By now you’ve undoubtedly heard about BP’s expanding oil slick in the Gulf of Mexico.

With such a major disaster, PR is obviously a key issue for the company and there are plenty of PR industry experts weighing in on how BP is doing with respect to PR. Here’s a quick rundown:

• BP needed to take responsibility. In a statement, BP CEO Tony Hayward said, “It wasn’t our accident, but we are absolutely responsible for the oil, for cleaning it up.” While this may be true, the public doesn’t care – in a crisis, a company needs to accept responsibility immediately and work quickly to show how they are addressing the situation in a very proactive manner.

• BP’s social media communication efforts throughout the crisis are being applauded by some. BP created a new section of its site to share cleanup updates – on a daily basis, links to company statements, video responses and updates from company spokespeople. If there is one thing that everyone is looking for in the midst of a crisis it is updated information, all the time! BP’s site provides just that and offers one place for the public and the media to go to find the latest details on the spill.

• Get your messaging / facts straight before you talk. The Slate wrote:

“For example, the company initially told reporters that the rig was leaking 1,000 barrels of oil a day. The real figure turned out to be 5,000 barrels, after a new leak was discovered. Even then a BP spokesman downplayed the number as somewhere between 1,000 and 5,000. “That hurt their credibility early on,” says Timothy Coombs, who teaches public relations at Eastern Illinois University. “People wondered, How much can we trust you?” It also violated a rule that Larry Smith of the Institute for Crisis Management tells his clients: “Don’t speculate. If you know, say so. If you don’t know, say you don’t know.”

There’s plenty more out there regarding the BP story – 18K+ stories on Google News in fact – but that’s what bubbled to the top for me as a PR professional.

The news about the accidental release of the latest iPhone has been a viral firestorm this week.  From a PR perspective, Bridget and Katie Mc see reasons to believe that this may AND may not be a publicity stunt engineered by Apple.  Here’s their thoughts….

KATIE Mc — Of course, no one knows the real answer…yet, but I think there are some key indicators that provide a shadow of a doubt that this iPhone “leak” isn’t a stunt.  Here’s why:

1. Apple doesn’t need to be “stunty. “ A company like Apple can create excitement and widespread interest by just making an announcement.  The company is innovative and people like seeing what its developers, engineers, innovators come up with.  Some have already begun to say that this “stunt” has failed.
2. Publicity Stunts are Risky.  Apple has a solid group of evangelists and brand ambassadors that is growing by the minute.  I’m not sure they’re willing to annoy them by sinking to the lows of a publicity stunt to get a viral discussion going about the latest iPhone.  Renay San Miguel of MacNewsWorld writes on this in his column.
3. Apple doesn’t do publicity stunts.  Like many smart and innovative companies, I’m sure Apple has loads of safeguards in place to ensure that information isn’t leaked to the public.  Why change that now?  And, even more so, how would they get this type of stunt by their lawyers?
4. Why do a “stunt” on a device that isn’t that outrageously different/new?  We’ve seen the newest capabilities of this “new” iPhone and most people don’t even think this iPhone is fully baked yet so why would Apple release a model, particularly in a stunt, that isn’t close to completion?  Andy Ihnatko explains more on this in his post.

 

BRIDGET — Although these points are all valid, the moment I heard about this misplaced iPhone, I felt that it was a publicity stunt to drum up excitement for the features of the next iPhone. Here’s why:

1. This has all the elements of a classic publicity stunt. The cease and desist letter from Apple’s lawyer, the rampant press coverage, the odd scenario starting at a German bar in California and including Gray Powell, a “really drunk person” who handed the phone to a “mysterious man,” who then sold the phone to Gizmodo… fishy.
2. Smoke and Mirrors Diversion: While Apple doesn’t do publicity stunts, perhaps they are trying to fight press with press, covering up the dismal reviews of the iPad.
3. With Apple’s reputation for secrecy and security, how likely is it that they’d let a junior to mid-level engineer  carry around an unsecured (no password evn!) phone with unreleased hardware and top-secret new features? Sorry Gray Powell, I know it was your birthday, but I just can’t see Apple taking that much risk just for the sake of “field testing.” For example, Business Week describes how iPad developers had to store it “in a room with blacked-out windows” and keep it “tethered to a fixed object.”
4. Yet another option for all you consipracy theorists…  Is Steve Rubel on to something when he suggests it’s a fake, meant to act as a decoy for an even better next gen iPhone?

 

If it is a publicity stunt, I’d say it’s a good one! This is right up there with some of the most memorable marketing stunts of all time.  

I like what Rafe Needleman tweeted earlier:  @Rafe: if Apple was smart (and had a sense of humor), they’d have Gray Powell introduce the new iPhone at the press event in June.

What do you think?

I was quoted in a PRWeek story by Aarti Shah today (“Google’s China move affirms reputation“). The article focusses on the Google brand and how its decision to “not censor” search and move their operations to a Hong Kong server might impact their brand reputation.

