Category Archives: media relations

When Leadership Talks AI Without Comms, Everyone Loses

Posted on by
Reply

In late April, Duolingo made headlines – not for its quirky language lessons, but for the language used by CEO Luis von Ahn. He announced an “AI-first” shift, positioning it as the nucleus of Duolingo’s business strategy. The intention was clear: innovate, lead the conversation and redefine education technology.

What followed was far from the reception von Ahn hoped to receive.

The criticism was not only focused on the use of AI, but its tone, timing and framing of the news. In particular, von Ahn’s publicly available companywide memo stating the company would “gradually stop using contractors to do work AI can handle” was seen as dismissive of the human cost of that transformation.

In the weeks that followed, Duolingo faced reputational challenges that are increasingly common when major business decisions are made without thorough evaluation of communications strategy. It’s become a timely case study evaluating how even well-intentioned innovations can falter when communications are not treated as a strategic business function.

The gap between strategy and messaging

At its core, Duolingo’s shift to AI reflects an undeniable and broad business trend. Organizations are rapidly adopting generative AI and automation to increase efficiency, reduce costs and improve scalability. While these moves are almost always declared necessary to remain competitive by leadership, they are not neutral.

When business transformation impacts people—particularly the very ones who build it— how leadership communicates matters as much as what is being communicated. In Duolingo’s case, comments from von Ahn emphasizing experimentation and efficiency, combined with previous AI-induced job reductions, raised concerns about whether the company fully considered the human element of its AI strategy.

Those concerns were further compounded by von Ahn’s comments not less than two weeks later, in which he said AI might be better suited than human teachers for educating children. An assertion that not-so-subtly suggests he envisions AI as a replacement for flesh and blood educators. While childcare services and specialized learning environments might still need human educators under such a vision, von Ahn’s remarks demonstrate a disregard for the complexities and nuances required to become a qualified teacher of future doctors, lawyers and engineers.

The absence of a clear, empathetic narrative invited public skepticism. It also created room for assumptions, misinterpretations and reputational risk. All of which undoubtedly will fall on von Ahn’s communications and risk teams to clean up. And despite the fact von Ahn recently tried to clarify his blunder by stating he “does not see AI as replacing what our employees do,” the damage has been done.

What Went Wrong: A Communications Perspective

Beyond the substance of the announcement, the problem lies in the breakdown between leadership and communications teams. When executives bypass or reduce the impact of communications teams in framing sensitive and complex topics like AI adoption or workforce changes, they not only jeopardize public perception but also expose the organization to avoidable reputational and operational risks.

This begs a significant question: How involved should communications teams be on these issues? Here’s what could happen if communications teams’ counsel is seriously considered or implemented:

  • Message discipline is strengthened across leadership: Major strategy pivots, especially those involving significantly disruptive transformations, demand carefully coordinated messaging at every level. When communications teams help shape the narrative early, they can coach executives on tone, timing and terminology, even what to avoid saying to ensure the company speaks with a unified voice.
  • Brand voice stays intact: A well-crafted message reflects the company’s values, not just a single executive’s view. Communications teams help leaders articulate bold visions without losing sight of empathy, humanity or business culture nuances.
  • The “why” remains visible: Change, good change, is easier to understand when stakeholders know the true intentions behind it. Strategic communication ensures bold moves are framed in the right context—how it will benefit users, support employees and position the company for long-term growth.

In Duolingo’s case, this proactive approach might have framed the shift to AI as a long-term value add while investing in talent and partnerships with educators. Rather, it was communicated as a pure efficiency gain and a need to be first to the detriment of human workers.

Lessons for every business leader

The Duolingo episode offers several takeaways for executives considering similar transformations:

  • Innovation is not a substitute for communication: Regardless of how forward-thinking the strategy is, it must be explained in a way that reflects empathy, clarity and foresight.
  • AI announcements require specialized messaging strategies: These are not routine product updates. Anything related to AI adoption must be treated with the same rigor and care as earnings reports, regulatory disclosures or acquisitions.
  • Internal stakeholders are your first audience: If employees feel blindsided, undervalued or expendable, the external message will most certainly fall flat.
  • Reputation is cumulative: Every comment from a CEO builds—or erodes—brand credibility. Once trust is lost, it’s difficult to get it back.

AI is here to stay, and it’s changing the way we operate. But it should also change the way we communicate. The pace of innovation must be matched by the discipline of communications strategy. Otherwise, companies not only risk internal friction and external scrutiny, but also long-term damage to their most valuable asset: trust.

