Adding to my argument in last week’s post 6 Steps to Empower Your Employees as Brand Ambassadors, David Pogue, technology columnist for The New York Times, explains the importance of allowing your employees access to social media while at work.

He is interviewed in this Ragan.com video entitled “Half of U.S. businesses block social media. What’s the point?”

Imagine my surprise yesterday when I received the following email from The New York Times at 1:04 pm.

Not me. Of course, as you may have read, The Times committed a big boo-boo yesterday when it accidentally cancelled the subscriptions of 8 million print and online subscribers. The media and Twitter scribes were all over it in the intervening three hours before the Times sent out this correction at 4:19 pm:

The Correction

The Times did the right thing, of course, but I’d like to make a point about content and tone of the correction. Aren’t they in the communication business? Note the cold tone of voice and shortness of the second email. Why was the first email sent in error? How did it happen? Subscribers would have welcomed a more detailed explanation.

A Missed Opportunity to Engage Readers

A Forbes writer, who also received an email, tried calling the Times and kept getting busy signals. It’s a sure bet that many, many other subscribers had the same experience.

Sure, it was nice to receive an apology. But The Times missed a great opportunity to engage with its subscribers. The paper could have used some humor in its message and personalized it with the signature of an actual person.  Can a company write a letter?  Didn’t a human being write this missive?

The Times wrote a story online about the mistake at 2:29 pm and sent out this  message in its official Twitter feed, “If you received an e-mail today about canceling your New York Times subscription, ignore it. It’s not from us.” Oh, yes, it was. Turns out the email was sent by a Times employee, according to Eileen Murphy, a Times spokesperson. And why the delay of almost 90 minutes before the subscribers received the apology?

The Times Email Could Have Said –

Dear Valued New York Times Reader,

Wow, did we goof! We did NOT cancel your subscription. Please ignore our earlier email with the subject line, “Important information regarding your subscription.”

It was an honest mistake — someone pushed the wrong button and we had 8 million unhappy readers for a couple of hours before we fixed things. Your email was not compromised. Everything is back on autopilot. You’ll continue to receive your New York Times as you always have.

If you’d like to vent, we invite you to visit us on our official Twitter account at https://twitter.com/#!/nytimes. We’ll also answer any questions you have about your subscription or any of our other services.

Thanks for your patience and understanding. We value you as a New York Times reader.

Sincerely,

Arthur O. Sulzberger, Jr.
Publisher

— now isn’t that better than the email I did receive?

PS – see the comment below. The email went to non-subscribers, too. What a goof-up.

Social media has spawned a whole new vocabulary. When I was starting out there was advertising and public relations. You paid for advertising and public relations — or publicity — was free (of course, it’s never free because a company as to pay people to generate PR).

I keep coming across the terms Earned, Owned, Paid and Social Media. So thanks to Business Wire for this schematic that describes what each term means.

I guess public relations comes under earned media coverage, whereas advertising is categorized as paid, the way it always has been. Do you agree with these definitions? What words would you add or delete in each quadrant?

Image via CrunchBase

[tweetmeme]Bill Keller, executive editor of The New York Times, thinks so. In the Sunday magazine section, he writes a rare bylined article entitled: “The Twitter Trap.”

His main premise: “Basically, we are outsourcing our brains to the cloud. The upside is that this frees a lot of gray matter for important pursuits like FarmVille and ‘Real Housewives.’ But my inner worrywart wonders whether the new technologies overtaking us may be eroding characteristics that are essentially human: our ability to reflect, our pursuit of meaning, genuine empathy, a sense of community connected by something deeper than snark or political affinity.”

Why So Negative?

He knows he will get “blowback” but I admire him for going on record with what a lot of people are thinking.  First, where I stand.  Social media is gobbling up a lot of people’s time. Remember, it’s still so new. We’re all learning how to use it so that it works for us as individuals – such as connecting on Facebook with far-away friends and relatives or looking for a job on LinkedIn. So, in my mind the jury is still out on its long-term effects on our brains.

Where I take exception to Keller is that he devotes his column almost exclusively to the negative aspects – “Twitter and YouTube are nibbling away at our attention spans…why remember what you can look up in seconds?” he asks.

Social Media Spurs Innovation

I predict that 2011 is the year that companies will jump into social media with both feet. Those on the sidelines will find they need to catch up to the early adopters. Enlightened companies such as IBM have an army of employees writing blogs under the IBM imprimatur “IBMers’ blogs: A menu of expertise and insight from a passionate crowd”  – with the links to dozens of employee bloggers. Note the words “expertise and insight.” By unleashing their employees the company has an army of brand advocates reporting on IBM’s newest innovations.

The web has revolutionized customer service. At Comcast’s Twitter account @comcastcares customers can get their complaints taken care of by a team of Comcast employees, such as Bill Gerth, “also known as @comcastbill. We are here to Make it Right for our customers.” He’s posted some 74,000 tweets.

Web-based Communities

The internet has enabled many companies to form communities of employees from around the globe  – focused on innovation, problem solving and client service. In the past, if an engineer in the U.S. needed an expert to help solve a sticky problem, it’s doubtful he would know the very person he wanted works in the Hong Kong office. The web has changed that. We can even have face-to-face communications via Skype, making the connection personal.

