Category Archives: pr

The Search is Over: Why You Need Public Relations More Than Ever

Posted on by
Reply

Online searches will never be the same, and for some, this is a good thing. For others, the struggle is about to get real.

On June 30, Google initiated its 2025 Core Update. Expected to roll out over a three-week period, this new iteration of Google’s algorithm will bring significant changes to search rankings. The new algorithm will focus on high-quality content and user experience, prioritizing helpful, relevant and authoritative content.

As with everything these days, this change leans on AI. Because AI-generated summaries (a/k/a zero-click searches) are, so far, less than perfect, brands should anticipate their messaging, positioning, tone and outright fact-based details may be summarized incorrectly by Google, potentially pulling in third-party or outdated information about the brand. As a result, brand websites could experience a drop in site traffic beginning this summer.

Brands can also expect to see a further decline in keyword-centric search engine optimization campaigns. Meanwhile, optimizing for voice, visual and video search will become of increased importance. This is already happening as organic search results are pushed further down by Google as more real estate goes to paid advertising, sponsored content and Google’s own products.

At the heart of these changes are brand authority and credibility. Those who lack a strong online presence—meaning frequent, engaging and varied source content—will be left behind in this new era of online search. For brands, public relations should be considered an increasingly critical tool for reputation management, promotion and search more generally.

The Credibility Factor

Creating frequent, original content, in a myriad of ways across a range of websites and social channels, is the best and most effective response to this seismic shift in online search.

PR pros can employ a range of tools to meet the changing landscape of search driven by AI. Securing multiple and regular opportunities for subject matter experts or brand leaders to represent their organizations outside of owned media (brand websites, blogs, social channels, etc.), will be paramount. These can include:

  • Podcasts, audio as well as video
  • Trade publication media interviews
  • Contributed articles to trade and other vertical media outlets
  • Guest blogs
  • Tier One media interviews or opinion pieces (i.e., Wall Street Journal, FOX News, Financial Times, The New York Times, etc.)

Additionally, brands will need to focus more on their owned content as part of their response to this change. Creating more robust content on platforms like LinkedIn Company Pages, brand websites and blogs, newsletters and online video content will be critical. Additionally, brand leaders will need to rethink the look, tone and substance of that content by unloading jargon and using more casual language to increase the likelihood of being found as voice search continues to grow.

As of June 2025, digital marketing firm SevenAtoms reported one in five global internet users now employ voice commands to search online, with 153.5 million U.S. adults expected to use voice assistants in 2025. That content will also need to incorporate more brand-focused Q&A information to respond to both voice and conversational search terms as traditional SEO continues to decline. Finally, it will be important to maximize brand websites for rapid loading as well as speedy mobile optimization.

When a brand’s public relations team secures credible, third-party media coverage and mentions in relevant, reputable media, this content will provide much of the high value, authoritative signals now prioritized in all search through varied placements and backlinks. Credibility, context and expertise are all core tenets of any effective public relations campaign, making PR the most effective way to help brands insulate themselves from the pace of change. Done well and with frequent, authoritative content and sources, some brands may see their search results improve overtime, allowing their SEO dollars to be repurposed elsewhere, perhaps to their public relations campaigns, as competition for human eyeballs continues to grow almost as quickly as the pace of AI adoption.

Mission (Im)possible: Securing Quality Coverage in a Busy News Cycle

Posted on by
Reply

In the media world, specifically earned media, timing is everything. When a major global or even regional event dominates headlines–whether it’s an election, economic crisis, natural disaster or cultural flashpoint—an already competitive media terrain becomes significantly more challenging to navigate. During these high-stakes news cycles, off-topic coverage opportunities shrink while competition for news desks’ attention intensifies on the topic DuJour. And yet, public relations professionals are still required to deliver results for their clients. Dare I say: it may seem like a “mission impossible.”

This expectation is not misplaced. An experienced public relations team knows how to assess a shifting landscape, identify new angles and pivot to fit changing narratives. However, this challenge-success dynamic is rarely achieved in isolation. Behind every story placement secured during a challenging news cycle is a strategic collaboration between the public relations team and the client. These collaborations are built on trust, agility and shared understanding of the exact message to be delivered.

