I’m teaching a much-requested session at the Code Factory called Strategies & Tactics for Implementing Social Media - a lot of NGOs and unions ask me to teach them how to take online communications to the next level. The class is this Friday at 1pm.

This session is great for organizations with small communications offices where only one or two people need to be trained up. Already cost effective at $99.00 - MediaStyle.ca readers can take $10 off with discount code “MediaStyle”.

Not the class for you? Let me know in the comments if there is a low-cost group training experience you would like MediaStyle to offer.

So, about a year ago the New York Times pissed off an ugly little fish in New Zealand.

The venerable newspaper published an article on September 10th on A1 of the New York edition titled “From Deep Pacific, Ugly and Tasty, With a Catch”. It suggested that Hoki--also known as the main McFish meat at McDonald’s--was potentially being overfished. The New Zealand Seafood Industry Council, the industry association tasked with keeping exports of the fish alive and well, understandably chafed a little when the paper used their copyrighted image of the ugly creature to illustrate this screed.

This is where things got interesting. At the same time the New York Times was apologizing for the appropriation of the image, the association was hiring a defensive New York PR firm called CounterPoint to begin an online war against one of America’s largest newspapers. Hoki is a $151 million dollar part of the New Zealand fisheries industry, so it’s little wonder the New Zealand Seafood Industry Council found a firm that advertised itself as able to  “...help clients confront volatile media circumstances. We shield clients and counter attacks. We hold press accountable and challenge adversaries. With unique solutions and proven tactics, we safeguard clients through a hostile public affairs marketplace.”

In short, these folks at CounterPoint have no qualms about placing ads targeted at journalists, on sites journalists visit, and intended to inflict maximum pressure.

Campaign Elements

Elements to the campaign as reported in the widely cited interview with CounterPoint principal Jim McCarthy on the Nieman Journalism Lab:

1) Google Ads targeted at reporters, featuring their names and “misdeeds”

“When you include their name in the search, it draws attention to it and lets the reporter know that you mean business and you’re going to hold them responsible,” McCarthy told me over the phone.

2) Blog Ads:

"Targeting reporters where they hang out online is McCarthy’s grating specialty. He went after ABC News, on behalf of the Formaldehyde Council, with ads on Mediabistro’s TVNewser. 'It was virtually a guarantee that they and all their competitors were going to see it,' McCarthy told me with more than a little relish."

3) Convert existing established landing pages with better content to rebut and include proactive messaging

“...the Times had linked to it in the third paragraph of the article (at right), and 78,000 people clicked though, according to Sarah Crysell, a spokeswoman for the council. Taking advantage of that incoming traffic, the group transformed its hoki page into a rebuttal of the Times story.” The ads also pointed to this same landing page.

4) Pressure

Remember that apology for using the picture of the Hoki without permission? CounterPoint used this as the main hook for their Google Ads and targeted MediaBistro presence: “NYT Apologizes for story - Fisherman hold NYT to account”.

5) Tactician with gumption to apply pressure

Channel V Media Blog spent some time with McCarthy and described him like this:

“... he has a little bit different approach from the rest of us. While most of us publicists are busy pandering to the press in our efforts to get coverage for our clients, Jim is all about taking reporters on and holding them accountable for what they write. Sort of a one man Media Accountability Office. Okay, so it's not exactly like he does this out of the goodness of his heart-he gets hired by companies to monitor media and journalists for biases, inaccuracies or less-than-whole-truth reporting about them. (Thus the name, CounterPoint. Get it?)”

Who is using “Hoki-tactics”?

The Sharp Agency in Chicago talks about how they used similar “Hoki-style” ads in their political work. They aren’t the only ones.

“We’ve used similar tactics for a recent political campaign here in Illinois, working with a local political consulting group to blitz all of the keywords surrounding the candidates for a key state election on the day of a candidacy announcement. When you searched for the candidate’s opponent’s name on the announcement day, the first thing you saw was an ad for OUR candidate, with a message designed to counter-program. When you looked up the current office holder’s name, the first thing you saw was an ad for the new candidate for office, with a link to a site for donations with a nice video commercial. The campaign had the effect of blanketing the digital landscape during a crucial period in the media cycle.”

