Following is the next video in a series celebrating The Pollack PR Marketing Group’s 25th Anniversary:

We introduce our sixth guest blogger of our monthly series on the 25th of every month, in celebration of our 25th anniversary this year, Paul Holmes, the highly regarded PR industry analyst.

Paul Holmes is editor and publisher of The Holmes Report, which provides knowledge and insight to public relations professionals, and manages the SABRE Awards, recognizing Superior Achievement in Branding & Reputation.

I just returned from Barcelona, where more than 200 PR practitioners and evaluation experts gathered to pass the “Barcelona declaration” of research principles, an attempt to set global standards for the measurement of PR.

The principles are much needed. My publication runs the SABRE Awards competition in North America, EMEA and Asia, and so I see something like 3,000 PR campaign summaries a year, and measurement is far from standardized. I see everything from clip counts to advertising value equivalency (roundly condemned by the Barcelona delegates), while relatively few seek to link PR to business results.

I have long believed that public relations is about what the words say it is about: building, maintaining and leveraging relationships between an organization and its publics. As a result, I believe the best measure of success is the impact a campaign has on relationships.

The past few years have seen the emergence of new evidence suggesting a strong correlation between an organization’s relationships and business performance. Specifically, Bain & Company’s Fred Reichheld has looked at the connection between advocacy (the likelihood that someone will recommend a company to a friend or colleague) and performance, and found that advocacy (or what he calls net promoter score: the number of advocates minus the number of detractors) is a strong predictor of future success.

This ought to be great news for the profession, because I believe PR is uniquely positioned to create brand advocates. It is hard for me to imagine an ad campaign that would make me more likely to recommend a product to others, but there are plenty of PR campaigns that have done this: communicating a commitment to CSR, linking products with causes, special events that touch people directly. (It’s also easy to imagine PR failures that create brand detractors: BP being the most obvious recent example.)

There are two obstacles to progress on evaluation, however: agencies and clients: agencies, because they all want a proprietary measurement tool that differentiates them from competitors, at a time when we badly need an industry standard; clients, because they remain fixated on traditional reach and frequency measures at a time when social media are demonstrating that engagement and advocacy are what really matters.

As an industry, we need to develop a standard and sell it to clients if we are going to take advantage of the opportunity for leadership offered by this new social media age.

It’s downright unthinkable and puzzling that Gen. Stanley A. McChrystal, of all people, wouldn’t think through potential consequences before taking action.  Unless, of course, he has a different agenda…

In the recent profile published by the magazine, titled “The Runaway General,” McChrystal disparaged administration officials, mocking Vice President Joseph Biden and criticizing special envoy for Afghanistan Richard Holbrooke and U.S. Ambassador to Kabul Karl Eikenberry, with whom McChrystal is supposed to carry out U.S. policy, potentially fracturing the unified front that Obama has sought to build for the war and the international coalition.

Oops…

Was this blatant naïveté on the part of McChrystal to simply speak off the cuff and blast the administration or just flawed judgment?  Apparently McChrystal, who spent much of his military career in the world of special operations, didn’t have as much experience dealing with the media, as did other top commanders, such as Gen. David H. Petraeus.  Still, he had “handlers” –civilian press aides assigned to him by the US military.

According to a report in The Washington Post, his now-resigned civilian press aide, Duncan Boothby said that, “he was heavily involved in arranging access for journalist Michael Hastings to McChrystal and his staff, so that Hastings could write the profile.”  Was Boothby aware of the bent that the story was to take?  Did he research the magazine and the reporter? Did he take steps to veer the story in such a way as to forestall any potential damaging results from the interview?  Was the reporter given too much access to McChrystal and his “anonymous” aides, with too little control? Did Boothby media train McChrystal at all?  Were McChrystal and his aides not aware of the administration’s policy that military officers must respect civilian leadership and keep their advice and views private?

Something doesn’t make sense…

It gets more dumbfounding.  Both Boothby and McChrystal fact-checked the story.  What did they read and approve? Did McChrystal intentionally speak out against the administration and choose a popular publication as a platform in which to vent?  If so, poor judgment, that triggered a public spectacle (or circus) with consequences that were easily predictable – a very public firing — reminiscent of the firing of General Douglas MacArthur, who played a prominent role in the Pacific theater during World War II and who was fired for insubordination by President Truman.