Break News, Not Your Pitch

Understanding how to secure media coverage during turbulent periods requires a clear grasp of what makes these cycles so daunting. Increasingly, media outlets of all sizes operate with limited bandwidth, both in terms of space and staffing. When a major story breaks, editorial priorities narrow. Feature stories, particularly those not tied to the day’s breaking headlines, are dropped. Industry reporters and editors may be called upon to bolster the ranks of breaking news teams or to transfer their efforts to broader, related stories.

For PR practitioners, a major news event can mean a compelling angle that worked last week, or even yesterday, may now be irrelevant. Press announcements will likely go unread. Thoughtfully curated pitches will likely be drowned out by sexier storylines. In these moments, cookie-cutter PR tactics fall flat, requiring teams to think outside the box and with greater precision.

Opportunities do exist in crowded news cycles; They just require a new lens rather than big, bold actions. Brands and their PR teams must find ways to stay relevant as news evolves and various topics circulate through the news cycle. One strategy might involve aligning commentary with a broader narrative or frontline experience— that angle might still find a place, even when newsrooms are stretched thin.

In other cases, the best course of action is to shift scenes, even temporarily. If the broadcast spotlight isn’t available, it may be worth building momentum elsewhere. Redirecting outreach toward regional outlets, industry trades or podcasts still running on normal editorial timelines can keep the story moving. These opportunities provide meaningful visibility and help maintain narrative continuity until the right opportunity with bigger media targets arise.

Radio Silence and Soundbites: What client can do to keep stories alive

Clients play a critical role in making these pivots possible. The most successful partnerships during crowded or chaotic news moments are those where clients remain responsive, adaptable and open to recalibration. That might mean fast-tracking internal approvals to meet deadlines or dropping everything to speak with a reporter. It might even involve rethinking a thought leadership angle or surfacing fresh insights that haven’t yet seen the light of day.

Equally crucial is a willingness to listen. Public relations firms bring strong media relationships and editorial instincts. When it’s recommended to pause a campaign or hold a story pitch for better timing, it’s to be sensitive to what’s taking place in the news cycle. It’s akin to a director calling “cut” mid-scene to protect the bigger picture. The goal is to preserve credibility and maximize long-term impact, even if it means temporarily shelving a story idea.

Difficult news cycles don’t always erase opportunities. They simply raise the bar, requiring sharper coordination and smarter, data-driven storytelling. Ultimately, success in a busy or breaking news cycle is more about choosing your moment rather than brute-forcing a story into media.

Public and media relations wins during impossible news cycles are rarely achieved by heroic acts. They are a result of an ensemble effort involving agency-client coordination, real-time strategy adjustments, and a focus on telling both a well-considered and well-timed story to an audience that is willing to engage. When that alignment clicks, even the most crowded news cycle can turn into an unexpected opportunity.

The Secret to Great Public Relations: Client Candor

Posted on by
Reply

This July marks the start of Kimball Hughes Public Relations’ 30th year in business. Reflecting on the agency’s history along with my own 22-year run as a PR professional, I’ve thought a lot about some of the most valuable PR lessons, for agencies and organizations that hire them. The one I keep coming back to is this: stop selling. And I’m talking to the clients. 

Of course, agencies of all kinds, at least in the beginning, need to sell clients on hiring them. Meanwhile an interesting, frequent and largely unspoken parallel exists where clients—for- and non-profits alike—continue to sell themselves to their agencies well after contracts are signed.  

What I mean is this: As the agency employees meet with subject matter experts or hold meetings with leadership, the organization will present its products, services, market position and even its executives as the best, most innovative, most insightful people and products within their space. While some of that may be (hopefully) true, there’s a bit of salesmanship involved. Put another way, if you aren’t telling your PR team about concerns, pain points, missteps or potential obstacles, you are setting up your messaging partners as well as your organization for potential disaster.  

Could This Be a Problem? 

My favorite example, now 20 years in my professional rear-view window, was when I worked with a large multi-national company. They faced no challenges, and every employee was the best and the brightest professional to be found. During our initial discovery, I asked if there were any areas of concern, topics to avoid or past issues that might create complications with the media. Nothing. The horizon was wide, bright and full of promise, or so I was told. In fact, their leadership team seemed put off by my question. 