But is this SEO style AdWords war really going to work? Is this how applying political micro pressure works? I think this is one way, but it’s basic and crass. Google Ads, Facebook Ads, and targeted placement work to get attention--this is true. You can easily watch clicks turn to converts and converts to donors.

But the value is decreasing as a younger generation grows up. Gen Y are digital savvy realists with a finely tuned bull shit detector. Allowing for more nuanced ways of creating the kind of links online that Google loves makes long-term sense. As does fostering a community of supporters and advocates online before you need them--or before you resort to tactics like the ones our ugly little fish friend uses.

The real story of who is behind the Gordon Lightfoot is sort of like an unfinished jigsaw puzzle. Each media outlet has a little bit of the puzzle, but there is still a bit of a mystery.

First, Facebook played an unseen role in this drama. The social networking site has become the go-to place for public grief, so it’s no surprise that it helped set off the first alarm bells about the “death.”  The source of the first digital mention? Ronnie Hawkins' wife, Wanda.

From Sean Michaels' article in the Guardian (emphasis mine):

This will have come as a relief to Ronnie Hawkins, the musician whose backing band became the Band. A friend of Lightfoot's, he was quoted in the early Canwest story, confirming the news. Hawkins said he had received a call from his management in Minneapolis, who had in turn received a call from Lightfoot's grandson, telling them the singer had died. "I don't know Gordon's grandson," Hawkins later told the Globe and Mail. "I didn't even know if Gordon has a grandson. I called my wife in Florida and told her, and I guess she faxed some of her friends and now, all of a sudden, it's all over the world. It's terrible. I can't even get hold of Gordon. Holy smoke, it's unbelievable." ... Hawkins suggested they trace the phone call to Minneapolis. "I think they can trace that phone call, maybe, and see who did that," he said. "I'm glad it is a sick joke, but it's bad."

Several sources have now confirmed that the prank call to Hawkins' management set the ball in motion, and this is when Wanda Hawkins took to the phone, fax machine, and Facebook.

This is where our Ottawa tweeter, @fleminksi, comes in. She knows a close friend of Wanda Hawkins. Our Ottawa tweeter's friend shared her grief on Facebook. The Ottawa tweeter in turn expresses her grief on Twitter and concurrently (and unrelated) CanWest is on the phone with Ronnie Hawkins--who no doubt believes his wife--and expresses his grief to the newspaper.

Meanwhile, this confirmation triggers an “alert” to go out across the CanWest newswire and CanWest reporters across Canada start tweeting it.

David Akin has some reflective and characteristically classy words about all of this on his blog.

And as Media Memo’s Peter Kafka says: Twitter didn't kill Gordon Lightfoot, Big Media did.

But say it is true. Twitter still didn’t force Canwest, the big Canadian media conglomerate, to publish a wire report that said the singer was dead. As best I can tell, it was that story, which was picked up by various Canwest newspaper sites, that convinced people that Lightfoot had croaked.

As Kafka says, this doesn’t suggest that CanWest is off the hook for not double or triple sourcing their facts. And, had an editor at CanWest News Service jumped onto the Twitter search, they too could have found--in well less than 30 minutes--that Lightfoot was alive.

Here is the point I think people should be very clear on: while the tweet from @fleminski came first, it certainly wasn’t what set off the nearly 3,000+ tweets in two hours. That is most certainly the fault of whoever pressed the “go” button on the CanWest wire alert.

All in all, only one person should be very happy about all of this: Gordon Lightfoot. His radio play hasn’t been this big in decades and he just successfully introduced himself to a generation of Canucks who thought he was already dead.

Update:  Some added information from a friend of the "Ottawa tweeter" at ThreeSeven.ca

However, it appears that the mainstream media jumped on it. Within half an hour of tweeting, Fleminski received a phone call from a reporter from CanWest (1. holy sleuth work, and 2. boundaries much, media?) asking for the source. She replied honestly: Ronnie Hawkins. The media then called Hawkins who confirmed the story. Believing they had a confirmed story, the media then ran with it.