To Speak or Not to Speak: How Brands Approach Difficult Topics

Posted on by
Reply

There’s nothing worse than someone butting into a conversation, only to add nothing of substance. It’s unnecessary, ruins a potentially productive discussion and leaves participants unsure about what to take from the interaction. It’s the same with brands taking a stance on national headlines.

The instinct to speak up about a nationally relevant, political issue or story was not born from thin air. In 2019, a Sprout Social study showed 70% of consumers found it important for brands to take a stance on social and political issues. But in a more recent study in 2023, Sprout Social reported 58% of consumers found it inappropriate for brands to speak about politics.

Why the change of heart and where does that leave brands now? A good communications team can help you weigh the risks and benefits of speaking out, keep a pulse on public sentiment and protect your brand from unforced errors.

Missing the Mark

Consumer cynicism about corporate politics stems in large part from years of perceived hollow messaging and little-to-no-action supporting the issues a brand claims to stand for. When protests following the murder of George Floyd erupted across the country in 2020, many businesses took the opportunity to share statements showing solidarity against racism. But not all messages were received positively.

It became easy for the public to recognize brands that had rushed to craft a statement or post a black square on their social media feeds because they felt they had to join the conversation. In the case of companies that chose to join the conversation around George Floyd’s murder like Netflix, with a reported track record at the time of regularly canceling shows led by diverse casts, the public reaction was anger. As more companies faced accusations of releasing statements with no authenticity or follow through, the public call for tangible action by these very companies to support the communities they claimed solidarity with grew louder.

Know Your Brand and Be Prepared

There is no single answer to the question of whether your company should take a stance on a public issue. It depends. However, it’s critical that strategic communications and public relations professionals play a lead role in these discussions and at every step of the decision-making process. Together with your team, they can take a strategic assessment of the situation, considering the following:

  • Your brand’s core values. Reflect on your company’s core values and ensure any outgoing message is consistent. A statement contradicting a tenet of your company’s mission can muddle your audience’s understanding of your organization’s identity.
  • Your audience. If your organization hasn’t previously discussed the issues at hand but believes it could score points with a new audience, it’s important to understand a statement on a sensitive issue likely should not be your first step. Instead, your PR team can help you to strategically find ways to gradually build visibility and credibility with a new audience through earned media and more. Otherwise, you risk leaving previously loyal consumers feeling left behind and the perception of seeking to profit from an unfortunate event.
  • The risks. Political or social justice issues can be incredibly divisive. It’s important to know that no matter what, putting out a statement is bound to ruffle feathers and turn people away from your brand. If your company determines issuing a statement is sensible, it’s always smart to work with your team to develop a plan should your statement not be received as expected. A good PR team can help you prepare a comprehensive crisis strategy.
  • Your value-add. Polite platitudes with no real action or investments to support an issue could end up hurting your brand, rather than helping. Even consumers who generally agree with the sentiment of your message could potentially see it as offensively hollow. The last thing you want is to be accused of using an important issue for profit, so make sure your organization’s addition is thoughtful and substantive, and remember, actions speak louder than words.

With more and more channels to voice opinions from X to Threads to Bluesky and LinkedIn, we’re seeing brands fighting for the spotlight on multiple fronts. While it may be tempting to weigh in on the hot social issue of the moment to attract viewers, it’s critical to consider one poorly received post can cause untold damage to a brand’s reputation. The right public relations partner can help you consider every angle and highlight potential blind spots before you decide to wade into murky waters.

Hiring a Public Relations Agency: What Clients Get Wrong and How to Fix It

Posted on by
Reply

Organizations sometimes hire public relations agencies based on how much they charge, what they are willing to guarantee and, occasionally, who they claim to know at certain media outlets. And, in doing so, these organizations are likely making the poorest of investments and putting their reputations at risk.

Why? Because none of that matters.

Let’s talk about the money first. Like most professional services, pricing for public relations can run the gamut. And, like most any other service, you get what you pay for. You’re not paying someone to churn out rubber stamped stories glowingly in the wonder that is you. That’s not PR. Instead, you are hiring communications experts to build inroads with the media; to discern the stories and guidance your target audience(s) is seeking and to create a series of ongoing opportunities to have your voice heard and your message clearly understood. This is a long-term investment and should be considered as such. Anything less is often a waste of money. 