Months later, I received a call on a Friday afternoon. One of their executives had been convicted of a crime almost one year prior, and on the upcoming Monday this executive would be in court for sentencing. Could this be a problem, asked my contact from within the company? Emphatically, yes, I responded.  

Because this executive had not worked for the client at the time the charges, and the later conviction, came down, the company’s name had not been connected to the scandal. This executive was not on the list of media-facing representatives of the company, so none of this came to light during discovery. Senior leadership had not been forthcoming, and our team didn’t know this executive was even employed by the client.  

I spent the weekend scrambling to pull together a crisis communications strategy. And while the executive’s conviction led to wall-to-wall media coverage, the client was not mentioned. The media couldn’t imagine, given his crime, that anyone would employ him. But he was a childhood friend of the CEO who helped him with a job while he awaited sentencing. The press simply didn’t investigate his work history post-conviction and LinkedIn wasn’t wildly adopted at the time.  

Because the client wanted to present everything in the most positive light possible, they missed an opportunity to better protect the company, its employees and its customers. In the above example, disaster was averted by dumb luck. In the interconnected, all-online world of today, I don’t believe such a near miss would again be possible. 

Honest Assessments Matter 

No one wants to start a new relationship with dirty laundry. Many a first date has probably tanked a potential relationship by employing absolute candor. While not recommended for a first date, absolute candor is mission critical when onboarding a public relations agency. PR professionals are only as effective as the information clients provide. By failing to share information about challenges, concerns or potential obstacles, clients tie the hands of their agency partners to do their jobs effectively. PR partners are best positioned to help protect client reputations from unnecessary harm, but only if they know the messages to amplify as well as sensitive areas to avoid or plan around. 

If you are considering hiring a public relations agency, the most valuable advice I can offer is to be absolutely candid about the good and bad; what you want to talk about and the issues that keep leadership (and maybe HR) up at night. There is power in doing so, and complete transparency can create an extremely productive partnership to both promote and protect hard-won reputations.

Diddy’s Silence Spoke Volumes: Why Secrets Are Toxic to Crisis Public Relations

Posted on by
Reply

When a brand or a public figure waits too long to tell the truth, they rarely escape the gravitational pull of a crisis unscathed. Whether it’s the ENRON scandal of 2001, Bernie Madoff’s 2009 arrest or the failed 2017 Fyre Festival, one common thread rings true; you can only evade the truth for so long.

Making recent headlines is Sean “Diddy” Combs’ ongoing public downfall. After decades of alleged abuse and misconduct from multiple sources, Combs is facing mounting legal and reputational crises. The musician and producer’s situation is a worst-case scenario from a PR perspective; a stream of headlines that could have been prevented with a wider perspective and proactive approach.

Don’t Let the Crisis Define the Timeline

In May 2024, CNN released a video of Combs from 2016 that showed a violent interaction with his former girlfriend Cassie Ventura after she filed a lawsuit against him in 2023. Allegations quickly began to accumulate, each one painting a more tainted picture than the last. CNN’s video was a turning point for Combs’ case in terms of his reputation and control of the narrative. What could have possibly been one or a few headlines became a viral cultural moment. For months, hundreds of allegations surfaced and by October 2024, an attorney announced he was representing 120 accusers with sexual misconduct allegations against Combs.

For PR to be effective, you cannot allow third parties, in this case the media, to define the narrative. This is paramount. Crisis teams are brought in to either diffuse or help to ensure a factual story, rather than lighting more fires. To do so, public relations professionals need every detail, every time stamp and every skeleton out of the closet from the very start.

Get the All the Facts Out

Secrecy is a dangerous thing in public relations. A slow cadence of new details like in Combs’ situation keeps a story alive and slowly tears down public trust. Letting the PR team know the details, and what might be out there waiting to be found, can give these professionals the tools they need to take a bit of the wind out of the media storm that just won’t seem to quit.