In the next few days I’m going to feature some stories on the digital tactics that firms are using to apply specific bouts of pressure to specific media outlets. These high-stakes, no-holds-barred firms are successfully using ads on Google, Facebook, and blogs to correct the record and and to skewer opponents.

Today’s case study is based on an article in Politics Magazine titled, “How digital ads helped turn CNN’s Lou Dobbs problem into a PR nightmare.” It’s a story about an old tactic turned digital with the end result being Dobbs resignation from CNN, citing this campaign as a factor.

Campaign Elements

Two partners at the consulting firm Chong + Koster (which describes itself as a “digital consultancy that specializes in high-stakes communications and win-or-lose situations around the world”) wanted to neutralize an opponent on behalf of their clients--America’s Voice, along with Media Matters, Presente.org, and others.

“The coalition aimed to take the poster child of the xenophobia movement—Lou Dobbs—out of the debate before it began.”

Here is a brief picture of the digital tactics used to support their strategic objective:

1) Create the hook

“We would make an amazing ad to drive donations, yet too controversial for CNN to accept. If the campaign raising enough money to air the ad during 'Latino in America' wasn’t enough to generate press, then the placing, the inevitable rejection and subsequent runs on other networks would. All the while, MediaMatters and Presente.org would run their own petition to drop Lou Dobbs, thus building a narrative that appreciated the commitment of the coalition.”

2) Get their attention

“If CNN thought of this as a three-day story, it would have passed. We had to get their attention at the very beginning, so they would set up Google Alerts to monitor the story, and to ensure each little hit was noticed and made them nervous. This is where digital ads shine.”

3) Ruthless targeting, Facebook Ad buy, $1750

“The Facebook feature 'workplace targeting' was our primary weapon. We targeted all CNN/AOL-Time Warner employees with 500 points per day (the Facebook max). We ran dozens of different ads, testing message hooks from 'Why did you let Lou Dobbs broadcast from a hate rally?' to 'Why is CNN profiting off racism?' We even called out CNN’s on-air talent by name...”

4) Hard sell fundraising asks via Facebook ads, undisclosed

“The majority of the Facebook budget was spent running the ads to progressives and Latinos with a hard fundraising ask.”

5) Blog ad buy, $10,000

“Within 24 hours, we also launched banner ads that paired the best performing imagery, hook, and call-to-action from the Facebook ads on political blogs.”

6) Google Ads, undisclosed (Blue State Digital was the vendor)

“delivering about 500,000 ad impressions per day, but we were also raising money from our clicks”

7) Access traditional earned media via trade media and online press

“We also leaked the story of the digital buy to ClickZ—one of the most well-read digital advertising publications. We chose them because an editor named Kate Kaye is the foremost journalist covering political digital ads, and they are exceedingly well syndicated and search engine optimized (anything that they post triggers dozens of Google Alerts). This post led to a post by MediaBistro—the insider rag for journalists—and the story exploded from there.”

This firm used tougher-than-nails tactics to get their clients point across to big American media. It worked like a charm. But at what cost?

It’s pretty clear that this firm doesn’t care about burning bridges with the traditional media. They only care about getting their point across. Suffice it to say that if someone in official Ottawa tried a stunt like this, they would probably be on the defensive for some time.

Tomorrow: What if you are on the other end of online ad-war tactics like these? We have a couple of pointers.

A USB media kit is a fun, and sometimes cheap, way to connect.

A provincial-level, non-governmental organization recently asked me to weigh in on using media kits as a method of introducing an organization to the media. I couldn’t attend the session in person, but I thought it was an amazing topic and offered to contribute via the blog.

A couple of points to help set up the organization's five questions:

• The program and the over fifty partner agencies feel they do not get the credit they deserve; they work in all communities across Ontario.
• It’s their organization's goal to make a “strong push to do more community engaging events and involve new partnerships.”
• As with most NGO’s, they need this product to “double.” In addition to being a traditional media kit, they also need it to act as a way to introduce these vital agencies  and their work to interested businesses, citizens, and potential community partners.

Media Kit Questions What tools are available for making your media kit--efficiently and effectively?

