I recently spent several days in Tennessee and Texas with the public relations manager of one of Rose Communications’ clients, a leading healthcare delivery company. Our trip had multiple purposes, a few of which included attending a local event in Nashville we had helped plan and promote; kicking off a series of interviews with one of the company’s executives to inform a foundational branding platform; conducting media training with Texas market executives; and gathering information for a strategy to address a regional communications challenge.

The trip was satisfying and eventful. For a company such as this one that serves people in several areas of the country, nothing compares to being “on the ground.” The PR manager and I were able to meet with the people instrumental in working on critical issues relevant to the lives of members in those markets.

I appreciated hearing directly from a variety of executives and staff members about their communications needs. I was also pleased to have the opportunity to introduce myself as a resource for them to tap as they work to convey messages to their diverse audiences.

Being there also gave me unique insights into the audiences we were trying to reach. If I hadn’t traveled to the various communities, my perception of the lifestyle and quality of life would not have been as accurate. I wouldn’t, for example, know what an assisted living facility looks, feels or smells like. I wouldn’t understand the barriers people there face every day when they don’t speak or read English, or can’t read at all.

I came back to work enlightened and energized. The experience reinforced for me the immense value of human-to-human interaction and cultural immersion in gaining the nuanced insights I need to do my job well. Obvious, perhaps, but important to remember in this age of technologically powered communications.

When we depend too much on smartphones and emails, sometimes the very things we need to know can get lost in translation.

In the publishing industry, repurposing content is common practice.  For example, a popular article that ran in the Style section of the print edition of The New York Times daily newspaper could be published again in the newspaper’s fashionable T Magazine.  I’ve seen this several times and never took issue with it because the articles I’ve read, and in some instances reread, are always properly labeled as repurposed content.  

This week the publishers of Martha Stewart Living made a major misstep by repurposing content and not alerting its loyal readers.  Mary Findley, an avid follower of Living, told Tanzina Vega, a media reporter with The New York Times, about how she stumbled upon this snafu when perusing the special 2011 Halloween issue of Martha Stewart’s magazine.  Ms. Findley had a déjà vu moment when she came across a photo of a chocolate cake titled Macabre Manse.  It turns out that this same photo and recipe were featured in the October 2008 issue of the magazine.  And apparently this wasn’t the only repurposed content in the 2011 Halloween issue, which retails for about $7 at newsstands. 

According to The New York Times article, a spokesperson for Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia said the company stood by its work and how it was delivered to readers. Martha Stewart Living Omnimedia publishes two to four special issues a year, each of which carries about 60 percent original material and 40 percent repurposed material.  However, The New York Times reported that the 2011 Halloween issue included about 70 percent of original content.

When additional media pundits and bloggers picked up the story, it prompted an additional response from the company and ultimately persuaded Martha herself to place a call to Ms. Findley.

During these uncertain economic times when many magazine titles are struggling to stay afloat, a snafu like this could prove costly.  It could cause advertisers to spend their ad dollars elsewhere.  And informed consumers may be reluctant to buy special issues.  Not to mention the potential damage to the Martha Stewart brand.  Isn’t the brand all about fresh new ideas? 

The statement issued by the Omnimedia leads me to believe that they don’t plan to change their practices. As a result, I’ll save my money at the newsstand for publications that are publishing original content, or those that are at least being upfront about articles that have appeared elsewhere.  How do you feel about media outlets that repurpose content? 

I have always been curious about why people become journalists.  What compels them to spend their lives seeking out the news? What makes them tick?

My current obsession is Anderson Cooper, the anchor of CNN’s nightly news roundup Anderson Cooper 360º .

Cooper fascinates me. He’s the son of heiress Gloria Vanderbilt, the “poor little rich girl” who grew up to head a fashion empire that launched millions of pairs of tight-fitting jeans. He’s the great-great-great-grandson of shipping and railroad magnate Cornelius Vanderbilt, whose statue stands at New York’s Grand Central Station.

This guy could have gone the route of many heirs to fortunes and sat around doing nothing but enjoying the fruits of his family’s labors.

So why become a reporter who frequently puts himself in harm’s way to cover bloody conflicts and natural disasters? With no formal journalistic education, Cooper has said the loss he felt after his older brother committed suicide compelled him to search for answers as a reporter:  “I think when you experience any kind of loss, especially the kind I did, you have questions about survival: Why do some people thrive in situations that others can’t tolerate?”