McChrystal issued an apology yesterday saying that,  “It was a mistake reflecting poor judgment and should never have happened.” How about that old adage, “think before you speak? “

Poor judgment, indeed.  Sometimes — “It is all a matter of judgment”

Ambush marketing — think of it as gate crashing, as in you want to get into a Lakers game without a ticket or go to a party without an invitation.  That’s what took place at the 2010 World Cup in South Africa.

Here’s what occurred…  Two women, with three dozen or so more in the background, all sporting the distinctive Dutch orange, are believed to have led an “ambush marketing” stunt on behalf of a Dutch beer brand, Bavaria, during the Denmark-Netherlands match on Monday.  In other words, the Bavaria beer people were caught red-handed promoting a beer without paying for sponsorship, basically stepping heavily on the toes of sponsor Anheuser-Busch’s Budweiser, who had spent a hefty sum for that privilege.

So they got their due. FIFA, the soccer governing body, caught the culprits as they tried to take advantage of the Game’s global publicity for their brand and confiscated their passports before releasing them on bail.  Although this is not the first run-in with FIFA (2006 World Cup in Germany) Bavaria is, of course, incensed. In a company statement, they protested, “the orange dresses don’t have a big brand name logo” and added that “thousands of fans at the game were wearing the dresses, which were sold with eight-packs of beer.” The company declined to say whether the two fans arrested had been employed by the company.

Ambush marketing is one of the oldest and most devilish marketing games around, breaking entry laws and overstepping ethical standards’ boundaries.  And yet big brands use ambush marketing to gain publicity that money can’t buy. It is akin to passing “go” without paying dues and getting in front of the line.

Brands choose high visibility events that present a world stage to them. As example, in the Sydney Olympics, the slogan for the games was “Share the Spirit.” Qantas airlines adopted a slogan “The Spirit of Australia” despite the fact that Ansett Air was the official airline sponsor. In the Barcelona Olympic Games, Michael Jordan (sponsored by Nike) covered the Reebok sign on his gear while accepting his gold medal for USA basketball. Nike also sponsored the press conference for the “Dream Team” even though Reebok was their official sponsor.

Ambush marketing is no more than creating a clever stunt to grab momentary attention. The lure for marketers is the immediate brand visibility, a notoriety of sorts, but the consequences can potentially be worse than the gain – that of being “hauled into a court of law” or being publicly and negatively discussed or derided in the on and offline media.

But it is prolific…

It is either a brilliant marketing ploy calculated to boost the giant liquor company’s sales or a spontaneous lucky streak for Smirnoff.  Or not — for the popularity of the ‘Bros Icing Bros’ game, which originated on college campuses and quickly spread virally via all social media channels, may very well cast a shadow on Smirnoff’s public image and its stance on responsible drinking.

Although Smirnoff has denied that this might be a company-mounted marketing scheme, the jury is still out, considering that the winner clearly is the liquor giant itself and that it has remained largely silent. The game has also triggered sales of Smirnoff Ice drinks within demographics that probably never even heard about the sugary ice malt beverage.

The rules of the game, which had a murky start somewhere in either Florida or Vermont, are explicit on the web: a ‘bro’ hands a friend (or ‘bro) a Smirnoff Ice and he (most participants have been men) “has to drink it on one knee, all at once — unless he is carrying a bottle himself, in which case the ‘attacker’ must drink both bottles.” The listed rules include: “You cannot refuse an Ice.  If you refuse to drink the Ice you are instantly excommunicated and shunned and thus can never Ice another bro or be iced. If you are Iced by a fellow bro you can Ice block.  When presented with an Ice, you pull out an Ice of your own and reverse the Ice on your bro. The ultimate ice insult…”

The mercurial spread of ‘Bros Icing Bros’ from the Web to living rooms and offices around the country seems bizarre, when you consider that it has gone way past college fraternities and now includes young professionals and minor celebrities such as the rapper Coolio, the actor Dustin Diamond and members of the rock band The National.  According to the New York Times, there is even a campaign online that aims to Ice Ashton Kutcher, who often serves as a kind of Kevin Bacon of Web memes, linking disparate areas of the Internet in fewer than six degrees.

Here’s the rub…If it is a social media trend that sparked spontaneously, the game will play out virally until the next ‘thing’ comes along, that is, unless Smirnoff finds ways to disavow the game.

However, it can also end abruptly if the young ‘Bros” get a sense that they have been co-opted by the brand for its own purposes, that they’re being used, in fact, to market a drink that, by all accounts, they really don’t like. But this will surely come back to “bite” the Smirnoff brand.