• Great writing; short, simple, and to the point: Information is great. But, concise and relevant information is priceless. Too many media kits feature too many pages about programs/events and ephemera best left in annual reports and newsletters.
• Good design: invest in templates; don’t let your designers provide only un-editable files. Make good design a prerequisite to products leaving the organization. Has it been time for a new overall look for years? Get on it. In the mean time, simplify pages, strip out clip art, and embrace white space. Keep the fonts to two, maximum. You don’t need Photoshop and InDesign to make great looking products. You need common sense and an inspiration (head to the local magazine store and try replicating simple, modern layouts).
• Amazing photos: what do people see first? A great big photo. The best one you have. Draw in the audience. Don't have great photos? Get some. Many photographers love working with NGOs and would be happy to help.
• Information journalists can use: I always giggle a little when I get big press packages with umpteen clippings from other papers. Select quotes should do it. Include relevant stats, a bullet point history (less than 150 words) and stories, anecdotes, and other information that can be used.

2) Can a media kit involve a simple cut and paste from your website? What tools should be included for media kits at events?

Journalists know how to visit your website. Don’t copy and paste.

Sections for a great event-based media kit:

Organizational bio (~200-300 words): have someone who works in your local coffee shop read it (Really!) and then ask them a few questions about your organization.

Event description: a short run down of the event narrative; what the journalist is going to see at the event and why; answer all the questions (who, what, when, where, why, and how).

Event scenario: a minute-by-minute breakdown of all things that will happen in the night.

Advance speeches: fork it over, it’s really nothing too secret--give journalists (and translators) copies of the speech in advance. They will like it, I swear.

Photo contact sheet: not required, but helpful. A one page colour print out of the 6 -10 photos available for download on your website. Photos of the prep and run-up to the event and of principal speakers/performers. Think, “photos that would look great on a blog or in the paper; unique shots no one else could have access to."

3) What are some common mistakes in media kits and their delivery?

• Too little information, too much padding.
• Too much information, too little colour.
• Way too much information with no design/navigation elements.
• Old materials, dated logos and fonts.
• Inattention to detail. Not everything needs to be custom printed, but it should look like you cared about the way it was put together.
• Forcing the kit on unwilling journalists.

4) What are some unique ideas to stand out? USB data keys or sticks are still popular and can be custom printed with your logo for less than printed/custom dye cut folders. Opt for the largest size you can afford.

I’ve seen kits delivered in paint buckets, pizza boxes, with “kidnapping” style notes attached, stuffed with sparkles and streamers, and delivered by sining telegram. Funny thing: I can’t recall what any of those zany pitches was selling. Stay fun, clever, and charming. Kooky and zany get in the way.

I’ll point you to my thoughts on Social Media Releases as well. I think they can be used to great effect, provided you don’t pay too much and have a strategy to get them into the hands of journalists.

5) Can media accept gifts?

Yes and no. They will certainly snap up swag (t-shirts, bumper stickers, coffee mugs) directly related to the pitch or event, but real gifts (over $10-15)? That places journalists in an awkward situation. The same holds true for lunches, drinks, and dinners: if it’s work-related and the point is to get ink, it’s best to let the journalist pay for themselves.

Toronto is collectively confused this morning as a rising political star with a week-old mayoral campaign has confirmed he had “an inappropriate relationship with a young woman.”

Adam Giambrone, seen above with partner Sarah McQuarrie, has apologized for his relationship with university student Kristen Lucas. He is no doubt mortified--but that won’t be enough to stop the questions about the future of his campaign.

This isn’t over by a long shot. Why? As evidenced by last week's casual outing of a Conservative Minister, it’s often the case that elected-people will simply refuse to comment on their “private lives”. As a result, the story simply goes away. It happens more than people would think.

However, when the private life and the public life collide there is bound to be an issue. Like with Maxime Bernier. His issues with Julie Couillard only became a full-fledged scandal when she went “public” about her time with the Minister, and in the course of those interviews she revealed that secret-level documents were left at her home for weeks.