Additionally, there are some shops out there—I don’t call them PR agencies—that will guarantee placements. This should be a red flag for you because of the associated reputational risks. Shops that guarantee placements are doing one of the following:

  • Pay-to-play placements. The shop is paying to use the space, dressing up advertising as earned media. This content has low SEO value, has a limited shelf life, is typically expensive and can dilute brand authority because it is usually labeled as advertising or sponsored content. This means there is no perception of a third-party endorsement, which is the whole point of getting your brand in the media through PR. 
  • They’re tapping low-value outlets. Obscure blogs, television programs, syndicated content sites, magazines you’ve never heard of or low-traffic outlets that take just about anything all fit this category. Your exposure is nominal at best, and the credibility of these outlets is always in question by anyone who sees them.
  • They have pre-arranged deals. Some shops pay freelance writers who work with certain outlets to pitch your story to their editors. In addition to being ethically questionable, thisoften violates the editorial policies of these outlets. When they learn their paid writer is getting paid by a third party to push a paid story, they often reject those stories and,sometimes, blacklist the pitched organization from future opportunities.

Then there is name dropping. Simply put, any public relations pro doing his or her job shouldknow the journalists covering the industries they represent. Finding names of journalists can be done by anyone or any AI, but that’s not the real value of a public relations firm. However, especially in an era when clicks determine both the value of the story as well as, in some cases, the financial benefits to the journalist, having a name by itself will only take you so far. You need to know the right journalists, along with how they think and where their story interests lie. Youalso, most importantly, need a strong story. And one that isn’t slavishly promotional. Lacking a good story of import to the journalist’s audience, all you have is their name and—frankly—thatis simply nowhere near enough.

What organizations must consider are the following:

  • Experience. PR agencies should be able to demonstrate they know the space that is important to you by telling you the current trends reporters are covering, and showing you recent success in that space that either matches or is closely adjacent to that which the organization is seeking to achieve.
  • Track record. Off the bat, learn what coverage they have landed for clients over time, and don’t be wowed by one recognizable media logo. Talk to their clients, past and present, and ask what they think about the agency and the work they have produced for them. Both current and former clients should be able to positively discuss the agency’s wins and what they liked about the relationship. If an agency cannot produce at least two former clients to speak on their behalf, run.
  • Credibility. Is the agency, and its staff, established in your space? What do the journalists in the space think of them? Do they churn out press releases and rarely interact with journalists? How have they overcome challenges to getting coverage for clients? Do they understand your industry?
  • Personnel. Agencies of all types, and PR agencies are not immune, have been known to pull a bait-and-switch. The prospective client meets with experienced, senior agency personnel. Once contracts are signed, it becomes a revolving door of junior staff, some with little or no experience. Ask who will work on your account, and insist on meeting those individuals and looking at their resumes or bios. Do they have the requisite experience to achieve your goals? Are they in-house or freelance? What specifically will they each be responsible for? This piece is often the most important in determining success.

In my 22 years of experience, boutique and specialized PR agencies often best serve clients in niche industries or markets. They have the experience, the insider language, the track record, credibility and the personnel to do the job well. Often, senior agency leadership will work directly on the accounts. This is rarely the case with big PR firms, and the smaller generalist agencies often cannot check all the boxes.

When in doubt, follow the specialty. Doing so is often the best investment to protect your most important asset: your reputation.

Hello Procrastinators: A Look at REAL ID Chaos and Communications

Posted on by
Reply

Whether it’s evidenced by crowds at retailers on Christmas Eve or the onslaught of extension requests sent to the Internal Revenue Service on April 15 each year, it appears America has its fair share of procrastinators. And the current chaos around the U.S. government’s REAL ID deadline only further proves that is another case in point. While there is no surefire way to win over the most stubborn procrastinators, a thoughtful communications campaign to raise awareness is a good place to start.  

A Real Problem 

The deadline—which had been moved numerous times previously— to obtain a REAL ID is May 7, 2025. The REAL ID initiative stems from a recommendation from the 9/11 Commission to establish more universal standards for identification cards and drivers’ licenses to increase security and reduce fraud. After May 7, the REAL ID will be required for Americans to board commercial aircraft, enter certain federal facilities or enter nuclear power plants. 

While the REAL ID initiative has been in play for 20 years, the “real” deadline seems to have come as a surprise for some. CBS News just reported that for people polled in a set of 30 states, fewer than 70% of residents who meet the requirements have a REAL ID. They also found, in 17 other states, fewer than 50% of the eligible population had obtained a REAL ID. 

With just several days until the deadline, Americans are scrambling, worried they will have difficulty boarding flights while airports are readying their teams for long lines and frustrated travelers. But is all of this confusion and delay due to a lack of communication?  

