Yes, we know, it’s hard to argue 2009 was a great year for ANY industry, but if the recession has had a silver lining it’s that it’s made us work harder and reassess the value of what we do. We’ve had to prove we’re worth the money that’s made us sharper, leaner and more accountable.

2009 has been momentous for other reasons too of course. Traditional, media-relations-centred PR has almost vanished to be replaced with something more fluid, more mercurial and more exciting while the way we approached audiences has changed completely.

Here are our top reasons why 2009 was a great year for PR.

1. PR began to realise its power. PR has traditionally been placed somewhat awkwardly below advertising and marketing in the minds of the public (it’s not called ‘below the line’ for nothing), and was often considered less effective and less creative than both. In 2009 that all went out of the window when it became apparent the digital world was going to make advertising flow into marketing and both flow into PR and out again. PR is really the only discipline that’s equipped to take control of that whole conversation in a convincing way and agencies began to adapt accordingly.

2. PR became less routine. Traditional media relations should never be neglected or downplayed, but it became apparent in 2009 that making press coverage the be all and end all was no longer what anyone wanted or needed. Smart agencies stopped operating to formulas and started to really think about what they were doing on a case-by-case basis, using the most effective channels and methods in combination with each other.

Some things we try not to do any more:

Blanket, indiscriminate press release distribution/selling in

Routine forward-feature-list-following PR plans

 ‘Pushing out’ messages hoping they’ll stick

Not doing enough research about the publication/site/blog before pitching

Not following up on pitches

Not knowing/caring enough about the audience. Which leads us to…..

3. PR tried that bit harder to understand people.  This year it was really brought home to us that we can’t presume we know what people are thinking and many agencies began to see this is an opportunity, not a hindrance. Listening properly to our audiences will give us a better return on campaigns.

4. The definition of news changed. Listening to the Today programme in the morning, reading the paper on the commute in and then Channel 4 news in the evening no longer provided us with everything we needed. No, in 2009 many PR people became experts in spotting nuggets of info on Twitter, trawling relevant items from discussion boards, cross referencing different sources across different channels and, let’s not forget, listening to the people around us. Many of us were amazed at how a story could mutate in a short space of time across all these different channels. It will make us sharper, quicker and smarter.

5. PR companies started to diversify. Of all the communications channels, PR has probably always been the most willing to employ a diverse range of people from a wide set of backgrounds, but in 2009 their value became clear. When campaigns encompass advertising, social media, traditional media, a bit of marketing, design, web design, copy and maybe an event, you need an astounding set of skills and respect for each member of the team. We’ll now become the ultimate team players.

6. A lot of us relearned how to handle a crisis. Of course crisis communications have always been a big part of PR and the watchwords ‘quick, honest and transparent’ still apply, but we’ve really had to step up our game in 2009. Stories escape onto email, the internet and Twitter and explode in hours with the entire world watching. Those who have been at the sharp end of it have learned what the public expect of organisations now and how to deal with these incidents quickly and decisively.

7. Audiences are more receptive. People expect their opinion to be respected now they have more channels to express it. They’re also very distrustful of anyone in authority (not just the usual punchbags – bankers and MPs). While that means that PR agencies can no longer ‘push’ messages out, which would be the easy option, it also means we get to talk to people and actually get feedback about what we’re doing. It’s made PR a more satisfying job.

8. Creativity became more important. Clients now expect their agencies to show them entirely new ways to get their name out there. This kind of creativity isn’t commonplace – it takes talent, effort and experience and the agencies that cultivate it will win. As with point 7, it’s made PR a more satisfying job.

9. Accountability increased. PR has always had the problem that it’s difficult to measure. We have certain metrics for press coverage such as opportunities to see and AVE, but even these are quite blunt instruments. This year agencies started to cultivate new metrics, including measuring online chatter or changes in reputation. This is a work in progress but it will make us more accountable and more employable.

10. No one lost their faith in PR. Our industry has been hit hard like everyone else but PR’s reputation hasn’t been diminished. As long as we continue to evolve and adapt according to the realities above, we will remain the discipline to take on communications in 2010 and onwards.  Happy New Year.

PN graduate Anna Svensson tells us about her networking experiences and recommends the top events.

It’s a PR’s job to build relationships with clients, colleagues and journalists, but how much networking they do is largely down to the PR and their enthusiasm for meeting people.

Since starting at Porter Novelli, I have made a genuine effort to go out and make new friends and contacts. I feel that I had an advantage because, before starting on the graduate scheme, I used Twitter to follow people in the industry – some I knew and others I didn’t. This made it easy to follow industry topics and understand where relationships ran between agencies, PRs and journalists. In due course I joined in some of these conversations and people began to notice me.

Now, as I attend various events, I see people I’ve met on Twitter and can meet and interact with them face-to-face. After a time you come to realise that a lot of the same people attend the main events, specifically within the technology circles. It’s nice for me to see (now) familiar faces but it’s easy to stop making the effort to meet new people, so I try to attend other events as well.

I’ve also found that at events I attend with my own colleagues, its easy to forget to spend the time getting to know them outside of work and to just focus on meeting other people. It’s important to be aware of building relationships with your colleagues as it will make your day-to-day experience far more enjoyable.

If I could offer a top tip then it would be to use social media (LinkedIn, Twitter, Facebook as a few examples) to meet people before and after an event. It’s always good to contact them to with a “nice to have met you” type message the next day so that you don’t fade into one of the many other people they met that night. Also, they will then have your contact details on hand should they want to stay in contact or see if you’re attending the next event.