Giambrone stands accused of staging the announcement of his partner to benefit his campaign (and attempting to keep an ongoing fling with Lucas), telling her about TTC fare increases and, as the Toronto Star reports, several more salacious details:

Giambrone told Lucas that he hoped they could continue seeing each other,and assured her, "I had to have someone political." In recent interviewswith the Star, Lucas said she's been involved with Giambrone sincelate 2008 and, on several occasions, had sex late at night on a couch in his City Hall office.

In short, watch out: it’s going to be a feeding frenzy. The private and public just collided.
Giambrone was already in for a rough ride. “Troubled” is the most frequent adjective attached to the Toronto Transit Authority--of which Giambrone is chair. The Toronto media, egged on by frustrated transit riders, have been sticking it to the troubled TTC’s service “issues” for a few weeks now.

But the real problems are right in the facts as presented in the Toronto Star. The two parties are kilometers apart. He says the relationship “consisted of text messages and conversations in public places only.” She says it was a year-long, intimate affair.

His campaign needs to sort out the truth, get him onto the most sympathetic TV set (with partner Sarah) and tell the whole story. All of it. The only real hope is being more human than the people who are gloating gleefully about the scandal.

Whether or not he can recover from this depends less on his team orsupporters and more on his partner’s reaction.

So, is this what you sign up for when you are elected? What do electors have the right to know? How much should a citizen need to know before casting a ballot? Please comment below.

Photo credit: Tsar Kasim

The byline Jan Wong makes some wince a little. And likely, an equal number dive eagerly into everything she writes. And, for better or worse she inspired a whole new generation of journalists this past weekend.

Very few others practice her "How far do you go to get a story? As far as it takes" style-of-journalism and none since Mordecai Richler with the ability to rouse such strong reactions in people.

Wong gave an emotional keynote at the Canadian University Press national conference this past Friday night. This is a roundup of the best reporting I could find about her speech.

The Innovation in College Media blog provides the basic structure of the keynote speech - including all ten of Wong’s rules “for getting the story” with their comprehensive written notes here: “Her talk was about 10 rules for getting the story, but she also talked about her battle with depression. It was a powerful presentation…”

Ashleigh Mattern provides a good overview of Wong’s career in the official CUP conference newsletter. But, I found it strange that the CUP conference newsletter report on the speech had no mention of the news Wong had handed them. So here it is:

Jan Wong, it seems recently freed of any restrictions on speaking about matters surrounding her departure of the Globe, confided in the large group of student journalists that she was fired while on leave for depression.  Here is how some in the audience reported the Wong keynote via Twitter:

And here is an embed of the aggregate opinion/tweets of folks talk about Jan Wong on the conference hash tag #nash72:

And, a final reflection on the Wong speech from student journalist and blogger Karen Ho from her post “High on hope (and other legal things)”

“I can still fight for a place in the world’s media landscape. Jan Wong and Ing Wong-Ward’s presence were especially helpful in showing me how other Chinese-Canadian women journalists can be incredibly successful while at the same time kicking down expectations and escaping from the cultural expectations of our parents.”

Photo credit from Andrew Louis, (@hyfen on Twitter) who also blogged his amusing observations about my hometown, Edmonton.

Several major announcements recently made in the smartphone market and my ongoing research (read: playing) on Foursquare - a hyper-local social network based on “checking in” at locations (office, restaurant, home, etc.) to earn points with your phone, are perfect fodder for a set of MediaStyle.ca posts.

Over the next few days I’m going to be featuring developments in the mobile space. We will be posting on new smartphone applications that feature of this years most-mentioned online trends: geolocation; as well a couple ideas on how political parties and unions could be using mobile technology and I’ve got a few amazing interviews lined up.

Tomorrow: Pro and Con of Foursquare. Two seasoned online communicators from Toronto are interviewed about their Foursquare views.

Monday: we explore why geolocation may be the tool that gets politics really (and spending real money) on social media channels.

Tuesday: ideas on how unions and NGOs could be using text messages, mobile applications and wireless communications.

But first, I wanted to hear from my online community on Foursquare - a couple days ago I asked via Twitter what users/non-users thought of Foursquare. Here are some of the responses. Some love it, some hate it  and many see opportunity.