Speaking to your PR team could be viewed similarly to speaking with an attorney insomuch as all the details, warts and all, need to be shared with the PR team, with whom should have a non-disclosure agreement, up front. Being transparent and thorough with the crisis team early on, no matter how difficult, will help businesses avoid a slow leak of damaging stories and details. Sometimes the situation is simply bad, as in the case of Combs. Even in these scenarios, there can be a benefit to taking some measure of responsibility and trying to shape the narrative; not with spin, but with facts and taking a measure or responsibility. While doing so may not mitigate the public’s interest, it can sometimes allow you to get everything out at once which can, in some instances, shorten the lifespan of media coverage and attention. Once a crisis team is equipped with the full scope of a problem, they can work with business leaders to shape a fact-based narrative around it and try to develop a reasonable plan through the situation. Rarely can one avoid or go around a situation like Comb’s without some obvious reputational damage, even under the best of circumstances.

The Value of a Crisis Team That Knows the Right Questions

A good crisis team asks hard questions. They map out worst-case scenarios, poke holes, identify risks and prepare messaging that anticipates the next batch of headlines. They can only do so if they are brought into the room before the cameras start rolling, footage leaks and lawsuits multiply. In Combs’ case, every new, salacious detail draws more coverage and confirms what many had already assumed about the man. That’s the cost of self-preservation. Had his team had the full picture earlier, it may have been less of a sensational story, or at least less frequently publicized, and more focused on accountability.

In Combs’ case, his actions and behaviors have been further reinforced by past tragedies and altercations like his involvement in and reaction to the Heavy D & Puff Daddy Celebrity Charity Basketball Game stampede and the East Coast vs. West Coast hip-hop rivalry that allegedly contributed to the deaths of Tupac Shakur and The Notorious B.I.G. A crisis team will consider how a company’s past mistakes might be uncovered and rehashed in the media as a current crisis unfolds.

Secrets Don’t Age Well

While Combs’ case is particularly extreme for many reasons, any global brand or a public figure could find themselves in a crisis that plays out in the media. And when speaking with a crisis PR team, it is critical to lay all the facts out early. Anything left unsaid can quickly be found by the media, the courts or random sleuths on the internet. Owning the story and being forthcoming with information might not prevent backlash, but it does allow a crisis team the time and details necessary to manage a situation with clarity, compassion and some measure of control to ensure the client’s side of the story is told with care.

Yes, Chef: Revisiting “The Bear” for Communications Dos and Don’ts

Posted on by
Reply

FX’s “The Bear”, an instant hit when it premiered in 2022, is preparing to air season four. Taking place in Chicago, the show follows a restaurant’s kitchen staff as they ping-pong across the scale of functionality. Something is always broken, staff members are constantly fighting and profitability is plummeting. It gave those with previous food experience, like me, severe deja vu, and those who have never worked in a restaurant a gritty look at how chaotic the day-to-day can be.

Two years ago, my colleague Kate Glaviano wrote a piece inspired by the show exploring kitchen skills she learned as a Chicago chef that transitioned well to her work today as a public relations manager for a busy boutique agency. A service industry veteran myself, I’d like to take that article a step further offering a few communications lessons from the highly acclaimed series.

Spoiler alert: in the show’s third season, we see “The Bear,” the upscale restaurant main character Carmy dreamed of opening with his late brother, finally open for business. But after the high of the grand opening in the season two finale, things sour through season three. The menu is changing on a constant basis, and the team feels fractured and out of step with one another, leading to high tensions that prevent the restaurant from reaching its lofty goal of attaining a Michelin star.

The kind of communications chaos seen in the fictional kitchen is bound to produce burnout. It’s not an uncommon story in the business world—a company with a talented team and solid product can’t seem to get out of its own way. This is why business leaders sometimes employ communications professionals for input on their day-to-day internal and external operations, to help set their team up for success.

