As PR consultants, our job is all about identifying who our clients need to engage with and ensuring that the right message is delivered to them, which consequently means we have had to keep up to date with technology by adapting the techniques we use to communicate these messages. PRs have had to gain a clear understanding of how a brand’s reputation both online and offline are fundamentally linked, yet what many still don’t seem to understand is that the main difference between traditional PR and digital PR is only the channels of communication; the objective is still very much the same.

Most agencies nowadays have diversified away from traditional PR services by creating different branches of their business, such as social media development, online editorial and SEO management. For example, last week, PR Week published encouraging signs for the industry in the form of its annual top 150 consultancies table. According to the report the industry’s total fee income has risen to £900m (exceeding the pre-recession figure of £858m in 2008), with the results demonstrating a huge growth in digital agencies. All of the 150 agencies listed offered digital PR to its clients in some shape or form.

Headline Communications is celebrating its 20^th birthday this year, and the changing face of PR is clearly evident when looking over this timeline. It’s amazing to think that online communication platforms have only been around for less than half of this time, yet it has now become an essential part of our job. LinkedIn launched in 2003, Facebook in 2004, YouTube in 2005 and Twitter in 2006. Long gone are the days of posting press releases to journalists via ‘snail mail’, plus we now even have to the chance to voice our own opinions on different issues, PR related or not, through blogs like this.

The PR industry has always relied on print media as the main channel of broadcasting messages, although the changing media landscape has prompted agencies to increasingly use online channels to broadcast their messages directly to consumers, be it through Facebook or Twitter. Newspapers have also had to change to a new business model to adapt to the shift to online. Consumers will usually search online for information and reviews, and last year the Social Media Statistics Compendium found that 75 per cent said that their purchasing decisions were influenced by what they had read online. The digital era has therefore meant that it is just as easy to get online coverage immediately, as it is to wait for a newspaper to go to print a day or so later.

Social media continues to be the most rapidly evolving area of the public relations profession. It has fundamentally changed the way in which agencies work, with Twitter fast becoming an invaluable resource for the public relations sector. A survey conducted in 2009 found that more than half of all journalists turn to Twitter for initial story research, and with 140 million active users, it offers companies the chance to directly connect their brand to a mass audience of potential consumers.

Companies succeed or fail by their reputation, and since the arrival of the Internet and social networking, they can try and fail a lot quicker. Word spreads like wild fire on the Internet and with communication platforms like these now available to everybody with an email address, it seems that anyone can be their own publicist these days. While many were sceptical that these new platforms may signal the end of the need for PR agencies, we have instead embraced this opportunity to create a new dynamic for the public relations industry.

Since the bid was accepted, economists all over the country have been debating how it will affect the UK’s economy. A lot of scepticism still surrounds the benefits the Games will have on the UK, with a recent poll revealing that more than half of those surveyed did not believe that London 2012 would be worth the huge public expense.

The current budget for holding the Games is £9.3bn, which has largely been funded by the taxpayer. This amount is nearly four times the £2.4bn estimated cost for staging the games at the time of the bid in 2005, and has seen many disgruntled Londoners paying an extra £20 contribution in their council tax. A poll conducted by BBC Radio 5 Live found that 64 per cent thought taxpayers had paid too much to cover the games’ costs, with the large budget even prompting former Olympic Minister Tessa Jowell to question whether London’s bid to host the Olympics would be a costly mistake back in 2008.

Of the £9.3bn, £3.1bn has been allocated to building the Olympic park and venues, and £1.7bn for regeneration and infrastructure, yet we have been reassured that the costs of staging the event will be met through selling television rights, corporate sponsorship and ticket sales. So the big question is will this huge expenditure eventually benefit the UK economy?

