With the Fair Media Council as my client for PR 107, I was offered the opportunity to volunteer at the New York media's Folio Awards. The awards ceremony was very interesting and provided me and my peers with an amazing networking opportunity. Some of New York's biggest media buffs were all in the same room as us! A classmate and I were given the task of greeters, which was interesting because we were able to welcome every media member to the country club.
The networking opportunities continued as we sat with members of Long Island pr firms and prestigious Manhattanites. The actual awards were presented to networks, anchors and reporters that delivered the most interesting investigative and feature reports.
Reporter Jim Axelrod delivered the event's keynote speech and told compelling stories about his journeys in Afghanistan and Iraq. Click to watch below.
Jim Axelrod Keynote Speech at the 2011 Folio Awards
Monday, May 16, 2011
Osama bin Laden killed by the U.S. forces: is the event two-fold?
The Obama administration recently started taking a lot of heat as many GOP members contemplated the legitimacy of the current White House as we look to the 2012 primaries this coming summer. Donald Trump, then a potential republican candidate, made stark remarks against the Obama administration, demanding proof of Obama's real birth certificate.
As the president has been in office for over three years, he has been scrutinized for his lack of delivery in relation to his presidential campaign initiatives, as most presidents are at this point in the term. But after weeks of media fire from the republican party regarding legitimacy, the president announced one of the most pertinent cornerstones of his four years in office.
After the news of Osama bin Laden's death spread through social mediums like Facebook and Twitter (garnering a reach of 52,214+), I had to wonder if this event just happened, or if it was a governmental public relations strategy.
To me, it seems awfully coincidental that after a media storm that spread across a few weeks, that Obama presented his opposition, the media and the general public with a slam-bam, thank you ma'am that stunned and silenced global audiences and critics.
Though U.S. intelligence reports can not be conveyed to the general public for obvious security reasons, I do think it is was interesting timing. And looking to the situation from my pr-scope, I have to wonder if it was just good timing, or if it was planned to give Obama and his next campaign an edge as politicians embark on the primaries in the next few months.
As the president has been in office for over three years, he has been scrutinized for his lack of delivery in relation to his presidential campaign initiatives, as most presidents are at this point in the term. But after weeks of media fire from the republican party regarding legitimacy, the president announced one of the most pertinent cornerstones of his four years in office.
After the news of Osama bin Laden's death spread through social mediums like Facebook and Twitter (garnering a reach of 52,214+), I had to wonder if this event just happened, or if it was a governmental public relations strategy.
To me, it seems awfully coincidental that after a media storm that spread across a few weeks, that Obama presented his opposition, the media and the general public with a slam-bam, thank you ma'am that stunned and silenced global audiences and critics.
Though U.S. intelligence reports can not be conveyed to the general public for obvious security reasons, I do think it is was interesting timing. And looking to the situation from my pr-scope, I have to wonder if it was just good timing, or if it was planned to give Obama and his next campaign an edge as politicians embark on the primaries in the next few months.
Crisis communications and transparency in financial institutions--does it exist?
Recently in one of my public relations courses, we watched The Smartest Guys in the Room, a documentary that investigated the exposure of insider trading with Enron years ago. As I've discussed in my blog before, Ivy "Ledbetter" Lee was one of the pioneers of transparency in public relations-but that does not mean that all companies have actually learned from his ways.
In the documentary, it is revealed that the company's investor relations were ill-handled; in combination with insider trading and a lack of transparency for shareholders, the corporation eventually faced one of the biggest financial downfalls and further bankruptcies of all time. But why didn't Enron see through the potential devastation?
If you look ahead to the future economic crises and downfalls of AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, it's easy to wonder: why didn't these investment banks and mortgage companies realize that their shareholders and employees would eventually learn of their mishaps?
For some reason, I notice a trend in this millennium. It seems that financial institutions are constantly at fault and not taking any credit for the issue, no pun intended.
As I have experienced crisis communications in the sports industry, I have witnessed the immediate troubleshooting that goes into effect. Sure, when a financial institution has a big crash, they troubleshoot, but it always seems that the company had a lot of past possibilities to fix their error ahead of time.
Any crisis in the sports industry or federal government must always be confronted immediately. If a player gets in a brawl, or a team owner does something stupid, there are immediate press conferences following within the next day, at the owner's discretion of course.
Is this because sports and government typically garner more attention than any financial institution? Or do certain industries simply practice better forms of crisis communications than others?
In the documentary, it is revealed that the company's investor relations were ill-handled; in combination with insider trading and a lack of transparency for shareholders, the corporation eventually faced one of the biggest financial downfalls and further bankruptcies of all time. But why didn't Enron see through the potential devastation?
