Read More!

I personally have always had a love for reading and writing, skills and passions that were major factors in my decision to study and pursue a career in public relations. In fact, it's hard to say which came first: my love for reading or my love for writing. To be honest, I think they each nurtured each other.

Everyone involved in the world of public relations knows how critical it is to be a good writer in order to survive in this field; everyone is always trying to improve their writing. It is my personal belief that the more one reads, the better one's writing will become. For this reason, I do as much reading as possible in my spare time. I've read six novels since coming home for summer, and have also been reading everything else I get my hands on -- from magazines to newspapers to blogs to others' writings samples.

I feel that reading can familiarize one with new facts and insights, new sentence structures and writing styles and new examples to follow (or examples of tendencies to avoid, for that matter). It gives excellent experience in dissecting and understanding arguments, relating to others, building and using vocabulary and communicating more effectively overall.

While I personally enjoy reading novels (when time allows ), reading is something that can be squeezed in anywhere in one's schedule and can accommodate even the most diverse moods and tastes. I think that more people should find ways to incorporate reading into their busy daily schedules. If we all did that, the payoff could be huge!

What do you think, does reading play an important part in your writing? Do you agree that reading is a crucial part of the study of communications?

For that matter, have you read any books lately you'd like to recommend?

The Oprah Effect

A few weeks ago I blogged about Oprah and the "Oprah Effect," coincidentally enough, just this past week I was browsing the TV guide only to find a special on the subject on CNBC.

The actual segment was about an hour long, though I couldn't find the segment online. Instead, visit this site for more information about the companies and their experiences from being on the Oprah Winfrey Show. The show featured three companies in particular, which included Carol's Daughter, a natural beauty product company; We Take the Cake, a bakery near bankruptcy if it wasn't for being featured as Oprah's favorite things; and LAFCO, a company importing European bath and body products that tried for seven years before being featured on Oprah.

I find the effects of companies and products being featured on Oprah interesting, it's always nice to hear about the success companies achieve as a result. Has anyone read or heard of negative results from the "Oprah Effect?"

*Picture taken from www.oprah.com

The Game Keeps Changing. Can You Keep Up?

Alert! Author bylines are now searchable on Google News, as reported by PRNewser and their sister blog Baynewser. This is a key development for the field of PR; it is a "PR Game Changer," as ragan.com put it.

In the past, time constraints have often led PR practitioners to "blast" out pitches without taking the time to do their research beforehand. This new - free - service can simplify the process of researching journalists, helping to better target journalists for increased effectiveness while reducing PR spam.

"Byline history was available on Google News all along," explains PRNewser blogger, Jason, "though not hyperlinked, and not available in search window functionality." The improvements made to byline searchability on Google News can make tracking journalists easier - even when they switch jobs.

Besides making life easier for PR practitioners, these changes are also changing the "game" of PR; companies like Google are coming out with free products that may lead to the decline and/or termination of previously relied-upon, subscription-based programs.

Check out the PRNewser blog for information about how to use the new Google Byline so that you, too, can stay ahead of the game.

Out With the Old and In With the New? Not So Fast.

"The so-called 'new media' - Internet utterings, cell phone photos and footage, Twitter tweets and the like - are demonstrating both their potential for journalism and their hopelessness as journalism in the post-election Iranian uprising," wrote the Atlanta Journal Constitution's Tom Teepen in a recent article called "Why 'Old Media' is Still Needed" in the Lancaster Intelligencer Journal.

As Teepen points out, new media has been extremely instrumental in getting around government-imposed information barriers during the Iranian uprising. He compares these new media tidbits to "messages in a bottle." These "snippets of text and flashes of image arrive outside Iran, satellite ricochets carrying provocative indications of conditions and activities in the politically lurching Islamic Republic," he said.