While he has proven himself to be a serious journalist, Cooper has a breezier side. He took a break from covering breaking news with a two-year stint hosting the reality show The Mole. He banters with bawdy comedian Kathy Griffin during their annual New Year’s Eve countdown specials in Times Square. He sandwiches the satirical “The RidicuList” segment into his otherwise staid nightly news program (his giggle fit during a recent RidicuList story is now the stuff of YouTube legend and, at last count, has been recommended by almost 15,000 people on Facebook). And although he’s a celebrity of sorts in his own right, he frequently seems smitten with movie stars and other show biz personalities.

To me, Cooper’s appeal as a journalist is that he comes across as genuine, not a robotic talking head. He’s relatable, even goofy at times. He can laugh at himself, which reflects his approach to anchoring the news: “I think the notion of the traditional anchor is fading away, the all-knowing, all-seeing person who speaks from on high. I don’t think the audience really buys that anymore. I think you have to be yourself, and you have to be real… I tend to relate more to people on television who are just themselves, for good or for bad, than I do to someone who I believe is putting on some sort of persona.”

Cooper recently announced he’s adding daytime talk show host to his repertoire: Anderson debuts on September 12.

My curiosity duly piqued, I’ll be tuning in. How about you?

My home office.

Yesterday my Tweetup buddy, @jtdesigns linked to the Mashable article “The Rise of the Mobile Workforce,” with the enthusiastic status “The new 9-to-5! Live it baby!”

I couldn’t help but smile when I read his status message and the article. As a member of the mobile workforce, I am very fortunate to avoid daily traffic jams and work from the comfort of my home office. I never envisioned I’d work from home – really, years ago, who did?

Thanks to the proliferation of Wi-Fi connections and other leaps and bounds in technology, working remotely is almost as common as commuting. According to a Cisco study on the international workplace, “the mobile workforce is now business-as-usual for enterprises around the world.”

The truth is I don’t even need the home office to be productive. I can take conference calls, brainstorm, draft pitches, etc., from my couch. Or a hotel. Or my cramped seat in coach. I’m connected to my coworkers via phone, email and IM. I’ve written and distributed press releases at 30,000 feet and taken a client’s call when I was on a cruise ship docked in Barcelona. Thanks to technology and an understanding employer, I am accessible and able to work regardless of my location.

But, when I do work from the office, which happens a few times each month, I feel energized. As much as I am an advocate for working remotely, I believe working from the office helps keep a sense of camaraderie with my colleagues. It’s great to see their expressions during a discussion and most importantly, it keeps me connected at a level I wouldn’t otherwise experience.

Where do you work?

Rupert Murdoch

There are some people who believe the only truly pure news is the weather forecast.

How ironic it is that forecasting the weather used to be more about entertainment than news. Consider that Diane Sawyer was referred to as a “weather bunny” back in the days she worked as a forecaster at a TV station in Kentucky.

With the advent of Doppler radar, forecasting the weather went from iffy suggestion (“you might want to grab your umbrella on the way out the door today”) to life-saving directive (“a Category 5 hurricane will make landfall on the Outer Banks by midnight tonight”).

As media mogul Rupert Murdoch weathers his own storm today, appearing before the British Parliament to defend his tabloids’ alleged illegal tactics, I was again reminded of the current nature of the news, and how it has become more about titillation than information.

Some believe the News of the World scandal is a sad commentary on the failure of corporate leaders to keep a tighter rein on the actions of their employees.  But as a PR person, I am prompted to consider just how low so-called journalists can go in pursuit of the next big headline.

For some, it’s all about the race to the bottom. When did bribing police and hacking personal phone lines become acceptable journalistic practices?  In today’s tough economic times, perhaps these journalists thought their jobs depended on uncovering and reporting – by any means possible – the most salacious and shocking stories. Grieving families of terror victims and murdered children be damned.

Or maybe it’s just always been this way – the muckrakers (in the original sense of the term) vs. the scandal-mongers.

As media continues to morph on a daily basis, many are predicting the death of journalism. Yet there is still cause for optimism. Blogger Lauren Rae Orsini, an unabashedly dedicated young journalist, puts it this way: “I worry that a lot of young journalists have given up because they don’t see the opportunity that still exists, even as the state of the media changes. My story is the reminder that many of us need. Journalism jobs are dead. Journalism opportunities are everywhere.”

She continues, “In 2011, there are so many ways a young woman can use her journalism degree. She simply needs to look outside of the box of ‘traditional’ journalism jobs and not wait for The New York Times to hire her when she can become a fully realized journalist on her own.”

For Orsini, “the tenets of journalism that I learned in school have remained my life philosophy: Be curious. Be honest. Be bold.”