Communicating REAL ID 

The U.S. Department of Homeland Security seemed to understand the assignment. They knew getting Americans educated about the REAL ID requirement and encouraging them to act might be a heavy lift. They also recognized a good public awareness campaign embracing a flurry of marketing and PR initiatives would be key.  

The department launched its “Be your REAL ID self” campaign in January 2021 with digital toolkits for government agencies and industry partners to share communications and marketing materials on their websites and social media, as well as through direct mail and on-site signage. And while Homeland Security had its own communications initiatives, individual states went out to try to stave off delays and discord as the deadline neared. For example, last June, Oregon’s Department of Transportation posted it was in search of a firm to launch an advertising and marketing campaign with a $500k budget to help raise awareness ahead of the transition.   

As to public relations specifically, when I asked ChatGPT how many news articles had been written about REAL ID, it said, “​While there isn’t a precise count of all news articles written about REAL ID, it’s clear that the topic has garnered extensive media coverage since the REAL ID Act was enacted in 2005.” Coverage was found in NPR, The Washington Post, CBS News, ABC News, The Associated Press and more. With significant media coverage and a multi-faceted marketing campaign, the public likely knew about the REAL ID deadline; If they failed to act on the information or are simply procrastinating, perhaps that is on them.  

Regardless of whether you see the REAL ID roll out as a communications success or failure, it’s important to understand the elements of a good public awareness campaign.  

  • Understand your goal and your audience: The shifting of deadlines in years past likely complicated the government’s efforts to achieve the goal of getting Americans to meet the May 7th deadline. A good campaign will have a clear achievable goal to raise awareness, draw people to a website, attract sales, etc. 
  • Encourage idea sharing between PR and marketing: In a complex campaign like this, the marketing and PR teams were likely talking to one another. Too often, the teams are expected to work in a vacuum. This can lead to missed opportunities, doubled efforts and conflict. 
  • Develop clear and consistent messaging: Clear consistent messaging is critical because no matter how often someone hears a message, procrastinators will delay. The message should be clear – in this case, explaining what needs to be done, why and when. 
  • Conduct proactive, persistent and regular outreach: A PR team should be regularly talking to media on your behalf. Reporters tend to stay away from promotional material, but any time you can tie your initiatives to a timely event or trend, you are more likely to gain a reporter’s attention. 
  • Leverage social media: Along the lines of the value of repeated messaging above, be sure to leverage social media. Share updates and links to news coverage, consider surveys and more to build engagement. 
  • Engage ambassadors: The REAL ID team wisely tried to tap into industry partners and government offices for support. Trusted members of the community or people with whom your audience is in regular contact can be valuable resources in sharing your key messages and getting audiences to act. 

Despite delays and extensions in recent years, it seems the May 7th deadline for the REAL ID may be … real. While considerable efforts were made to ensure the public was ready, many remain unprepared for the transition. Those who are prepared likely acted on some part of the communication campaign. Those who have not likely heard the call but chose to put it off until tomorrow. 

What to Expect from a PR Agency As the Pitching Pool Grows Shallower  

Posted on by
Reply

Journalists are outnumbered. As the public relations industry has welcomed more communicators into the field, news outlets nationwide have faced massive layoffs that have vastly reduced the number of reporters and editors.  

Between 2023 and 2033, the public relations industry workforce is expected to grow by 6%, according to the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics. There are now more than seven public relations professionals for every journalist and with some reporters receiving over 100 emails a day, finding a way to grab and keep their attention is critical for any pitching effort.  

It’s tough breaking through an already congested news cycle without the uneven personnel ratio making competition for attention even more difficult. This growing ratio should impact your vetting process when considering your next communications firm or in evaluating the effectiveness of your current agency.  

Consider the following questions when evaluating a PR partner or prospective partner:  