The economic impact that major sporting events can have on their host countries and its businesses has already been demonstrated in the past. During the 2010 football World Cup in South Africa, which attracted 500,000 visitors and created 130,000 jobs, South African food and drink group Famous Brands reported a 24 per cent increase in sales during the tournament. The 2002 Commonwealth Games in Manchester also saw £670m of additional inward investment for the city. Indeed, the rewards of hosting such a huge event already seem to be showing its effects here in the UK despite the Games being three months away. Sheffield has become home to a number of Olympic and Paralympic squads in the lead up to the Games and its city council has reported that it has brought a £19m boost to the city’s economy already.

The majority of benefits, however, will inevitably affect London. According to a study carried out by PwC for the Government in 2005, the Olympics will boost the London economy by £5.9bn, and the rest of the UK by a further £1.9bn. Already a 2.5km/sq corner of East London has been transformed into a hub of sporting venues, with every £1 spent on development here estimated to be worth 75p in long-term investment for the area. 98 per cent of facilities built for the Games have been built by British companies through contracts worth £6bn, and by 2016 the park’s venues are expected to be receiving 9.3 million visitors a year. The aquatics centre itself will become the UK’s top swimming facility and is anticipated to attract up to 800,000 visitors a year alone. Therefore demonstrating that one of the lasting impacts of the Games will be the way in which these new stadiums are utilised to continue to generate revenue.

The building of the Olympic Park has also impacted the housing market. A reported £30.8bn has been added to the value of residential properties located in close proximity to Olympic sites in the UK since 2005, with £6.4bn of this in added value to house prices in East London.

With a major influx of visitors expected in London, many are concerned about the pressure that the Games will place on public transport and the fact that traditional tourism may well decrease due to people avoiding the busy periods (some theatres have already reported reduced bookings). On the upside, 40,000 jobs have been created as a direct result of the Games, which has benefitted the UK’s current unemployment levels.

A recent study by BT also suggested the positive impact that UK businesses are expecting as a result of London 2012. Of 1,200 businesses surveyed nationwide, 68 per cent are expecting a peak in demand and nearly half anticipate a rise in sales. 45 per cent expect to find new international business opportunities and 30 per cent are hoping for a welcome boost to profits.

Furthermore, according to a report released by Visa Europe last year to mark the 25^th Anniversary of Visa’s global sponsorship of the Games, the UK GDP is set to benefit from a £750m consumer spending boost during the seven week period of the Olympic and Paralympic games. The report drew on Visa cardholder spending data from the 2006 and 2008 Games, the 2010 Winter Olympics and the 2012 football World Cup. Visa accounts for more than £1 in every £4 spent in the UK, so the information gathered offered a clear projection of how the UK population and visitors could spend during the 2012 Games.

The report found that during the three week period of the Olympics, the economy would receive a £621m spending boost (with a further £129m spent during the Paralympics), this equates to an uplift of 18.5 per cent above what would be expected over the same period had London not won the bid. According to the data, as a result of increased spending, the retail, leisure and travel sectors look set to be the biggest winners of all. Predicted spending injections include £81.5m to the entertainment, food and drink industry, £122.6m to the hotel sector, and a much needed £184.7m spending uplift for the British high street. In terms of long-term economic impact, the report also suggested that by 2015, as a result of hosting the Games, the expected growth for the UK economy would be 3.5 per cent.

If all of the figures are to be believed then the biggest impact to the UK economy will largely be generated by the huge number of visitors flocking to the Games. While the extensive budget has come under constant scrutiny over the last seven years, 55 per cent of people surveyed by BBC Radio 5 Live still agreed that the Games would prove to be good value in terms of benefits to the UK.

However, when the vast crowds leave, the increased spending levels will inevitably leave with them, so businesses will have to make use of the small window of opportunity open to them. With the UK economy only set to grow by 0.7 per cent in 2012, the Games are unlikely to lift us out of recession. Yet with the feel-good factor expected to come with the Queen’s upcoming Diamond Jubilee this summer and the anticipated boost to consumer spending during the Olympics, only time will tell whether the UK economy can win gold.

Largely due to how technology has so rapidly advanced in the last decade, traditional media is no longer our only source of news. These days I seem to have learnt most breaking news via my Twitter feed, which has led many people to contest Twitter’s rise from social network to ground-breaking news source.