Lessons from The Bear’s kitchen

As communicators, our team frequently advises clients on both internal and external communication functions. For organization leaders who sometimes do not have communications as a core function, there are lessons to learn from The Bear:

  • Don’t ignore your team: During season three, Chef de Cuisine Sydney is constantly sidelined at the restaurant. She often tries to speak with the head chef and owner, Carmy, with ideas about improving the menu, only to be ignored or to have his ideas prioritized over her own. At the end of the season, she begins to consider leaving the restaurant altogether. Radio silence is never a good sign for team morale. Your high-value team members need to feel like they’re being heard, and a good communicator can help you figure out the best way to ensure employees feel appreciated and keep difficult conversations constructive. Employees also want to be kept in the loop. A good communications team will work with you to build smart, transparent messaging to make sure your team members feel valued and critical to the company’s future.
  • Know your audience: A big point of contention among the kitchen staff in season three was the menu changing daily. While a daily menu change may not be abnormal for a fine-dining institution, most brands need to rely on consistency to build their audience. If your internal team doesn’t understand what your product or service is aimed at, no one will. Shifting priorities can lead to muddled messaging, making audiences unsure if your company is relevant to them. A communications team can serve as a sounding board for new business decisions, ensuring you stay aligned with your target audience and brand consistency.
  • Leadership sets the tone: The leadership displayed by Carmy, while effective at times, often devolves into angry outbursts. He frequently yells at his team, causing increased tension among his staff and making operations difficult. On the other hand, when he takes the time to show his team members respect and provide them with the right tools they need to succeed, the team is all the better for it. Toxic leadership can derail an otherwise talented team, stunting the growth of not only the company but also the employees. Poor communications from leadership can also trigger a crisis situation that could attract negative media attention and cause reputational damage to the brand. Leadership should work closely with a communications team to help them find a tone and personal brand that conveys empathy and transparency as well as a commitment to the company and its employees’ professional growth.

Whether The Bear restaurant can bloom into a functioning restaurant remains a question for its fourth season to address. Regardless, we can take the fictional restaurant and its kitchen chaos as a guide for what not to do with your company’s communications. Remember, just because something is working currently, doesn’t mean it will last. A big-picture communications strategy that is adaptable and responsive to your operational needs—and those can be a bear to build—can help organizations remain consistent while addressing the shifting needs of any business.

Guess Who’s Back (Again): PR Lessons From HBO Max’s Return

Posted on by
Reply

There’s no shame in a branding misstep, especially when leadership knows how to recover from it. 

Last month, Warner Bros. Discovery announced the return of “HBO Max,” reversing course from the streaming platform’s 2023 rebrand to simply “Max.” What transpired in the two years since the rebrand offers a valuable lesson in brand strategy: listen to your audience and don’t be afraid to course-correct with a little humility. 

 Where Everybody Knows Your Name 

HBO is a household name, having been around since 1972 and responsible for creating publicly iconic television shows like The Sopranos, Game of Thrones and True Detective. The intention behind the rebrand of HBO Max was to convey the expansive programming that became available when HBO Max and Discovery+ merged. While logically it made sense, decisionmakers at Warner Bros. Discovery underestimated the power of the HBO name.  

HBO has a legacy. Over decades, it has gained worldwide acclaim for releasing shows with unrivaled storytelling and gripping visuals that quickly became cultural phenomenon. Removing the three recognizable and trusted letters confused the public and brand recognition took a hit. At the same time, many viewers and others could not let go of the name by force of habit. 

Recovery Mode  

When Warner Bros. Discovery announced the return of HBO Max, they could have chosen to do the about-face quietly. Afterall, many people never let the original name go. Instead, they embraced their branding 360 with humor and transparency by posting a series of promotional videos that poked fun at the name-change induced chaos. In one video, actors in HBO Max shows and movies joked about the switch, leaning into the very reaction audiences had. This is where Warner Bros. Discovery got it right. 

 Rather than doubling down or defending decisions that led to the failed rebrand, they chose to align with the audience’s perspective. They acknowledged what viewers had already decided, HBO is the brand they trust. The pivot demonstrated to viewers that their voices were not only heard, but worth listening to. 

 Three Takeaways for Brands 

For communications professionals, the HBO Max name change(s) is a masterclass in how to rebound from a branding fail with grace. Consider the following:  