If you look ahead to the future economic crises and downfalls of AIG, Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae, it's easy to wonder: why didn't these investment banks and mortgage companies realize that their shareholders and employees would eventually learn of their mishaps?
For some reason, I notice a trend in this millennium. It seems that financial institutions are constantly at fault and not taking any credit for the issue, no pun intended.
As I have experienced crisis communications in the sports industry, I have witnessed the immediate troubleshooting that goes into effect. Sure, when a financial institution has a big crash, they troubleshoot, but it always seems that the company had a lot of past possibilities to fix their error ahead of time.
Any crisis in the sports industry or federal government must always be confronted immediately. If a player gets in a brawl, or a team owner does something stupid, there are immediate press conferences following within the next day, at the owner's discretion of course.
Is this because sports and government typically garner more attention than any financial institution? Or do certain industries simply practice better forms of crisis communications than others?
School of Communication Networking Event
In March, the School of Communication hosted a Networking Reception to kick off Women's Herstory Month on the 10th Floor of Axinn Library. Attending the dinner were Hofstra alumni that represented The National Enquirer, NBC, The Weiss Agency, The Hain Celestial Group, Inc., Hearst Magazines, Young and Rubicam Brands and WE TV. This dinner was an amazing resource for current students at Hofstra that are majoring in a field of communications. There were representatives from publishing, advertising, public relations, advanced technology operation, television, and communications firms.
Of all the notable things that the women on the panel stated, the most prevalent were simple expectations for entry-level applicants. The representatives from National Enquirer and The Weiss Agency suggested wise words: "Don't forget, it's not personal, it's business," and "Nothing good, on business trips, or in life, happens after midnight." The women on the panel possessed much poise and diligence and were willing to work with Hofstra students to help them make connections for the future. The networking dinner allowed me to gain several contacts and I have already followed-up on them for the future.
I was fortunate enough to meet WRHU alumni and discuss the differences in mission and technology from then and now. It was interesting and encouraging to find that college resources like that of the radio station can really help entry-level applicants market themselves. Out of all the things that the brilliant women admired from entry-level applicants, was the ability to write a handwritten note in thanks. Just a tip for the future!
Of all the notable things that the women on the panel stated, the most prevalent were simple expectations for entry-level applicants. The representatives from National Enquirer and The Weiss Agency suggested wise words: "Don't forget, it's not personal, it's business," and "Nothing good, on business trips, or in life, happens after midnight." The women on the panel possessed much poise and diligence and were willing to work with Hofstra students to help them make connections for the future. The networking dinner allowed me to gain several contacts and I have already followed-up on them for the future.
I was fortunate enough to meet WRHU alumni and discuss the differences in mission and technology from then and now. It was interesting and encouraging to find that college resources like that of the radio station can really help entry-level applicants market themselves. Out of all the things that the brilliant women admired from entry-level applicants, was the ability to write a handwritten note in thanks. Just a tip for the future!
Tuesday, March 22, 2011
Social media: Limiting our ability to think and listen democratically?
At the beginning of A Brave New World, Aldous Huxley writes, "People will come to love their oppression, to adore the technologies that undo their capacities to think." Given the near "Week Without the Web," my mind has been circulating around thoughts of social media and modern technologies that allow us to continually express our opinions. Are we in such a state of adoration with technology that we are unable to think and listen?
Despite an individual's reasoning for their connection to digital media in their personal life, my observations of peers conclude that people in my age group are not concerned with professional networking or things of that nature through the Facebook and Twitter mediums. Rather, it seems they are mostly concerned about the coolest possible new profile picture they could create to display their unique self and artistic style.
Recently, for one of my media classes, I have been observing peers to see their social behaviors while connected to digital media. One subject, a male senior broadcast journalism major, went on to strictly answer a message and signed off right after that. They didn't look at any photos of themselves or anything on their wall. Another subject however, a female sophomore undeclared major, spent an entire three hour class on Facebook--commenting on photos, keeping a dialogue up on other people's walls, changing their profile picture (they actually did it twice) and watching videos on silent while a professor was teaching the class. She would constantly look up from her computer to see if the professor noticed that she was not paying attention at all.
With the given observations of subjects, it seems that our society is becoming increasingly narcissistic by the mouse click. Alexis de Tocqueville argued in the 19th century for Democracy in America. The most prevalent of his thoughts was that everyone in a society has the liberty to have a voice and express their opinions and thoughts. I have to wonder however, are we expressing our voices and opinions via social media just so that we can, well, hear and see them again on our own?