  • Do They Do their Homework? Relevance is the name of the game. Before any good media relations pro jumps into writing, they make sure the topic is relevant to the interests of an outlet’s readership and personalize the pitch to target the reporter’s specific beat. If a reporter sees a pattern of irrelevant pitches coming from your company, they will be quick to ignore outreach from your PR team, and potentially your company, in the future. 
  • Do They Know How to Tell a Story that Matters to Your Audience? Every pitch entering a journalist’s inbox needs to be concise, clear, compelling, nonpromotional and ideally speak to an industry trend or hot topic. Context is important, but the goal is to offer proof points about meeting the needs and interest of the audience not promoting the company or brand.  Working with an agency staffed with former journalists can help. 
  • Do They Work with Urgency? No one likes having their time wasted, especially a journalist on a deadline. You need a PR firm to position you as a ready resource for a reporter, not as unreliable or unprepared.  
  • Can They Build Relationships? If a pitch is compelling enough to break through the static and engage an editor or reporter, a good media relations pro should use it as an opportunity for relationship-building. If a journalist recognizes your company’s subject matter experts as reliable and relevant to their audience, it can open the door to future opportunities. After all, it’s about what you know in today’s media environment, not who you know. That said, rapport is still important. Your PR rep should be proactively identifying reporters relevant to your industry, talking to them with regularity to understand what they are working on, as well as offering introductory meetings to ensure your subject matter experts are on their radar for future stories.  

Public relations pros cannot change the media landscape, but the good ones are adapting by taking the time to understand the current state of journalism and recalibrating where needed. Business owners and leaders will want to make sure they are working with PR partners who get it. 

It’s called earned media for a reason, and while there is never a guarantee for coverage, these tips could help you find the agency that can make your company’s engagement with journalists stand out among a sea of mundane, irrelevant, promotional or just plain old uninteresting pitches.  

Houston, We Have a Problem: A Female First Campaign Lost in Space

Posted on by
Reply

Pop star Katy Perry, news anchor Gayle King and four other high-profile women launched into space this week with high hopes of inspiring a swell of female empowerment. But, the Blue Origin 11-minute flight—carrying six glamorous women in full make up, donning matching blue, fitted spacesuits —did not resonate with the public as intended. Instead, it launched a chorus of criticism by celebrities and others who bashed the event as tone deaf and an empty show of feminism.

So, what went wrong? How did this “one giant stunt for womankind,” as a critic from The New York Times called it, go wrong and how might a different comms approach have produced a more positive outcome?

Exploring the Issue

The flight was part of the New Shepard program at Blue Origin, founded by billionaire Jeff Bezos. In announcing the flight, the women described the trip as an endeavor to encourage STEM careers and female empowerment, according to interviews with Elle.

The rocket, which pilots itself, carried Perry and King, as well as aerospace engineer Aisha Bowe, civil rights activist Amanda Nguyen, film producer Kerianne Flynn, and Lauren Sanchez, a journalist and Bezos’s fiancée. Even though the women were not space professionals, the Blue Origin team labeled the group as the rocket’s “astronaut crew.”  Blue Origin described them as storytellers who inspire others —as advocates for students in STEM (Science Technology, Engineering and Mathematics), civil rights, philanthropy, overcoming adversity and more.

While the trip may have been designed to encourage girls to consider STEM careers, the women aboard were seen as space tourists. They were not operating the rocket or fulfilling any astronaut responsibilities and left audiences reaching to connect them with STEM.

Upping Their Game

Could the right communications approach have changed the outcome here? Maybe. However, we do see a few areas where Blue Origin could have better executed this mission.

  • Authenticity in messaging: Blue Origin thought they were planning a mission to inspire young girls and women to explore new careers, but the wealthy, well-connected women selected to participate did not relate well to audiences. Brands need to ensure their messaging is authentic, compelling and connects to their audiences. The public watching and reading about the launch are not millionaires or billionaires who can afford the undisclosed ticket price. Audiences might have better received a passenger manifesto made up of successful women in STEM, rather than celebrities and journalists.
  • The brand’s reputation: Amazon, also founded by Bezos, has a reputation for disregarding the environment with its packaging and fleet of delivery vehicles in constant motion across the globe. While Blue Origin claims to be sustainably minded using reusable rockets and researching ways to encourage sustainability through space exploration, many viewed the rocket launch as damaging to the environment, as well as a waste of resources when many are experiencing financial hardship. Blue Origin may have been better served by hosting more female scientists like Bowe on the mission, conducting research to further sustainability, and creating messaging to show how those initiatives might connect to the brand.
  • Optics: Full-makeup, perfect blow-outs and designer matching spacesuits set a new tone for space exploration. Blue Origin’s comms team should have considered the optics of the women posing in slinky suits with professional makeup and hair. The comms team should have considered suggesting attire that looked less Hollywood and more professional rather than monied glamour.
  • Leveraging post-event energy: After the women returned to Earth and interviews were conducted, audiences were left feeling flat. Perhaps a post-event press conference with the women talking about the next steps for advancements in STEM for females, for which this mission has opened doors, would have conveyed a real commitment, garnered more attention and furthered a goal of female empowerment.

