Owning It
Remember when Edelman screwed up and I called ‘em on it? Remember when Racepoint screwed up and I called ‘em on it? During that more recent episode, I predicted that we’d screw up at some point, too, and, “when (not if) that happens, all I can promise is that I’ll acknowledge it here, ASAP, and share the lessons learned.”
Welcome to my “we screwed up” post! It’s even got a screencap!
SHIFT was one of 5 other firms outed for some blogger relations gaffes, in Marshall Kirkpatrick’s blog. Here was our entry:
(I’ve redacted Margaret’s name cuz I see no reason to mess with what is assuredly a bright career in PR. It’s a rare and terrible thing to be called out publicly like this, especially when you’re a twenty-something who simply messed up while trying to do the right thing. Just one more peril we face as we engage in blogger relations.)
Margaret’s Mistake: Her pitch is too vague. There’s no value-add to Marshall, no relevant personalization, no news. Forget about Facebook, forget about blogger relations: this is PR 101. I’m owning and will fix it.
That doesn’t mean we won’t screw up again. Despite all the official and unofficial training, we will screw up again – it’s the nature of the beast. We’ve got 100 folks now, and many more queued up in the hiring process… as we get bigger, it will be harder & harder to ensure 100% awesomeness. (But 100% awesomeness is the goal.)
By the way, and for what it’s worth (not much), I think Marshall’s being mean with that FB response. For a kid just getting started, the dripping sarcasm in his reply might have been lost. He was ostensibly being “nice” to Margaret in his FB post; he’s egged her on, despite intending to call her out on her lackluster pitch.
Isn’t that how the mean popular kids in every-teen-movie-ever-made tend to act? I’m cool with learning lessons from constructive criticism — and I know Margaret will paste a smile on her face and soldier on — but let’s keep it all constructive, eh? (And yes, sure, I am being defensive on behalf of a valued staffer.)
Have at it in the Comments. I’m braced for it.
Subscribe by Email
Maybe I’m just too old school, but it really upsets me that bloggers (and some reporters) do this. Feedback is great, but it could be done privately. It’s an abuse of power to call people out by name (and in Margaret’s case, face). Would those examples be just as compelling without the specific details? Yes. He could even have left it with the agency and client (not the person’s name). Once you name people (first and last), the intent is public humiliation not a learning experience. Just my opinion.
Todd,
I had an internal joke with my team that they weren’t truly initiated into the group until they had their first public “outing” or gaffe. It happens, and provided it’s not unethical (bad pitch vs. paying bloggers w/o transparency), what’s important is learning from it.
Dave
I hate to admit I follow your blog but I read Marshall’s article last night, which led me here today.
Your transparency is great – everyone from reporters to PR reps to analysts – are learning new lessons every day about social media and your shared insights are very interesting. I find it admirable to put yourself out there – I have yet to see Outcast, Weber, Bite or the others comment, let alone blog about their own lessons learned – so kudos to you both, Todd and Margaret.
Unfortunately, blogger relations is even more time consuming to “get stuff right” and “personalize.” Most clients don’t pay more for social media relations and management – they just lump it all into media relations – so as an industry we are forced to work fast and furious. Everyone in social media is working this way but PR agencies have the added burden of executing in that manner for multiple companies at one time. This can lead to mistakes like Margaret’s.
Of course this wasn’t only about social media – it was about better PR … I’m sure the workload, combined with her level of experience, were probably key factors in this – but it could happen to any of us.
Hang in there, Margaret. Maybe this will just make you famous!
I really don’t think Marshall’s response was all that mean, nor do I think he intended to be mean. I know Marshall pretty well and there isn’t a mean bone in his body. Look at the emoticon. He is trying to be constructive and a bit cheeky.
Thanks again, all.
Christine – it’s ok to own up to being a reader; you’re in my feedreader too.
Cathy – I think the lesson here is that the old rules don’t apply – including the old “courtesies.” Pitch a blogger, be prepared for the consequences – including the one we’ve experienced today.
Nat – I don’t know about Marshall’s intentions. I think he could have made his points without using specific people’s names (and photos). It’s a big, weird, wired world and that stuff will be on Google 4ever. Not sure that that sort of punishment fit the “crime.” His OTHER points, his lessons, were well received though.
Hi all, interesting discussion here. I do apologize for any excessive meanness – let’s be honest, it’s too easy to be mean when you’re frustrated with people who are just names and avatars to you. That said, I did try to offer some positive input in the post, etc etc. Margaret has left a very thoughtful comment in response to my post. I hope I can be a helpful participant in these discussions. I will try not to be that nasty more than once a year, so cross your fingers, we’ll all be spared for another 12 months. Thanks, by the way, to all the PR people who added me as a friend in twitter after this (including Todd) I hope we’ll be able to get to know each other better there. If you’re not familiar with the value of Twitter, see my recent post on marshallk.com titled “twitter is paying my rent.”
best to all,
Marshall
Marshall, you made some great suggestions in the post. I am sure you *were* frustrated.
(But if you think it can be bad now, check out my more recent post on MyPRGenie. Services like THAT are gonna really suck for writers like you.)
BTW – thanks VERY much for stopping by to weigh in. (Margaret is fine, btw.)
I’m sure we can all be friends. …Maybe even “actual” friends, not “just” FB friends.
Todd,
I agree with some of the other posters here. This is relatively minor. It’s a mistake, it’s unfortunate and something you don’t like, but it was a generic pitch from someone relatively junior. It wasn’t deception, bribery, impersonation., etc.,
While there are issues with that, compared to the other gaffes, it isn’t in the same ballpark (kinda like the Rockies last night).
Hi Todd:
Don’t worry — Racepoint will have your back on this one…
I actually don’t think you have much to apologize for here. Not every “pitch” is going to a gold nugget.
We’re still feeling our way through digital media relations and I discuss some initial thoughts on PR/media relations on our blog here:
http://racetalk.wordpress.com/2007/10/16/press-20/
I think journalists and bloggers need to take some responsibility and start to use some proper decorum. Is it right to publish an email pitch? Isn’t that a form of private communication? I’m not sure of what the right answer is — but it is a question worth considering.
So I’m still not sure what the purpose of Marshall’s post is. What value is he supplying to his readers? What’s the news here — that PR people sometimes send out bad pitches? I think we already all knew that.
Tell Margaret not to worry — the pain does go away after a few days. She should just be thankful that she’s not the Colorado Rockies…
Hi all, interesting discussion here.