Some media theorists believe that those creating and controlling new technologies are the people we continue to wrestle with. But are we in a wrestling match with...ourselves? And if Huxley was correct in stating that people will adore the technologies, are the new egocentric mediums just a way for us to "Like" ourselves more?
Despite an individual's reasoning for their connection to digital media in their personal life, my observations of peers conclude that people in my age group are not concerned with professional networking or things of that nature through the Facebook and Twitter mediums. Rather, it seems they are mostly concerned about the coolest possible new profile picture they could create to display their unique self and artistic style.
Recently, for one of my media classes, I have been observing peers to see their social behaviors while connected to digital media. One subject, a male senior broadcast journalism major, went on to strictly answer a message and signed off right after that. They didn't look at any photos of themselves or anything on their wall. Another subject however, a female sophomore undeclared major, spent an entire three hour class on Facebook--commenting on photos, keeping a dialogue up on other people's walls, changing their profile picture (they actually did it twice) and watching videos on silent while a professor was teaching the class. She would constantly look up from her computer to see if the professor noticed that she was not paying attention at all.
With the given observations of subjects, it seems that our society is becoming increasingly narcissistic by the mouse click. Alexis de Tocqueville argued in the 19th century for Democracy in America. The most prevalent of his thoughts was that everyone in a society has the liberty to have a voice and express their opinions and thoughts. I have to wonder however, are we expressing our voices and opinions via social media just so that we can, well, hear and see them again on our own?
Some media theorists believe that those creating and controlling new technologies are the people we continue to wrestle with. But are we in a wrestling match with...ourselves? And if Huxley was correct in stating that people will adore the technologies, are the new egocentric mediums just a way for us to "Like" ourselves more?
Sunday, March 13, 2011
Network Transparency: Beginning to exist because of PR shift or is the other party simply at fault?
In the early 1900s, the Pennsylvania railroad companies learned the relevant notion of transparency. After the railroad experienced difficulties when a wreck occurred on teh railroad and the corporation chose to keep the news of the accident to the public. At this time, PR pundit Ivy Lee told the company that he disagreed with their deicision to try and keep the news private. By doing so, he developed an early sense of transparency in the public communications arena for crisis communications situations.
Last semester in a media relations course, a professor addressed the fact that a few years ago, the ABC network chose to conveniently neglected to cover a controversial story that involved Disney's Animal Kingdom and a third party. With the current media ownership monopoly, it seems that networks do not betray their owners--would CBS cover a story about Viacom? Or would NBC rat out Universal? ABC's decision to not cover a story about a problematic Disney World province is a seemingly ignorant corporate deicison in this day and age; especially after the bricks of transparency were laid by modern PR founder Lee himself.
Newer PR models teach agencies and corporations to be transparent.Major corporations like Graco, BP and Toyota have led by example by admitting to their faults and clearing the smoke from the air at the beginning of a crisis instead of waiting for it to stew and boil over into a more extravagant crisis. The Pennsylvania Railroad owners at the beginning of the 20th century believed this was an effective way to rid themselves of difficult I have to wonder if the news networks will follow suit. For example, when will ABC learn that not covering a story about an incident in the Animal Kingdom is detrimental to their overall image.
I have to wonder, do I just notice this shift because I study media and PR daily? And more importantly, is it even noticeable to the general public that is constantly eating what five total corporate news owners are feeding them? With all the talk of media bias these days in the Information Age craze, I believe it can only be a matter of time until the current news networks follow the path of Lee himself.
Last semester in a media relations course, a professor addressed the fact that a few years ago, the ABC network chose to conveniently neglected to cover a controversial story that involved Disney's Animal Kingdom and a third party. With the current media ownership monopoly, it seems that networks do not betray their owners--would CBS cover a story about Viacom? Or would NBC rat out Universal? ABC's decision to not cover a story about a problematic Disney World province is a seemingly ignorant corporate deicison in this day and age; especially after the bricks of transparency were laid by modern PR founder Lee himself.
Newer PR models teach agencies and corporations to be transparent.Major corporations like Graco, BP and Toyota have led by example by admitting to their faults and clearing the smoke from the air at the beginning of a crisis instead of waiting for it to stew and boil over into a more extravagant crisis. The Pennsylvania Railroad owners at the beginning of the 20th century believed this was an effective way to rid themselves of difficult I have to wonder if the news networks will follow suit. For example, when will ABC learn that not covering a story about an incident in the Animal Kingdom is detrimental to their overall image.
I have to wonder, do I just notice this shift because I study media and PR daily? And more importantly, is it even noticeable to the general public that is constantly eating what five total corporate news owners are feeding them? With all the talk of media bias these days in the Information Age craze, I believe it can only be a matter of time until the current news networks follow the path of Lee himself.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)