One of the wonders of Twitter is its ability to represent the real-time nature of the Internet. News can break and spread across the world in a matter of seconds thanks to the retweeters and hashtaggers amongst us, and has been one of the biggest changes to the journalism field in recent years. With the subsequent rise of the smartphone, we now also have the tools to record anything at anytime and broadcast it to the world with the click of a button.

Subjects on Twitter can now start trending long before they hit the news outlets, which poses a problem for today’s mainstream media. For example, 45 minutes before media sources broke the news of singer Whitney Houston’s death in February, it was already up and trending on Twitter. Within the first hour of its announcement, 2.5 million tweets and retweets had already been recorded.

So why can’t journalists keep up with Twitter? Mainly because Twitter isn’t obliged to fact check. News outlets must find reputable sources to confirm a story’s legitimacy before publishing, which demonstrates Twitter’s credibility as an unreliable news source. The line between fact and fiction has on many occasions become distorted on Twitter, after all it was first to break the news of Jon Bon Jovi’s death – interesting considering he is still very much alive. Indeed, many among us will admit to reading something via Twitter then googling it straight away for confirmation. Which poses the question, does the news only become fact when confirmed by mainstream media anyway?

Social media plays a huge role in modern journalism. Retweeting is the fastest way of breaking a news story, as anyone with a Twitter account becomes a news carrier. While Twitter has become a valuable asset to journalists, the BBC recently told its journalists not to break news stories on Twitter before telling their newsroom colleagues, which follows Sky’s controversial clamp down on its staff’s Twitter updates. However, most news that does come through Twitter has more than likely been via links from mainstream media accounts, which suggests that more media outlets should be making use of its power and taking advantage of the changing media landscape.

Although journalists can’t compete with the sheer speed of social media, there will always be a call for well-researched, in-depth news articles. Anyone that believes that Twitter is sounding the end of traditional journalism is wrong, even though Twitter is fast and efficient, it is still unreliable. Yet with more than 200 million tweets being sent a day, the power of Twitter in disseminating news has firmly placed social media at the forefront of breaking news; so for now it seems that all you really need to know about the world might just be sitting right there in your Twitter feed.

By now, I’m sure you will be fully aware of the Internet sensation that is Samantha Brick who has caused a media furore around her controversial opinions on beauty and prejudice.

A few weeks ago her name would have conjured up little opinion considering she was a relatively unknown journalist, yet flash forward a week to the headline ‘why do women hate me for being beautiful’ published in the Daily Mail and everyone’s got something to say.

Brick has stated that she thought she was breaking a taboo that women shouldn’t be hated for being prettier than others. While moaning about how tiresome she finds it constantly receiving flowers from strangers, she admits to having had a helping hand up the career ladder thanks to her “good looks”. In theory she did have a good point, considering that one of the least admitted prejudices of all is the positive discrimination experienced by the attractive, yet Brick’s somewhat inflated view of herself and one-sided argument is what triggered such a vitriolic internet storm.

Many have taken Brick’s words literally and branded her delusional while others have labelled it a huge PR stunt; I mean can anyone really be that vain? If the latter is to be believed then maybe someone should be offering her congratulations; after all it did get her name and the Daily Mail’s name plastered all over TV, the Internet and across every other newspaper.

While Brick is baring the brunt of the abuse, the Daily Mail is clearly laughing all the way to the bank. Brick’s article has got thousands of people talking about the newspaper, and posting its name and links to its website all over the internet; including singer Lily Allen, who tweeted a link to the Daily Mail’s website for her three million followers to see.

From a PR perspective, some would say she deserves a pat on the back for creating such an impact. Although the general view of Brick is negative, she is currently enjoying riding a huge wave of publicity off the back of it all which some people could only dream of experiencing.