While the launch gained plenty of media attention, the resulting backlash has not benefited Blue Origin or the six women who chose to board the rocket. When considering a media stunt or event, be sure to think strategically. Not doing so could leave your brand identity lost in space.

April Fools: Messaging Blunders That Should Be a Joke But Aren’t

Posted on by
Reply

I wish I was joking. What follows really ought to be an exercise in April Fool’s frivolity and humor. Unfortunately, the only thing foolish about what follows is these brand communications efforts were undertaken with some level of intent or ineptitude that resulted in public embarrassment for some or all involved.

With that, I offer the top five most April Fool’s-worthy communications that really should have been overseen by a competent public relations professional:

  1. Mixed Signals: On March 24, some of the Trump Administration’s most senior leadership commiserated over an imminent, and then later completed, attack on Houthi rebels in Yemen who are accused of carrying out missile and drone attacks on shipping lanes in the Red Sea. They did so via an app called Signal, a free open-source and encrypted messaging app, the use of which by government employees has, to date, been discouraged by the federal government. That group chat included a well-known U.S. journalist, leading to an embarrassment of sometimes competing explanations, excuses and denials that anything sensitive was shared. They tried to chalk it up to something like a fat-thumbs-texting-moment where you didn’t mean to text your ex, but you did and now you very deeply regret it.
  2. Oh Boya, a Press Release from Goya: In a what-medication-was-he-on-moment, Goya Foods CEO Bob Unanue issued an ill-considered, rambling and seemingly pointless self-published press release in February announcing his new, but extremely unclear chapter after the Goya board allegedly voted him out. The release included a stream-of-consciousness quote from Unanue about child trafficking. File this one under friends don’t let CEOs self-publish press releases.
  3. Dude, Where’s My Car?: Jaguar went full SNL/Calvin Klein commercial crazy late last year when it rolled out its new branding in a techno-beat, multiracial, gender-bending, psychedelic-color driven ad campaign that seemed to offer a little bit of everything … except its iconic automobiles. While trying to defend the company’s rebrand as “bold” and “imaginative,” the public seemed to respond with a collective eye-roll and complete dismissal of one of the most confusing rebrands/commercials of the modern era.
  4. Finger-licking Eh: In 2024, McDonald’s—the bastion of Big Macs and Dollar Menus—took a bold step in introducing its first beauty product line. In partnership with beauty brand Nails.INC, Mickey D’s created a line of nail products that mirrored its brand colors in polishes, along with stickers and a French-fry-inspired French manicure. Ironically, the fast-food giant has a standing policy that does not allow employees to wear nail polish. The campaign ended almost as quickly as it was announced as the public did not seem to be lovin’ it.
  5. Ain’t Mis-Bee-haven: Spring was in the air, but a 2024 campaign proved to be a buzzkill for dating app Bumble after it introduced a series of advertisements advocating against celibacy. It was an ill-considered attempt to humorously address dating frustrations related to dating apps. Backlash was swift, with women’s organizations and others noting women choose celibacy for a range of reasons, including safety, reproductive rights and more. With its wings clipped, Bumble quickly reversed course and ended the campaign with a commitment to help support domestic violence organizations.

If there is a takeaway or lesson across all these situations it is this: Avoid becoming a fool, in April or any other month, by ensuring your internal or external comms teams have a say in all brand communications. Public relations pros know how to manage the message as well as alert senior leaders of potential, unforced errors that can place a dunce cap high-atop the brand’s reputation.

Brand Authenticity Requires Communicators to Play Lead Roles

Posted on by
Reply

While brands have a voice in shaping their narratives, it is their publics who play an outsized role in holding organizations to their brand promise and reputation.

One of the best time-tested methods of ensuring adherence to brand authenticity is having a public relations or communications professional at the decision-making table from the start. Failing to do so runs the risk of self-inflicted reputational harm that is extremely difficult, and often expensive to dial back later.

In brands we trust

B2C as well as B2B consumers have vast resources to evaluate brands and a wealth of options from which to choose. Brands that consistently speak to the values and priorities of their consumers engender trust and an emotional connection. According to April 2024 data released from Shopify, 86% of American consumers say authenticity is a key reason they buy or engage with a brand.

Whether it is Red Bull, GE or Salesforce, these companies and others are great examples of organizations that use engaging storytelling, emotionally targeted messaging and brand authenticity to reach and connect with their audiences. We know Red Bull gives you wings. We know GE is focused on imagination at work, and that Salesforce positions you to manage success, not software. Their messaging goes beyond taglines, and their stories resonate with their publics because they meet a need.