It’s every company’s dream to have sales rocket through the perennial roof without spending for a marketing campaign.  But this is about a game that extols uncontrolled drinking, with one particular product, with the potential of youths of questionable drinking age, participating.

It raises doubts…

A Smirnoff company statement says, “We never want under-age ‘icing’ and we always want responsible drinking.” Well, that’s good. But if, in fact, Smirnoff had nothing to do with initiating the game, how about taking a stronger stance to distance the company from all the ‘Icing’?

Not happening as yet.  Sales are good.

Twitter can sometimes be foreboding. One logs in, takes a look at that ominous “What’s going on?” question and may think . . . “What is going on?”  And that person may not have an answer.  Sitting there? Drinking water?  Procrastinating on a project?

Looking for something to discuss, the “Twitter-blocked” may browse through the main feed searching for inspiration.

Stanlopez forget about it.

Covid My buddy broke his collar bone.

Xfdgg TOP 10 WAYS TO GET 10000 FOLLOWERS IN JUST 1 WEEK!!!!

Ronmalone My 12-year-old is great at Photoshop!

Xfdgg TOP 10 WAYS TO GET 10000 FOLLOWERS IN JUST 1 WEEK!!!!

Mikehilton Time to close the laptop.

Xfdgg TOP 10 WAYS TO GET 10000 FOLLOWERS IN JUST 1 WEEK!!!!

Nothing.

The Twitter-blocked may look around the office hoping for something to tweet about. Color of the walls maybe . . . or perhaps how quickly the coffee has gotten cold.  Nothing is clicking.

The Twitter-blocked is generally not using Twitter to talk about “coffee” or “sitting there,” instead he/she uses Twitter to build a brand presence. The Twitter-blocked understands that endless tweets about the brand won’t work and that there needs be a genuine connection with the Twitter community. A trusted network builds meaningful relationships, thereby strengthening the brand. Sounds easy, right?

But what to tweet about?

When I have “Twitter-block”, I resort to my personal “C.R.A.S.H.” formula:

Comment
Reply
Ask
Share
Help

Comment
Every time you go into Twitter, tweet something. Anything.  It could be “Good morning, Twitter,” or “Sitting down to start my day,” or anything benign.  Just write.  Once you do that, the rest comes easy. The hardest part of filling out a blank page is writing the first sentence. Just get something out and be natural.  Twitter isn’t always about broadcasting your brand; sometimes you can just talk. Casual conversation builds trust within your network and identifies that the brand is supported by real people. It is easier for people to connect with a person than it is for them to connect with a logo or product.

Reply
Reply to someone. Find a tweet and reply to it.  It doesn’t have to be Shakespearean, just say, “@neatfollower Good point!” or “@hungryfollower Yeah, pizza sounds good now” or “@Xfdgg Why do I need 10,000 followers?”

Ask
Ask a question. The question could be something like: “How does one get past Twitter-block?” Or it could be a discussion question about your industry. Or something personal like “What is going on with all of you today?” Questions encourage conversation and the more people that you respond to, the more conversations evolve. Check your @replies frequently and make sure that you aren’t missing out on connecting with someone.

Share
Share something. Either tweet a link for a blog you’ve read or retweet something interesting someone else said.  You can pipe in many RSS feeds into FriendFeed and easily post them on Twitter straight from there.  You can even tie your blog into FriendFeed so that it tweets whenever there is a new post.  There are Twitter applets and Firefox apps that will help you tweet from wherever you are browsing. Make it a habit to simply share what you find as you find it.  Link retweets are the most popular type of tweet for a reason.  Most people are there to find news and websites, and if you post interesting things people will notice you more.

Help
Help people. Use Twitter Search (or some other 3rd party search system such as Monitter.com or any of the Twitter desktop applications) and find conversations that you can contribute to. Search by whatever your expertise is and jump in – give advice, help people that are asking questions and peddle your smarts.

Use hashtags (#) on your topics so that they reach a broader base of people, such as: “Writing press releases is good for your SEO! #PR #SEO”. When you use hashtags the tweet shows up in a feed on Twitter Search, which many people follow.

Using the C.R.A.S.H. formula once a day keeps you a valuable and contributing member of Twitter. Leveraging your own expertise and the benefits of your brand in each of those steps will build awareness. But most importantly, C.R.A.S.H. will help you get rid of that dreaded Twitter-block.