To date the article has received 5,725 comments on the Mail’s website, and 207,797 likes on Facebook, with Samantha Brick’s name becoming the biggest trending name on twitter within 24 hours of the article’s release. Brick’s extreme vanity has already received a reaction from numerous celebrity tweeters and prompted a personal appearance on ITV’s This Morning to defend herself.  Brick has made sure that everyone has formed an opinion on her – whether it is positive or negative.

When trawling through all the comments, articles and blog posts on the controversy, it does become apparent that this so-called “backlash” is more than likely part of Brick’s cleverly contrived plan for a career boost. Indeed, the frenzy surrounding her initial article has encouraged her to write a further two pieces for the Mail defending her views on beauty.

For now it seems that “Brick-gate” will continue going round in a vicious circle – for as long we keep talking about her conceited views, she will continue to respond (and be paid to do so), and the Daily Mail will continue to profit. In this day and age where just about anything can go viral thanks to sites such as You Tube and Twitter, Brick has clearly played a manipulative game in what could have been the beginning or the end of her career. Which leads me back to the original question; can all publicity be good publicity? Whether or not Brick’s 15 minutes lasts will certainly be a clear indicator of this.

So for now, this leaves me with just one question that everyone’s been asking – is she or isn’t she? Well I wouldn’t like to comment, beauty is of course in the eye of the beholder.

On average, creatives work for eight hours 13 minutes a day, send 28 emails and spend just over 12 minutes on social media sites.

Researchers for Mars Drinks UK asked 2001 male and female office workers across Britain about their average work day, including employees in marketing, finance, creative, HR, legal and IT sectors.

According to the results, despite the average workday for those in the creative professions being roughly 45 minutes longer than the typical office worker, with a lunch break that is three and a half minutes shorter, 50 per cent said that they are happy in their jobs. Only six per cent said that they hated where they work.

Throughout the day, creative workers receive 31 emails and send 28, both make and receive 24 phone calls and drink an average of three cups of tea or coffee.

IT issues are the biggest office irritant, including computers and printers inexplicably crashing, followed by colleagues who gossip when they should be working.

It’s fascinating stuff from Mars Drinks UK, but is it really telling us anything we (i.e. creatives) didn’t already know? Probably not.

The only surprise is that the average number of cups of tea or coffee drank in a day is just three.

Time to put the kettle on, I think.

(Story published on www.thedrum.co.uk)

Having recently graduated from Birmingham City University with a BA honours degree in English Literature and Language, Laura has already gained a wealth of experience in both PR and journalism through various internships whilst studying for her degree.

Laura was previously editor of her university’s student magazine, as well as fashion and beauty editor and PR assistant at online publication Rookie magazine. Having written for various other publications, online and print, Laura was looking to put her creative skills to good use and kickstart a career in PR after university.

With a self-proclaimed love for second-hand finds, when she’s not in the office, Laura can usually be found wondering around vintage fairs or charity shops in search of her next bargain.

Welcome to the team Laura!

So what is it that the public and judges on the show are looking for in the winner? What is that special ‘X’ ingredient that some have but so many lack? I guess if we knew we would all be as successful as Simon Cowell (minus the high waisted trousers and dazzling white teeth).

My suspicion is that there isn’t a magic formula for the perfect pop star, which led me on to thinking about what makes the perfect PR.

Headline Communications is currently looking for a junior account executive to join the team, and whilst the ability to hold a tune isn’t a prerequisite of the role, there are some things we will expect the successful candidate to demonstrate.

So before you pick up the phone to give us a call or start drafting an email, complete with covering letter and updated CV telling us how brilliant you are and how this role is perfect for you, take a look at the top 10 attributes that we think make the ‘perfect PR’.

1. Enthusiasm and Drive – As someone starting out in PR you should demonstrate an enthusiasm for the role and a desire to succeed. We’re not expecting an “I’ll sell my grandmother to get to the top” attitude but a little bit of ambition goes a long way.

2. Be confident – It may sound a little Gok Wan, but PR is all about the confidence. PR is a people business, so if you’re a shrinking violet it’s probably not the profession for you.