Perhaps she could teach Murdoch and his minions a thing or two.

Many times I’ve sat in my car in my driveway, waiting to turn off the engine so I could hear the last bit of some fascinating or heart-tugging feature, usually on NPR. Those types of stories have been dubbed “driveway stories” to describe any authentic, well-told narrative that grabs your attention and won’t let go.

To me, telling such compelling stories is really what public relations is all about. Good PR people connect with and captivate their audience, turning storytelling into an art form.

One person who truly understood the value of good PR was William Donald Schaefer. Schaefer, the former Baltimore mayor and Maryland governor and comptroller credited with revitalizing Baltimore with his “do-it-now” work ethic, passed away last week at age 89.  Throughout his life, Schaefer worked tirelessly to promote the city he loved.  He wanted everyone to see his hometown as he saw it:  not as a laughing stock, but as a unique and delightful place to live, work and visit that ranked among the nation’s best.

An example of his PR prowess occurred back in 1981, when Schaefer famously followed through on his promise to jump into the seal tank at the National Aquarium if the new harbor attraction he spearheaded didn’t open on time. Behind the scenes, he dreaded donning the old-fashioned bathing suit and straw boater hat for fear he’d look like an idiot, or worse, make Baltimore look ridiculous in the process.  But jump in he did, holding an inflatable rubber duck. The rest, as they say, is history. He caught the attention of the nation and was subsequently featured in Esquire magazine as “the best mayor in America.” 

As the city says goodbye to Schaefer this week, The Baltimore Sun quoted many notable Baltimoreans who reflected on their feelings about the legendary figure’s impact. 

A former client of mine, Bronwyn Mayden, who worked for Schaefer when he was mayor and now serves as assistant dean of continuing professional education at the University of Maryland School of Social Work, commented on Schaefer’s devotion to Baltimore, saying, “His heart was in the city.”

Baltimore filmmaker John Waters, an adept storyteller in his own right, summed up Schaefer’s keen understanding of the value of telling Baltimore’s story this way: “He was always great to me, even when everybody else thought my movies were obscene. He used to say, ‘I don’t care what they are, just keep making them.’”

“I think it was just to keep the name of Baltimore out there,” Waters said.

Schaefer’s legacy will live on in the hearts and minds of the thousands of people he touched during his lifetime. But more importantly, perhaps, is his achievement of telling Baltimore’s story with genuine pride, passion and love, as only he could.

I was once a morning show junkie. Before the morning programs began to air segments online, I would TiVo the shows and watch them in the evening.  I even tried to get a former boss to pay for my purchase of TiVo, claiming that its main purpose was to record The Today Show, Good Morning America and The Early Show.  My borderline addiction was comparable to soap opera fanatics – I couldn’t go a day without seeing what happened during my favorite daytime program. 

While I’m still aware of what’s going on with the programs, I don’t tune in with the same excitement as I once did.  To come clean, I’ve not watched much of TODAY since Katie Couric left the program in 2006.  Having met her (okay, I said “hello” to her as she passed the green room back in the late 90s while accompanying a former client to a segment), I’ve always been in awe of her.  Like me, she is petite, but her personality is larger than life.  She has that rare combination of wit and wisdom and is someone I’ve always admired. 

I have to say I was elated last week when rumors started to emerge that Couric was entertaining the idea of hosting her own talk show.  Her interview with Andrew Goldman in yesterday’s New York Times Magazine confirmed that Couric is considering hosting a syndicated show with her former boss from TODAY, Jeff Zucker. 

Will daily conversations with Couric work in a talk show format?  I definitely think so.  When Couric appeared on TODAY, people tuned in as much for the entertainment value as news value.  Sure, she delivered the news headlines in a manner that only a serious broadcast journalist could, but then she could be seen on the Plaza rocking her four-inch heels and joking around with Matt, Ann and Al.    Her laugh and perkiness became quite the draw. 

In my opinion, a talk show might have been a more natural progression for Couric post-TODAY than an attempt to reshape the evening news – which was much like forcing a square peg in a round hole. I don’t need to rehash the challenges she faced trying to reconfigure the evening news format, enough media outlets have already done that. 

I’m anxiously awaiting Couric’s next move.  A talk show with the seasoned broadcast journalist will definitely have a place in my TiVO lineup. 

I hope I’ll soon be adding Katie back onto my list of “must-sees,” along with my daily dose of Ellen.  Who’s with me?  

The new season of AMC’s hit TV series Mad Men started off with a bang (pardon the pun), with a peek into the bedroom of creative director and new bachelor Don Draper.  It also revealed the tensions inherent in the pursuit of new business at fledgling ad agency Sterling Cooper Draper Pryce.