I think the simple answer is: only in good ways. Why? Because they stayed true to their Philosophy and chose to not compromise. Regardless of how you might view Google’s business overall (selling advertising and collecting data about people), you won’t be able to corner them for being hypocrites!

But this does bring up an interesting point not being debated as much right now:  Why go into China in the first place? Did they really think this wasn’t going to be an issue?  Google is a smart company, with some of the smartest people in the world.  Naïve isn’t  a word I would use to describe them. But let me table that for another day (and another blog)!

What I think is most interesting is how this act will impact mobile-focused companies doing business in China that rely on Google to help monazite their products and services.  For example,  OEMs like Motorola are breaking ties with Google in China. This is most likely a pragmatic act of  solidarity with the Chinese Government as Google might not be available in China in the near future anyway…so why not hedge their bets?

But to understand fully the implications here, you have to remember that Google isn’t just a web search being used on LAPTOPs and PCS. Google today is about mobile phones, mobile search, and location based services.  When looking at the global usage numbers these are consistently the big drivers in mobile data traffic. This is why people PAY for data plans.

How time flies!  TechFlash celebrated its first birthday last week and we were there to check out the TechFlash Holiday Party & Birthday Bash. 

 John Cook was in his best Santa hat as he hosted the tech trivia challenge which included questions that we couldn’t even begin to guess the right answer –

• Robin Williams named his daughter after which video-game princess?

 

And others that we could –

• Season six of Donald Trump’s “The Apprentice” starred which Seattle entrepreneur as a contestant?

 

While the party was definitely hopping and the trivia competition was fierce, we found ourselves – as PR professionals – discussing how much the media landscape has changed in the last year, in the Seattle market and elsewhere. 

 We came to a common agreement about the evolution of the Seattle media market — Even though we’ve lost the traditional print version of the Seattle PI, there are increasingly more and more interesting and credible non-traditional news sources for our clients to reach and some that enable us to really zero in on a specific audience. 

 Take the blog MyBallard: not only has it become a credible source for the Seattle neighborhood of Ballard, it recently won an Online Journalism Award for community collaboration, beating out stiff, and in a sense, more traditional competitors such as the Los Angeles Times and Miami Herald!  For some of our clients, MyBallard has morphed into a better place for them to see stories posted about their company — because it’s hyper-local and the readership is quite obvious.

 This thought also led us to consider what the future holds for the Seattle media landscape and the PR industry.  From our perspective, it comes down to a couple of key takeaways:

1.  Hyper-local forums and blogs like MyBallard will grow in readership (Yes, even my parents will read them….if I can get my mom to use the Internet for more than finding recipes on the Food Network Web site…) and will increasingly be the first place readers stop for news that relates to their lifestyle and where they live.
2. ALL of our clients will one day ask to see coverage on their company in online outlets like TechFlash and MyBallard just as often as they ask for coverage in traditional outlets like the Seattle Times.  We’re not fully there yet, but we’re definitely seeing a shift!
3. While the newspaper industry appears to be dying a very slow death, newspapers will never go completely away. Just take a look at SeattlePI.com: while it has obviously changed, the site earlier this year boasted 4.3 million monthly unique visitors – not bad for a news Web site many people thought wouldn’t survive.

 

 Our conversations may have turned into a philosophical PR and media discussion, but I can honestly say that we all enjoyed the event, the refreshments, the food and the company!

 And, in case you’re wondering, the answer to the Robin Williams trivia question is Zelda and “The Apprentice” question is James Sun.

Was just reading a story by Chris Foresman at Ars Technica about the future of AT&T sans iPhone exclusivity.

There is no doubt that AT&T gambled (a lot) and won (a lot) with their bet on the iPhone. So let’s call it a success and move on.

What I think is a more interesting question to ponder: when will AT&T better leverages its quad-play (home phone, cell, Internet and IPTV) offerings to begin really owning the digital home. I am not talking about discounted package deals and single billing statements. Yawn.  What I am talking about is going into an AT&T store seeing a big, beautiful HDTV and getting it for free or near free (say $20 per month) for signing a 2 year commitment for new IPTV and Internet service.

When this happens, AT&T would not only drive up subscribers, but drive HDTV sales and services through the roof. I love going into Best Buy, but if AT&T was willing to off set the cost of a new HDTV like they do for cell phones, I’d be the first in line.

If you are a tech-nerd like me, take a step back before you blast me on the disadvantages of bundling. I know the customer service issues needed to be dealt with first! But most people don’t want to be CIOs of their house. They want a simple solution to bring everything together. And think — what’s the next logical step once all these things are connected together? Access to advanced content and services. Not just movies, but critically needed services such as remote home network management, off-site file back-ups (documents, movies, photos and videos), managed DRM so you can move content from one device to another (legally), and much much more.

I am not the first to prognosticate about the future of telco and cable companies (sorry satellite), so believe this isn’t a matter of if this will happen, but when. And when it does… that will be a hell of thing to be able to promote. Much more interesting than bundled billing!