3. Multitasking – The ability to keep a number of plates spinning at the same time will almost certainly be a skill you will need to master.

4. Write succinctly – The golden rule of writing in PR is don’t use five words if one will do. This is one of the most difficult skills for graduates to learn after years of writing lengthy essays.

5. Creativity – Aspiring PRs need to demonstrate creative flair, whether it’s coming up with new campaign ideas or finding new angles for stories. In PR, ideas are the currency.

6. Organisation – The ability to organise yourself and others is a must.

7. Show some passion – Cliched, maybe, but being passionate about something, whether it’s PR or a personal hobby/interest, shows there’s more to you than just work. If we wanted a robot we would hire one.

8. Have fun – Take your work seriously but remember to have fun and enjoy it.

9. Know the news – We’re in the business of news so we expect you to keep abreast of the latest issues and current affairs. How can you advise clients if you don’t know what’s happening yourself?

And finally…

10. Make a good cup of tea – Useful but not essential.

Still interested? Then click here for more information.

For companies, a good corporate reputation is built on trust, be that through the provision of good products, the delivery of services and customer relations, or just communicating effectively about what you do with the people who matter the most. This includes customers, employees and the wider community in which you operate.

These groups will build a perception of your company based on what they see, hear and experience, either through direct communication from you or from other sources, such as word-of-mouth, the media and online.

PR Strategy

To ensure the right messages are getting through you need a carefully thought through PR strategy, which will help you to engage with the people and companies you need to talk to in order to influence what they think and win their loyalty.

Your PR strategy should support your business goals and objectives, and should identify target audiences, the key messages you want to convey and the tactics to be employed.

There are a number of different PR tactics that can be used, depending on who you want to target, from media relations and corporate affairs to stakeholder engagement and social media.

Media relations

A media relations programme, for example, will help build awareness and understanding of what you do through regular and favourable news coverage in the press, be it print, broadcast or online. This is a key element of any effective PR strategy.

A PR company will be able to assist in establishing and developing relationships with your target media and journalists, as well as identify the types of news angles and opportunities that will give you the exposure you desire.

Social media should be an integrated part of your strategy, rather than treated separately, as it will be able to support the dissemination of your news and key messages or work on a more sophisticated level to engage and interact with online audiences and influencers.

A good PR company will be able to advise you on the best strategy for your business.

Remember, it can take years to build a reputation but just days to destroy it.

Thanks!

Trying to convince new or existing clients about the power of social media is always a struggle. Sat in meetings, I’ve become used to the blank looks and scratching of heads as I start talking, in simple terms, about Twitter and Facebook, the importance of engaging with online audiences and business benefits of implementing a social media strategy.

Thank god then for Tippex and whoever the genius agency was who thought up their YouTube ‘tippexexperience’ Channel viral ad campaign.

The video, entitled ‘A hunter shoots a bear’ is posted on what looks like Youtube’s site and shows a hunter just about to shoot a grizzly bear (or rather a man dressed in a bear costume). But as he’s about to pull the trigger the hunter reaches out of the screen, picks up some Tippex and uses it to cover up the word ‘shoots’ in the title of the video. As the viewer, you are then asked to fill in the blank space with another word, sit back and watch as the bear and hunter play out the scenario of whatever word has been entered. For example, if you write ‘dance’ they dance together; write ‘fight’ and they have an onscreen punch up, and so on and so forth. The message is that you’re able to re-write the story, just as Tippex allows you to re-write something if you make a mistake.

It’s a clever idea, which not only strengthens their brand message but does it in a fun, interactive way. Not only that but no sooner had the link to the video been posted on Twitter was it doing the rounds amongst the Twitterati and quickly became a trending topic on the site.

It’s the perfect example of a well executed viral campaign and demonstrates the power of social media. Next time I get quizzical looks and scratching heads I’m going to use this as an example. If nothing else it will get a few laughs.

Take a look for yourself  http://www.youtube.com/user/tippexperience