Teepen also makes an interesting observation: "without means for verification, without explanation or narrative, unconnected to one another and of uncertain provenance, these raw data of news are as frustrating to readers, listeners and watchers as they are intriguing," he explains. This has led him to characterize the bits of information that escape from the troubled country as "chaos, not coverage." What's missing, he says, is journalism, which would act as a "filter," a means of providing explanation and detail to go along with the little information that is received. This can not only spur confusion, but it can give an unbalanced view of the conflict to outsiders.

Teepen suggests that, for this reason, "old media" is still needed; new media cannot or should not stand alone. I found this idea to be really interesting, as I had not previously considered the important ramifications of having a detailed, unbiased intermediary between the impassioned civilians on either side of the conflict -- and for that matter, on either side of Iran's borders. What do you think, is new media alone a valuable means of getting information in this conflict? Or is it an important part of a larger whole? In emphasizing new media as much as we do today, are we throwing the baby out with the bath water?

Lessons Learned From Billy Mays

As I'm sure you've heard by now, the notorious TV pitchman Billy Mays passed away this past week. It seems appropriate to take a moment to reflect on the man who has "probably persuaded you, or nearly persuaded you, to buy something you don't need" (as ragan.com so eloquently put it). In fact, as CNBC's Darren Rovell pointed out, "Mays did the impossible. He got us to buy something we sometimes never heard of in 30 seconds time."

We can all learn from the example Billy Mays set as a pitchman: dedication and enthusiasm are critical to a successful pitch. Combine these characteristics with knowledge of your product inside and out, up and down and backwards and forwards, and you can successfully sell just about anything - including things no one ever knew they wanted or needed.

How to Make Sure your Surveys are More than a Waste of Paper

There's a great article on Ragan that raises some important questions about survey writing. One example they give shows how to think about the end results you want out of a survey before distributing it.

"A popular question on readership surveys goes something like this: 'How much of the employee magazine do you read? All / Most / Some / None.' One problem with this question is that it would yield data of limited value. What if you learned that 60 percent of employees read “most” of the publication? Does reading “most” of the publication help them in their work? And what parts of the publication do they read? Even if you knew what parts they read, how would that help you improve the parts they don’t read?"

Instead, they recommend to ask more specific questions that yield results you can actually use to evaluate. "A better question would be: 'From the list below, select the publication features you find most relevant to your everyday work.' A list would help you pinpoint what people read, and the phrasing of the question asks them to rate the relevance of the features in the specific context of their everyday work."

For more tips on survey writing, click here to read the article "Ask the right questions to get useful survey data."

Study: Generation Gap Largest It's Been in 40 Years

"American adults from young to old disagree increasingly today on social values ranging from religion to relationships, creating the largest generation gap since divisions 40 years ago over Vietnam, civil rights and women's liberation," wrote Hope Yen, Associated Press reporter, in Monday June 29, 2009's Lancaster Intelligencer Journal/New Era.

Here is an excerpt from her article:

A survey being released today [Monday June 29, 2009] by the Pew Research Center high-lights a widening age divide after last November's election, when 18- to 29-year-olds vote for Democrat Barack Obama by a 2-to-1 ratio.

Almost eight in 10 people believe there is a major difference in the point of view of younger people and older people today, according to the independent public opinion research group. That is the highest spread since 1969, when about 74 percent reported major differences in an era of generational conflicts over the Vietnam War and civil and women's rights. In contrast, just 60 percent in 1979 saw a generation gap.

Asked to identify where older and younger people differ most, 47 percent said social values and morality. People age 18 to 29 were more likely to report disagreements over lifestyle, views on family, relationships and dating, while older people cited differences in a sense of entitlement. Those in the middle-age groups also pointed to a difference in manners.

Besides being interesting, this information is extremely relevant and important for public relations practitioners to consider. Given the vast differences in opinions and attitudes between generations today, it is important to consider your target audience and tune your pitches to better suit the age-group you are trying to reach. Today more than ever, it seems, failing to consider one's audience thoroughly can risk alienating that audience all together.