What Ben Franklin said

Ben Franklin famously quipped, “It takes many good deeds to build a good reputation, and only one bad one to lose it.” There are countless brands that illustrate Franklin’s point.

The example set by Target regarding its shifting DEI policies has put … well, a target on the Target brand with calls for boycotts and declining sales. Such inconsistent messaging causes brand audiences to reconsider the authenticity and trustworthiness of the organizations at issue. Consumers aren’t sure what, if anything, the brand stands for and repairing that damage will be a long and expensive undertaking.

On the B2B side, there is no more powerful example of reputational damage due to a lack of authenticity—as well as transparency—as WeWork. The company promoted a utopia-style revolution in how workspaces would evolve while leveling the playing field for entrepreneurs to work collaboratively. In reality, the company infamously misled everyone regarding its spending, profitability and stability, leading to a loss of trust among investors and business clients that ultimately led to the founder being ousted and a Chapter 11 filing in 2023.

The power of communications strategy

A chief communications officer with a seat at the leadership table can help organizations adhere to brand authenticity. These professionals are trained to assess the communications risks of any given action by an organization that plays out in front of its publics—internal or external. They help brands avoid unforced errors and plan for a range of responses from their target audiences.

Having that comms professional in the room from the start of major brand decisions can lead to important conversations and questions filtered through a public perception lens, such as:

  • How does this align with the public’s understanding of who we are and what we do?
  • What risks are we taking with this change, and what can we do to mitigate them?
  • Does this change align with our core values?
  • How should we communicate this change clearly to our audiences, and what are the best channels to do so?
  • What is the plan to measure the impact of this change on our brand reputation and perception?
  • What is the backup plan if this change is not well received, and what is the trigger to institute that plan?

Brand leaders are best served when their PR teams challenge group think and work to consider the reaction to organizational change among various audiences. This approach can strengthen and even improve the proposed changes, better aligning them with the brand’s reputation and perception and lead to a smoother introduction to its publics. However, making change better and more sustainable only happens if the communicators are in the room where decisions are made from the beginning. That is how you maintain brand authenticity, and it matters.

Keys to Boosting Brand Awareness in 2025: Embrace New Media

Posted on by
Reply

While you contemplate adding extra protein and strength training to your weight loss plans for 2025, why not consider adding new media and video to your company’s communications strategies?

A turn of the calendar to a new year presents an ideal opportunity to not only consider weight loss and exercise, but to evaluate business strategies as well – both successful and failed strategies. In public relations, as with many other industries, this new year refresh or reinvention beckons us to consider the latest trends and undertake new initiatives to continually boost brand awareness in the year ahead.

This time of year is replete with industry experts offering outlooks on what we can expect in the year ahead. And while traditional PR tactics, like contributed articles to well-respected outlets continue to carry weight, we are increasingly seeing good PR pros encouraging industry pundits to take on new platforms or new features of existing platforms to share their views, including – LinkedIn Live, LinkedIn Newsletters, TikTok, and new X competitor Blue Sky, among others.

Depending on the audience targeted, each platform can yield considerable results for company leaders who offer original, valuable and educational content. Leaders who want to boost their brand’s visibility in 2025 should consider the following new media:

  • LinkedIn Lives – In 2025, we will continue to see savvy thought leaders connect with their audiences through LinkedIn’s event-hosting platform LinkedIn Live. LinkedIn Lives are becoming increasingly popular for the platform’s ability to host live events with a casual feel – with one or multiple speakers, while engaging and interacting with the audience through a live chat function.

The tool markets itself in many ways as the event can easily be promoted among LinkedIn followers of the company page or the individual hosting the event. Followers will receive notifications about the event, as well as when it goes live. Moreover, any form of video in social media tends to generate higher levels of engagement than written content alone.

In the insurance space, digital marketing and transformation guru Ema Roloff has seen tremendous success with this resource, gathering roughly 1,600 registrations for an insurance predictions and trends event in late 2024. She hopes to do the same and more this year ahead of her Insurance Trends to Watch for 2025 event Dec. 17.