I confess I’m a “Mad-dict,” in part because I’ve worked at a few advertising agencies in my career and many of the situations hit home for me. 

In my experience, some clients view advertising as the golden child and public relations as the bastard at the proverbial family reunion. PR can be an after-thought, while creative gets the lion’s share of the attention.  After all, how do you quantify something you can’t storyboard or plot into a media plan?

The season premiere of Mad Men, entitled “Public Relations,” opened with Don being interviewed by an Advertising Age reporter.  Don’s lackluster responses and subsequent dismissal of the interview as a waste of his time reminded me of a few clients’ view of doing media interviews.

When the article showcases Don in a less than favorable light, he’s called onto the carpet by his agency partner Roger Sterling:

Don:  He never asked me that. Did he check any of the facts?

Roger:  You didn’t give him any facts. He had to make some assumptions.

Don:  My job is to write ads, not go around talking about who I am.

Roger:  Who knows who you are? This was supposed to be an advertisement for the firm…this is a missed opportunity.

By the end of the episode, Don has an “aha” moment when he realizes the value of PR as a tool to tell the agency’s story the way he wants it to be told.  During his interview later on with the Wall Street Journal, it’s obvious Don’s in control.

Smart organizations (the Roger Sterlings) know the value of leveraging editorial coverage to their advantage.  For those that don’t (the Don Drapers), we’re here to tell them.

I like music. I enjoy watching music videos. I even enjoy watching some commercials. But what about when the line between entertainment and advertising is blurred?

On a recent morning while at the gym, I was watching VH1 and the VJ introduced the next video – courtesy of Toyota. But the video wasn’t from a pop artist or hot rapper. “Swagger Wagon” was a commercial for Toyota’s Sienna minivan. I was entertained by the rapping parents; the beat was decent and the lyrics comical. But I was also thoroughly confused by the placement.

Had the “Swagger Wagon” video simply followed an ad for toothpaste or a fast food restaurant, I would have thought great commercial.  I appreciate that networks have to think differently to appeal to advertisers these days, but I was left wondering if playing an ad off as just another music video would really do anything for Toyota.

The beauty of viral videos – like “Tea Partay” and “New Dork” is that consumers drive the interest; not the marketers behind the effort. I’d much prefer a colleague to email me a “can’t miss” video or have a friend post one on my Facebook page than watch it on TV. The buzz created by and surrounding viral videos has to be earned and authentic, not solely a media buy.

Rolling Stone magazine was founded by Jann S. Wenner in the late 60s – an era defined by Vietnam War protests, hippies and Woodstock.   A chronicle of counter culture, the publication carved out a niche for itself by combining in-depth political coverage with pop-culture commentary. 

The longtime home of gonzo journalists Hunter S. Thompson and P.J. O’Rourke, Rolling Stone’s relevance seemed to fade when the founding baby boomers grew up and the controversial Thompson passed away.  Advertising revenue and circulation was on a downward spiral.  The cutting-edge national affairs pieces that made the magazine famous were nonexistent. 

That is until Mark Hastings, a contributor to Rolling Stone magazine, was granted unprecedented access to a top-ranking military official, General McChrystal.  The piece recounts disparaging comments made by the general and his staff during a few nights of alcohol induced outings.  Hastings’ “Runaway General” article did more than prompt the resignation of General McChrystal, it marked the beginning of the magazine’s comeback. 

Hastings’ article quickly became one of the most read online even before the print publication hit newsstands.  Mr. Hastings appeared, via satellite from Afghanistan, on various broadcast outlets including CNN’s Larry King Live.   Having once worked in the publicity department of Wenner Media, I know the staff there was overjoyed by all the TV bookings and fanfare created around the June 21^st issue. 

But the question becomes can this title that’s been around for more than four decades sustain its renewed popularity?

Some argue that the publication is well poised to continue to churn out notable journalism.  A recent New York Times article attributes Rolling Stone’s recent success to its bi-weekly publishing schedule: “Many newsweeklies have faltered and lost their impact on shaping the national conversation, but as a biweekly Rolling Stone has thrived in defiance of a digital age in which articles are supposed to appear then vanish within hours.”

According to Graydon Carter, editor of Vanity Fair, “Biweekly publications have the best of both worlds: they can respond nimbly to the news and take their time on longer enterprise pieces.”

We’ll have to wait and see if the publication can continue its momentum.  I know I’ll be watching to see what’s on the next cover of Rolling Stone.