  • If it isn’t broken, don’t fix it: HBO’s switch to Max removed the part of the name that had built the brand’s credibility over decades. HBO took a gamble with brand recognition and while risks can sometimes yield positive returns, this case proved that a strong brand identity is hard to come by. When considering big risk, brands should ensure they are considering their core values, what makes them recognizable and how the proposed change could be perceived by the public.  
  • Listening is part of strategy: Brand decisions may be made in boardrooms, but brand perceptions are crafted by the people. Effective public relations means staying in tune with what audiences want, how they are reacting and how to continue to engage them. In HBO’s case, many continued to refer to the brand’s streaming platform by its original name, rather than accepting the name change. If the public is not willing to jump on board, it might be time to listen, rethink and pivot. 
  • Tone matters. By responding with humor and humility, the platform made the change seem more like a silly stunt gone comically wrong rather than a corporate correction. The audience wasn’t talked down to, they were invited in. In one of the videos, Olivia Cooke, a cast member of House of Dragon, even says “why would you remove the biggest part of the branding?” HBO’s humor around the issue demonstrated transparency, proving to audiences their value while poking a little fun at the corporate blunder.  

Today’s audiences are brand-savvy, and they are not afraid to be critical. They notice when companies fumble and when they truly connect with a brand, they engage. HBO Max’s return is more than a case of a company admitting it was wrong, it serves as a reminder that sometimes the most strategic thing a brand can do is lean into a mistake with transparency, respect for audience feedback and maybe even a touch of humor. 

 HBO Max’s content hasn’t changed, the rebrand just adds clarity. The lesson? Great brands don’t just tell audiences who they are, they listen and meet their audiences where they want to be met. 

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.

From White Smoke to Bluesky: Uncovering New Ways to Reach Your Audience

Posted on by
Reply

Earlier this month, white smoke emitted from the top of the Sistine Chapel in the Vatican announcing the news that a new pope had been selected to oversee the Catholic Church.  

Cardinals voting in the papal conclave have been burning ballots releasing black smoke from the Vatican since the 1400s. Starting in 1914, the Vatican began to release white smoke to announce the selection of a new pope. This was an effective way to share important news long before the dawn of newspapers, 24-hour cable and streaming news, social media and more. In present day, the news crews that flooded the Vatican to film and report on the color of the smoke to announce the new pope, as well as the many individuals who posted to their own social channels and publishing mechanisms, relayed the message to a global audience.  

From black smoke to white smoke to broadcast news to social media, the vehicles we use to share messaging and raise a brand’s profile are always changing. As public relations professionals, it’s our job to make sure we’re finding your audience where they want to be met—and likely they are all not standing patiently, waiting to hear from you in St. Peter’s Square. New channels are always emerging to open new doors to reach your audience. Consider the following as their own smoke signals, alerting brands and others to new media opportunities:  

Substack is evolving as a legitimate news source as media continues to split off from more traditional channels. Around for several years now, Substack continues to gain credibility as known thought leaders come onboard. Former CNN Chief White House Correspondent Jim Acosta joined Substack earlier this year after leaving the cable news network. The platform allows its users to publish and monetize online newsletters as independent journalists. It also provides a forum for live videos and podcasts. Shortly after launching his presence on Substack, Acosta welcomed 280,000 subscribers. According to New York Magazine, “Substack has escaped its humble newsletter beginnings to become a juggernaut collective of independent voices. If you’re looking to start a media operation, it’s now the place to do so.”  

Bluesky is a microblogging social media platform built on an open-source platform that allows users to move around among online apps. Unlike other well-known social media platforms, Bluesky does not report to one central authority giving posters more freedom and attracting new viewers with more than 30 million users as of last January.   

Open AI is working on its social media platform as well. While no official details have been released, the Verge reported the platform could be based on ChatGPT’s image generation capabilities and possibly integrate it into ChatGPT or launch as its own app. Open AI may benefit by using the data collected from its own social media platform to train its AI. With ChatGPT boasting more than 1 billion users in little more than one year since its launch, a social media platform would open the door to a sizable audience for those who post.  

A good PR professional recognizes and follows the growth and evolution of the media landscape to present opportunities for clients to reach new audiences. Meanwhile, savvy clients have an opportunity to gauge how best to leverage these new mediums to ensure their messaging reaches their target audiences. While not all will become the next LinkedIn, X, or Instagram, it’s critical that marketing and comms teams pay attention.  

Like the smoke at the Sistine Chapel hundreds of years ago, these platforms are informing your audience about your brand. With the help of a smart PR team, you can find the right channels to meet your audience where they want to be met and raise your visibility, credibility and if all goes as planned, indirectly sales. 

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.