Web Ink Now

When lawyers get in the way of PR

I received a press release via email a few days ago from a well-meaning PR person.

Guess what? I can't write about it because at the bottom of the release is this:

NOTICE: This electronic mail transmission contains confidential information intended only for the person(s) named. Any use, distribution, copying or disclosure by any other person is strictly prohibited. If you received this transmission in error, please notify the sender by reply e-mail and then destroy the message. Opinions, conclusions, and other information in this message that do not relate to the official business of AGENCY X shall be understood to be neither given nor endorsed by AGENCY X. Before opening any attachments please check them for viruses and defects. When addressed to AGENCY X clients, any information contained in this e-mail is subject to the terms and conditions in the governing client contract.

Yikes! The notice at the bottom of the press release says I cannot distribute the press release. This is what happens when lawyers get in the way of PR.

Or consider this typical press release from Shell that I found on one of the press release wires. Now, I'm not picking on Shell here, I'm making a general point. I could have chosen any one of a thousand releases for this example.

New Shell $aver Card(SM) Available at Shell-Branded Stations Nationwide

HOUSTON, Jan. 5 /PRNewswire/ -- Shell Oil Products US launched the Shell Saver Card today, becoming the first gasoline retailer to make an electronic check payment method available to consumers nationally. This latest Shell payment option provides consumers with a convenient way to pay for purchases with a direct link to a checking account and savings on each gallon of fuel pumped at Shell stations.

The body of the press release has several other paragraphs and contains 361 words. It is a well-written new product release. But then the lawyers get involved and add a 519 word "Disclaimer statement" (sometimes called safe harbor). The legal crap is much more lengthy than the news and includes minute definitions of things that aren’t even in the release such as these two sentences:

Forward-looking statements include, among other things, statements concerning the potential exposure of Royal Dutch Shell to market risks and statements expressing management's expectations, beliefs, estimates, forecasts, projections and assumptions. These forward-looking statements are identified by their use of terms and phrases such as "anticipate", "believe", "could", "estimate", "expect", "intend", "may", "plan", "objectives", "outlook", "probably", "project", "will", "seek", "target", "risks", "goals", "should" and similar terms and phrases.

Yikes! By including these statements, the press release says don’t believe a word we’re saying. This is what happens when lawyers get in the way of PR.

Over the holiday break I read a great book by David Henderson called The Media Savvy Leader. David talks a lot about what he calls "bad habits" around these sorts of disclosures. David says that the legal people include this sort of language so the company can't be accused of lying. That's a terrible strategy if you want journalists to believe you! David suggests: "Always tell the truth and you won’t need to hide behind an attorney or safe harbor."

Question to PR people: Have you ever had a lawyer ask you to review a contract in order to remove the jargon and legal gobbledygook? I never have. So why does it happen the other way?

I was fortunate when I was VP of corporate communications for several NASDAQ publicly traded companies (before I escaped the corporate world in 2002). I had an understanding with the lawyers and we only put the safe harbor in the quarterly financial releases, but not the others. I'd recommend that you come to an understanding with your legal department and do the same.

For more on this subject, check out David's book The Media Savvy Leader. It is a terrific book because David has been a success both as a journalist and as a media-relations practitioner. He is an Emmy Award-winning former CBS network news correspondent so he knows what it is like to be a working journalist. And as a media-relations advisor and strategist, he has been responsible for such stunning successes as generating massive national media attention on little Branson, MO. And Henderson knows the online world. He writes a terrific blog and knows how online communications fits into the mix.

US Air Force Web Posting Response Assessment

Several weeks ago in a blog post called The US Air Force: Armed with social media, I wrote about my interview with Capt. David Faggard, Chief of Emerging Technology at the Air Force Public Affairs Agency in the Pentagon. I spoke with Capt. Faggard about what he and his team are doing to get the word out about the Air Force online.

I wrote about the detailed Air Force blog assessment flowchart that Capt. Faggard shared with me. It provides, in simple to understand, but in a detailed and specific way, how to react to blog posts.

As a result of some of the comments left here as well as on the blogs of Joey DeVilla, Jeremiah Owyang, Steve Field, Matt McGee, and others, Capt. Faggard has revised the US Air Force Web Posting Response Assessment. The new version is below.

Click the assessment for a larger size image.

During my interview, I was intrigued by the term "counter-blogging" which Capt. Faggard says is when: "Airmen counter the people out there in the blogosphere who have negative opinions about the US government and the air force." The assessment is a tool that is used to help in this area.

"We obviously have many more concerns regarding cyberspace than a typical Social Media user," Capt. Faggard says. "I am concerned with how insurgents or potential enemies can use Social Media to their advantage. It's our role to provide a clear and accurate, completely truthful and transparent picture for any audience."

Everyone should take a look at the assessment tool and consider applying something similar in your own organization.

Attention Twitter: You should be communicating better during what some are calling a crisis

I'm a Twitter fan. My Twitter feed is an important way for me to communicate. And I've said many great things about Twitter at my keynotes, on this blog, and in my books.

But this weekend, Twitter has let me down.

I was reading the Boston Globe Magazine today, there was a big fat interview with Biz Stone, a cofounder of Twitter. The first question the Globe asked was: "In November, the company declined Facebook's offer to buy it for $500 million. Say what?"

Stone's answer: "We admire and respect Facebook. We are big fans, actually. They approached us, and we took it seriously. But we feel like we want to continue this path we're on -- sustaining this innovation -- and the time is not right."

Just a few minutes after reading the interview, I logged on to Twitter and found that I had received ten bogus Direct Messages.

The messages said things like "Hey check out this funny blog." I soon learned that all were phishing for me to enter my Twitter ID. (I did not). It seemed like all my Twitter friends were talking about it and I quickly found a bunch of blogs where people were describing the problem. So this is a big deal.

In my opinion, Twitter has not been communicating as well as it should be during this crisis. As I look at my friends feeds, nearly everyone is talking about this issue. Yet, Twitter has three feeble communications as of this writing.

1) Three tweets from the @twitter ID providing a bit of information.

2) A short post on the Twitter blog

3) A warning on the Twitter home page.

Stone's interview seems a bit arrogant based on what was happening this weekend.

Many people rely on the Twitter service. Sure, it's free and we get what we pay for. But if Biz Stone and his colleagues (and the VC firms backing the company) want a bigger payday than a half a billion, then they’ll need to manage this crisis better. Much better. Starting now.

I think Twitter should be doing more to inform users.

I'd suggest hourly updates on the Twitter blog. Maybe set up a new Twitter ID that can be the official place where people go. A YouTube video that you put on the Twitter homepage to inform people. Whatever. But you've got to do more than you're doing.

The Design for Users blog has an excellent post on this subject called Communicate, Inform, Address Users When Things Go Wrong Online.