I won’t even go into how Twitter is forming communities that are forcing radical changes on governments around the world. You’ve read all about that.

So, Bill Keller, while I appreciate your frustration with a lot of the dreck that passes as discourse on social networks, the good far outweighs the bad. We don’t need to memorize books like they did in the olden days. After we take a minute to find what we need in a web search, we can take the time we would have devoted to memorization to reflect on new ideas that will make things easier, cheaper, faster and maybe even earn some money.

[tweetmeme]It’s been fashionable lately to proclaim that blogging is dead. After all, look at all those bone-crushing numbers of subscribers on Facebook, Twitter and LinkedIn.

But a story in today’s New York Times, Russian Site Smokes Out Corruption, illustrates the unique power of a blog. The story describes how a Russian lawyer, Alexsei Navalny, attracts a million unique visitors a day with his blog that exposes corruption in big state-owned energy companies in his crusade against graft, kickbacks and bribery. He’s putting himself at great personal risk for a cause he believes in on behalf of the small, but growing number of middle-class shareholders in these companies who he believes are being ripped off. Blogging is the new media in countries where the government controls official media, because official media isn’t reporting the news.

What This Means for Business

So, how does this translate into blogging for businesses? As I’ve written before, I believe a blog should be the centerpiece of a company’s social media strategy. Foremost, it provides ample space to tell your story, your way, with as much copy as you need to make your case. This can’t be done in a 140-character tweet or in a quick update on other social media sites. A blog has a long shelf-life because it will continue to come up in searches long after it is written. That’s why Mr. Navalny’s blog is so important. He’s able to include chunks of copy documenting what he claims is corruption in these companies. The story continues to get fleshed out in each blog post with more information as it is uncovered.

Blogging is story telling. Over time, a blog can help to shape a brand and reinforce what the company wants to be known for and why this is important for its constituents. Long live blogging.

Reporters are more experienced than you are in an interview.  They should be.  They do it for a living.  They know the questions that are likely to make you squirm.

For example, a reporter will often lead you into areas that you would rather not talk about for any number of reasons.  For example, a reporter asks for confidential company information you are not permitted to discuss.  Or, you are asked for details about your work for a client, which is off limits.  Or, you simply are not an expert on the topic.

“Bridging” is the process of returning to your key messages and away from the topics you do not want to discuss.  Or, the reporter may wander into subject areas that weren’t proposed as topics for the interview.  This isn’t necessarily something bad – s/he may have a particular interest in that subject.  It’s just that you don’t.  So how do you get the interview back on track?   You do it by “bridging.”

Example of Bridging

Question: “Tell me about the new online service you’re developing for Best Client.”

Answer: “Our client Jack O’Brien is the person to talk to about that and I can put you in touch with him.  But I’ve read with interest your stories about online services offered by money center banks.  Let me tell you about how we’ve come up with a solution for companies with a thorny problem they’re facing in cross-selling their customers on the Internet.”

You have responded to the question by pointing him to the appropriate spokesperson, and demonstrated that you know the topics the writer is covering.  Now you can return to a key message without alienating the reporter.

Whether you are being interviewed by a print, broadcast or online reporter, you should structure your answer in what journalists call the “inverted pyramid” style. That is, you lead with your most important message. For many executives, this is in direct contrast to the way they approach a problem, that is, by gathering the facts and building a case for a proposal or recommendation.

Just read the lead article in your daily newspaper tomorrow, and you’ll see that the most important news is in the “lead,” or the first paragraph. Unless you have a personal interest in the subject, it is doubtful that you will read the entire article. The facts will be written in descending order of importance, with background detail at the end of the story.

When framing your answer, think in “headlines.” Your headline should be short and simple with one idea. The headline is, in effect, your most important key message that you want to communicate to the reader or listener. It will be supported by evidence, examples, facts, personal experience, anecdotes, visuals, etc. In a television interview, you may not have time for more than one headline and a couple of supporting facts.

As an example of a headline, the House of Representatives is investigating brain injuries to football players.  Facing a barrage of nasty questions from House committee members regarding National Football League policies and research, the Commissioner Roger Goodell responded, “I can think of no issue to which I’ve devoted more time and attention than the health and well-being of our players, and particularly retired players.”  This is the key message he wants as his takeaway: that baseball is committed to the health and well-being of its active and retired players.  Time will tell if his message holds up or is refuted.