  • LinkedIn Newsletters – As LinkedIn continues to flex its authority as the social platform for business professionals, its newsletter function has also become increasingly popular for sharing thought leadership and other educational, nonpromotional content. LinkedIn claims it has seen a 59% increase in people publishing newsletter articles and a 47% rate increase in engagement. The platform claims more than 184,000 newsletters published. Once published, these newsletters invite your connections and followers automatically to subscribe so they are notified each time you publish with an in-app and email notification. Another perk – the success of your content is easily measurable through LinkedIn analytics.
  • Tik Tok – While Tik Tok has primarily been a successful B2C tool, we are now seeing the platform used more frequently for B2B engagement. In fact, Roloff has told us, her B2B Tik Tok videos on digital marketing in insurance have attracted more than one million views. We’ve been hearing for years that video content is essential for business communications, and Tik Tok proves the point and should not be overlooked in 2025.
  • BlueSky – As some look to move away from X, the app Bluesky, which bills itself as “an open foundation for the social internet” has been gaining popularity. In fact, BlueSky just reported crossing the 15 million user mark. As audiences flock to newer platforms like Bluesky and Meta’s Threads, business leaders will want to take note to ensure they are meeting their customers where they are.

To understand new media available to your business and what might be right for you, work with a communications specialist or agency that understands your business objectives, your audiences and the new media that can deliver on those objectives and audiences. Technology and AI are quickly changing how we do business, as well as how we communicate and interact with each other and prospects. Don’t get left behind.

Wicked-ly Long: How long-form content can be valuable with the right message and strategy

Posted on by
Reply

As the highly anticipated film adaptation of Wicked the Musical hits box offices worldwide this weekend, audiences are eager to see how director Jon M. Chu will bring the story to life. In April 2022, it was revealed that the adaptation would be released as two films, split by the first and second acts of the stage show. And in September 2023, it was announced that the first installment would run a whopping two hours and forty minutes—longer than the total runtime of the original production.

In an age dominated by digital media, we’ve been repeatedly told that attention spans are shrinking. The American Psychological Association reports that the average attention span has dropped from 12 seconds in 2000 to just 8.25 seconds in 2024. Yet, some of the most successful Hollywood blockbusters in recent years have defied this trend with above-average runtimes. While advances in technology and more sophisticated storytelling techniques may be contributing to audience engagement, society’s willingness to embrace long-form content challenges our understanding of how people consume media. Not only are audiences willing to sit through extended films—they anticipate them for months, buy merchandise, participate in online discussions and pack theaters in record numbers.

There are countless reasons why audiences become deeply invested in a story, and it’s undeniable that films like Wicked, Avatar, Oppenheimer and Avengers: Endgame benefit from unfathomable marketing budgets. However, a valuable communications lesson can be mined from the success of these blockbusters: when people perceive something as valuable, they’ll make the time to consume it.

Will anyone read it?

This lesson extends beyond films to written content, such as articles or blogs. Understanding how these mediums have evolved is key. In the 2000s, the average article length ranged from 500 to 800 words. By the 2010s, this figure had grown to roughly 2,000 words. Today, articles are back down to an average of 500–800 words, while blogs often remain closer to 2,000 words. These fluctuations reflect ever-changing factors like algorithm updates and SEO best practices.

Many brands stick rigidly to short-form content, fearing audience fatigue or wasted efforts. However, a strategic mix of short- and long-form content can offer a more comprehensive approach, giving audiences a deeper understanding of a brand’s insights.

What warrants a longer message?

Not every announcement or discussion requires a long-form message. The key is understanding when more depth is necessary and where that depth makes sense. For instance, a general press release announcing a personnel change or new product offering is best kept succinct and easily digestible. Overcomplicating simple announcements risks disengaging readers and the reporters who you hope will cover it as a story.

On the other hand, targeted content—such as a blog or article for an audience with a preliminary understanding of the subject—can benefit from a longer, more detailed explanation. For example, a trade publication or a subscribed site catering to industry professionals may justify a 1,500–2,000-word deep dive that addresses relatable pain points and offers insights on trends.

The critical question to ask is: Who are you talking to? General audiences unfamiliar with industry nuances might struggle with long-form content, while more specialized audiences may appreciate detailed analysis. This is where thought leadership plays a pivotal role. While press releases are typically concise (around 400 words), thought leadership offers companies the opportunity to dive deeper into subject matter and educate, justifying longer formats.

The value of strategic communication

A skilled public relations team can help brands determine the right time, place, and format for their messages. Long-form content can help to humanize a brand’s experts, foster transparency with the public and solidify the brand’s reputation as an industry leader. A well-rounded PR approach that considers various audiences, their preferred methods of information consumption, and the gaps a product or service can address is essential for effective messaging.

Long-form content is not obsolete in today’s digital world, but brands must approach it strategically. And as moviegoers flock to experience the magic of Wicked on the big screen, let it serve as a reminder: audiences will make the time if you make it worth their while.