limelight for a few months, he held a conference in February to apologize to his family, friends, colleagues and supporters for his self described irresponsible and selfish behavior. While his emotional apology was largely well received, as Woods is idolized for his golfing ability, the main talking point after the conference was not his apology but the fact that he did not say when he will he return to game. Until that day comes, we will wait in anticipation, and when it does, the crowds will be behind him, just like they always were.

He is not the first and will not be the last

Unfortunately, infidelity and other crisis management issues are seen as being almost part of the package deal that comes with a celebrity endorsement. High profile sport stars such as Kobe Bryant and David Beckham have admitted to being unfaithful in the past, and were subject to heavy criticism by the press and the public for doing so. Many believed they too had ruined their brand image. However, Bryant and Beckham were able to move beyond it and continue to have incredible success, both on and off the field. Given time, Woods’ situation will not be any different. They are able to do so because public outrage eventually fades, the press gets wind of a new story and the next celebrity crisis makes the front pages. This is how it usually goes, except in the case of John Terry. All four men were married with children when news broke about their philandering ways, yet unlike the others, Terry and his PR team will have far more difficulty in shaking off the negative press coverage. While cheating under any circumstance is perceived badly in the eyes of the public, Terry took it a step further by ignoring the sacred code amongst men. The main criticism levied at the former England captain is not that he betrayed his wife, but that he betrayed his friend, and in the eyes of the media and the general public (especially males), that is an act which is far more difficult to forgive.

Nike’s view of the situation

It would appear that Nike has taken the view that time heals all things and that pretty soon this controversy will be consigned to the dustbin of history. Having said that his professional advisors have gone to great lengths in preparing Woods for his comeback. The press conference at which he made a comprehensive public apology was clearly designed to pave the way for his return to the game. They obviously feel that by coming out with his hands up, Woods will get a more sympathetic hearing from the public. This is important because when he comes back he needs to focus on his game, as this matter will be very quickly forgotten when and if he wins his next tournament. Luckily however, if Woods does revert back to his old ways, there is an app for that, called Tiger Text. It is a device which allows the sender of a text to delete the message once the recipient has read it.

In deciding to stick with Woods, Nike executives will be privately hoping for two things. Firstly, they will not want any further damaging revelations. Secondly, they will be hoping that Woods ends his self imposed hiatus from golf in the very near future, and gets back to doing what he does best, that is being the best golfer of his generation.  He has made a start on the restoration of his image, and assuming he has not lost his swing or his hunger for the game, he should soon get back to his winning ways and repay Nike for its support for him during this difficult period. Of course only time will tell but many feel if anyone can make a successful comeback, it is Tiger Woods.



Ryanair’s advertising and public statements are often deliberately controversial in order to generate additional free publicity for the airline. In the past CEO, Michael O’Leary, has spoken about proposed measures to reduce overheads further, for example, eliminating two toilets to add six more seats on their aeroplanes, redesigning the seating layout to allow for standing room at the back, charging extra for overweight passengers, demanding passengers carry their checked-in luggage to the plane, and charging for the use of the toilets.

One of Ryanair’s most controversial publicity stunts involved the French President and his partner. In 2008 they released an advertisement in the French newspaper Le Parisien featuring Nicholas Sarkozy and Carla Bruni. At the time they were not yet married but there was a lot of media speculation that the pair were soon going to be. The picture showed the couple sitting happily together, with a caption next to Ms. Bruni, which said, “With Ryanair, my whole family can come to my wedding”, referring to the 100,000 cut-price fares the airline was offering. As expected, the French President and his partner were less then pleased to be part of yet another Ryanair publicity stunt and sued the airline.

This sort of publicity is a PR nightmare for most organisations, where crisis management would immediately be put into place, however Ryanair are not like most organisations. They seem to have a policy that says all publicity is good publicity. Ryanair did apologize for using the couple’s image without their consent, but insisted it meant no offence, – “It was a humorous comment on a matter of great public interest,” they said. Ryanair offered to donate €5,000 to any charity of Mr. Sarkozy’s choice, but he declined and the couple proceeded to bring the case to court. Former model Carla Bruni was seeking €500,000 compensation, while Mr. Sarkozy sought a symbolic €1 in damages. The high profile couple won the case, however, the court in Paris awarded Ms Bruni only €60,000, a fraction of the sum she had sought. Mr. Sarkozy was given the symbolic  €1 he had claimed for himself.

The case created worldwide media coverage, with every newspaper from the Times to the Sydney Herald covering the story. By being controversial the Ryanair public relations team have continually ensured that the resultant interest generated by their unorthodox promotional methods achieve column inches far in excess of the original advertising spend. This is a method they have successfully used time and again.

After the case Ryanair said “In the light of the extraordinary worldwide publicity generated by this single advert, we have instructed our lawyers to write to President Sarkozy’s office, offering to make a similar €60,000 payment to any French charity of the President choice.” The company appears to enjoy the extra free publicity generated and its business does not seem to be adversely effected by the inevitable legal conflicts which arise from its controversial promotion techniques. It would be an interesting experience to attend the monthly brainstorming sessions in the Ryanair Public Relations department. 

The airline offers cheap flights and by often using quite controversial means, they let the customer know about it. This has worked effectively for them, because as O’Leary has been quoted as saying, “The European consumer would crawl naked over broken glass to get low fares.”