When you have the opportunity to be interviewed, you will no doubt have thought about the key messages you want to communicate.  This is important and the right thing to do.  It comes under “being prepared.”  But you also need to know what reporters are looking for in a story and it may not always be what you are interested in talking about.  Before the interview, be sure you’ve researched the media outlet and read/watched the last few stories the reporter has written.  If the reporter feasts on controversy and you don’t want controversy, think twice about doing the interview.    But if you are good to go, this is what you need to know about what reporters want:

1. What’s new. Reporters are always looking for “what’s new.”  Are you announcing a new service, a new president, sponsoring an important event, releasing the results of a survey?
2. Trends. Trends in your industry that are affecting the way business is being done, impacting large numbers of people, influencing public policy.
3. Stories with a beginning, middle and an end. Reporters love to hear the words, “For example,” because they know they are likely to  hear an interesting story that will clarify and possibly even entertain.
4. Conflict. Differing points of view on important subjects of wide interest, i.e., health reform, the economy, the environment, etc.
5. Visuals. Charts, graphs, product samples and other visuals that will improve their understanding of the story, and stimulate the interest of their readers or viewers.
6. Juicy quotes. A sound bite for television, a lead or “grabber” for a newspaper article.
7. Oddball angles. Man bites dog.  The expected turned on its head

So, when you’re preparing for your interview, see how many of these “wants” you can include.

More than ever before, executives are being called on to represent their organizations in backgrounders, briefings and interviews with reporters from the print, broadcast and online media. These discussions offer an excellent opportunity to tell a positive story about the organization and its products and services.

Every discussion is different depending on the length, format, reporter’s style and whether he or she is working for a print publication, radio/TV station or online media outlet. A reporter with a monthly magazine generally will have the time to explore a subject more thoroughly than an on-air TV reporter who, more often than not, is simply seeking a juicy “sound bite.”  With the advent of the Internet, the news cycle is now 24/7 and an executive may be called at any time of the day or night for a quote.

In every case, executives increase their chances of being included in a story by using techniques regarding form and content that can be learned and practiced and avoiding these common mistakes:

1. Replying “No Comment.” No comment translates to “guilty as charged.”  The reply is used most frequently when the responder has bad news.  You are under no obligation to give out information that would be damaging to you or your company.  However, a response like “I can’t discuss the matter at this time, because of SEC regulations” accomplishes the same thing.
2. Not Being Prepared. You need to have your facts and figures at your fingertips prior to the interview.
3. Repeating a Negative. Your response:  “Yes, earnings are down, but we made a capital investment of $50 in the quarter to expand our production capacity to meet consumer demand.”  What is written:  “Yes, earnings are down.” Some notable quotes: President Richard Nixon: “ I want the American people to know their President is not a crook.”   Jessica Hahn:  “I am not a bimbo.”  Bank regulator: “We were not asleep at the switch.”
4. Being Late to an Interview. Reporters are on tight schedules.  If you are late (either by phone, in person, or online), besides irritating the reporter, you reduce your chances of getting in all your key messages.  Being late to a live television interview is fatal to the relationship.
5. Restricting Your Answer to the Question. You don’t have to narrowly respond to a question with a “yes” or “no.”  Use the opportunity to “bridge” from the question to offer information that will broaden the reporter’s understanding and knowledge of your company and its offerings.
6. Ignoring the Question. You must acknowledge the question, but you can say, “It’s not a simple yes or no, but let me tell you about how our company is addressing this is important public policy issue.”
7. Not Returning Phone Calls or Emails. This is a cardinal sin, especially if a reporter is on deadline.  Return all phone calls and emails (and text messages) as soon as possible, even if you know you’ll be asked questions you’d rather avoid.  Otherwise, you’ll find reporters not returning your phone calls or emails.
8. Using Jargon. Not every reporter is knowledgeable about your industry and its acronyms.  Use language in terms that are understandable to a layman.
9. Lying. Never lie to the press.  They can always find out the truth from another source or by searching the Internet.
10. Dribbling Out Bad News. The cardinal rule is to get all the bad information out at once.  Do  not dribble out morsels one at a time as this is guaranteed to keep the bad news in front of the public until all the bad news is out — and it will come out.

The Wall Street Journal had an article yesterday “Why Email No Longer Rules” about the slow demise of email, which is giving way to text messages, Facebook, Twitter and other communication channels.

But is that true?  I think not.  The article states, “In August 2009, 276.9 million people used email across the U.S., several European countries, Australia and Brazil, according to Nielsen Co., up 21% from 229.2 million in August 2008.”  A 21% increase seems to me that email does still rule, even if other channels are increasing their share of traffic.

This isn’t a horse race with only one winner.  What is happening and will continue to happen is that people and companies will begin to segment their messages and target audiences by communications channel.  You may make a new business connection using a 140-character Tweet, but it’s likely that you will build the relationship with a deeper discourse that email – and the old-fashioned letter – allows.

Also, there will always be an element of the consuming public, possibly your target audience, that isn’t jumping on the social media bandwagon, at least not now.  They don’t want to be force fed with small bites of Tweets.  They will stick with old-fashioned email, thank you.

So let’s not count email out yet.  Remember, the pundits predicted the demise of direct mail with the emergence of the Internet yet we’re all receiving more catalogs than ever before. Companies like L.L. Bean and Chico’s know that relaxing in your easy chair while thumbing through pages rich in color and photographs still holds a lot of appeal. Not that these companies expect you to fill out the tip-in order form.  Their purpose for sending the catalogs has changed:  they have learned that after browsing and earmarking pages, you will go to your computer to place an order online.  See, you can teach old dogs new tricks, but don’t count out what’s working well, like email and catalogs, just yet.