Some events that I have been to so far and would recommend to new people in the industry are:

Flackenhacks – Informal and irreverent event but great for meeting new people in the technology sector. It happens in October and so is an easy event to ease yourself into as you start the graduate process. This is definitely an event to send a “nice to meet you” note to people the next day as there will be a few sore heads that morning.

WOM UK – You never stop learning in this industry and WOM UK events make it easy for you with their espresso mornings with thought leaders in the word-of-mouth sphere. The espresso mornings ae short but to the point and WOM UK’s evening sessions provide you with more opportunities to meet like-minded people after the event.

Gorkana Breakfasts – Learn about journalists and how they like PRs to work with them. It’s also a nice informal opportunity to get to know colleagues.

Twestival – You don’t need to be on Twitter to attend but I think it makes the event more enjoyable. It’s a great place to meet people of all backgrounds and everyone is there to meet new people.

PRCA Member Drinks – Obviously you need to be a member of the PRCA but these events are a fantastic way to meet new people in the PR industry. It’s an informal event but everyone is there with the aim of making new contacts rather than being there for the free drinks (which is very common at most “networking” events).

PR Week Awards – A formal event and not cheap. If you have a kind employer who can assist with the cost then definitely try to attend this event at least once in your career to get an idea of what competing agencies are doing and meet strong contacts.

News has reached us from a land down under of a slight online mishap involving Toyata and Saatchi & Saatchi, which is being passed gleefully around the interwebz as yet another example of brands and in particular advertising agencies not ‘getting it’. The entire saga has been played out over the past month or two and has been beautifully catalogued by Australian marketing and media blog, mUmBRELLA and I suggest that if you have a good half hour to spare you go there and read the background and gory detail as it unfolded. If you haven’t got time the executive summary is that Toyota gave $15,000 AUS each to five agencies to promote the Yaris via social media as part of a live, online pitch.

Each agency either had to, or chose to, run a competition as part of the pitch but the one that is causing all the hubris was the ‘winner’ of Saatchi & Saatchi competition. This particular one was the fairly standard create an ad for us on YouTube please affair. Unfortunately, and like many such competitions,  it didn’t work and so S&S then enticed creative shops to submit entries with this email.

From: Rob

Date:

Subject: Clever Comp

Hey creative people

I’ve got something that you’ll (or your housemates, brothers, sisters, artistic friends etc will) be nterested in.

It’s a film comp in aide of promoting Toyota Yaris.

“A film comp? I don’t have the time!” you may say, but listen up. So far, NO ONE has entered and it has been open for more than 10 days and closes 1st December. Voting is done on hits and comments so if you’re in first you have a huge advantage. And you don’t have to make an ad, just put a Yaris in somewhere a la the ‘number 8′ or ’spring’ in Tropfest or something

First prize is $7,000. $3,000 for second and $1,000 for 3rd. At this stage, you could enter a picture of your cat playing in his kitty litter and win 7 grand.

Details are in the attachments. If you win, I’d love an all carbon fibre road bicycle for Christmas.

Cheers y’all.

-Rob

Which was all sorts of wrong. To top this perfectly executed campaign, a jury of Saatchi & Saatchi execs, brand representatives and members of the Yaris demographic then picked a nicely controversial ad that led to charges of sexism.

So where did it all go wrong?

In quite a few places, let us begin with the premise of the live social media pitch itself. Social media is all about appropriate engagement and commitment, brands should not rush in lightly to having a presence but should seriously consider if, once they dip their toes in, will they be able to maintain a consistent presence. Asking five agencies to shoot it out in public vying for the attention of potential Yaris buyers doesn’t exactly sit well with that. Also the brand is diluting its online presence and generally confusing the consumer. We’re all for having multiple online platforms to engage fans, but each should work together to form a sum greater than their  parts, at the same time telling a coherent story. What was the intention for the fans/twitter followers of the agencies that lost? Was it intended that they would politely ask their fans to switch to another FaceBook page?

Then there is the amount of money. There is a belief that online work, and in particular social media, is cheap. It’s not.

There may be few physical costs associated with it but doing it right takes time, see the commitment piece above, and a certain skill set, otherwise you end up being mentioned in social media guru’s ‘how not to do it’ slide decks for the next five years. $15,000 AUS is roughly £8,000, which is a not a massive amount to build a sustained amount of activity, which is clear from the metrics that the various agencies achieved on various platforms, The most successful in terms of views would have to be from Hothouse, who worked with Australian Vlogger, Blunty, to create a stop-motion Lego short and give-away a Yaris, which had around 32,000 views by the time the competition closed. The most popular FaceBook pages, ran by The Population and Oddfellows, who set Melbourne and Sydney against each other had only 12,000 fans between the two. So were not talking great stats here, there is also no mention of how the various views, fans and followers might actually translate into car sales.

Most of the agencies seemed to have ignored the offline element as well, although I prepared to be corrected on this. Just putting something on YouTube doesn’t mean that people will see it, awareness needs to be raised otherwise you will find yourself with zero entries and views. The campaign I particularly liked from the five was American Werewolf in Yaris, by One Green Bean. It featured some nicely shot teaser films of Wolfy giving people lifts in his Yaris across Sydney, which he continued to do for the rest of the competition period, generating content for Twitter and Twitpic’ing as he went, tracked by GPS of course. The competition element is actually hard to find but I think it was via questions on Twitter and Facebook. It appeals as it used real world events to drive interest online and certainly created talkability, having one of the most commented on Facebook pages.

But back to Saatchi & Saatchi, I think the greatest mistake was made by the judging panel, which included Toyota representatives in ignoring the brand values. The selected video would not have been approved if Saatchi & Saatchi had made it, so why should as part of a shamateur competition?