PS. If you want that Nexus One from Google? I’d look to the new kid on the block. WIND Mobile COO tweeted yesterday:

Wow! Lots of interest in the Nexus. http://bit.ly/5XZQ9e Yep, works on AWS, and we're chatting with them... will let everyone know soon.

Journalists across Canada celebrated the unanimous Supreme Court of Canada ruling granting a new defence for libel - “Responsible Journalism” or “Responsible Communications.”

It’s obvious why established news organizations - with legal teams, corporate support and money - would find this ruling immediately useful - but, I think many Canadian bloggers and communications advisors were left scratching their heads as to what it meant for them.

As one lawyer for the Ottawa Citizen said, "It will be interesting to see how these communications advisers now are going to advise their clients. I don't think you can say 'no comment' anymore."

Hopefully this post helps sort through some of the implications for bloggers and communicators.

This new defence protects publishers from judgment if they have reasonably attempted to secure the information and facts needed prior to publication of the story - and still end up making a mistake that results in legal action.

In other words - more simply - if a reporter does her homework (due diligence) and makes every effort to “get it right” - but still ends up making a mistake that she get sued for - this defence will protect the reporter (and publisher) from losing in court.

Now, as noted Canadian legal academic Michael Geist says on his blog (emphasis mine):

“In a big win for new media and bloggers, it concludes that the defence applies broadly… This is crucial decision for all publishers both big and small. It represents a major win for freedom of expression in Canada and should remove some of the libel chill that arises far too frequently.”

What kind of due diligence would you have to put in to avail yourself of this defence ? Well, helpfully the court lays it all out.

A. The publication is on a matter of public interest

and:

B.  The publisher was diligent in trying to verify the allegation, having regard to:

(a)   the seriousness of the allegation;

(b)   the public importance of the matter;

(c)   the urgency of the matter;

(d)   the status and reliability of the source;

(e)   whether the plaintiff's side of the story was sought and accurately reported;

(f)    whether the inclusion of the defamatory statement was justifiable;

(g)   whether the defamatory statement’s public interest lay in the fact that it was made rather than its truth (“reportage”); and

(h)   any other relevant circumstances.

Here are a few possible implications in relations to blogging:

1. Freedom of Speech could be bolstered online; many cease and desist letters are combatted daily using “fair use” doctrine in the US; I can see how bloggers (with access to legal help) could push back against libel chill in the same way traditional media will now be able to - the path will be blazed by the traditional media; but expect bloggers to point to precedent once it’s established
2. Bloggers may move forward with more provocative or investigative work; knowing that they have less to fear if they make an error and they are sued for it; a defence exists to defend against judgment
3. Bloggers could feel more emboldened with Supreme Court protection to phone up a subject of a controversial story and ask them to confirm or deny facts;

The bottom line for bloggers seems to be “Blog Responsibly”. The Supremes’ new libel defence says if you make a small mistake - it’s OK - just as long as you really were being responsible and the matter is in the public interest.

In my estimation, much more immediate than implications for bloggers is what this ruling means for public relations firms, political communications advisors and lawyers advising clients in media situations.

Canadian Press reported Ottawa Citizen lawyer Richard Dearden as saying the ruling will increase journalist standards because "you have to be responsible."

"You can't phone at midnight and the presses are going to roll two minutes later and (say) well, we couldn't reach that person. That won't be responsible. But if you've given them fair opportunity to respond and they choose not to, that's up to them, you've done your job."

The bottom line for public relations professionals seems to be: have another lawyer or two on standby. You may need their advice soon.

Read the full ruling here.

A very well thought out argument for what magazines might soon look like:

Mag+ from Bonnier on Vimeo.

From the designers:

"The concept aims to capture the essence of magazine reading, which
people have been enjoying for decades: an engaging and unique reading
experience in which high-quality writing and stunning imagery build up
immersive stories.

The concept uses the power of digital media to create a rich and
meaningful experience, while maintaining the relaxed and curated
features of printed magazines. It has been designed for a world in
which interactivity, abundant information and unlimited options could
be perceived as intrusive and overwhelming."

Is this what's next for magazines in Canada?

(h/t @remarkk)