Today’s guest post comes to you from my dear colleague Shakirah Dawud, a highly prolific writer I admire greatly for her style, creativity, features (in writing), and genuine interest in provoking thought. She writes for Deliberate Ink, and you can connect with her here and here.
Shakirah Dawud Says:
This article was going to be much different than it is. I was going to name a campaign whose unscrupulosity (yes, I made the word up) totally blew my mind, the reasons it did, and raise your hackles about it as much as I could, too.
But I stopped because I wondered (as I often do about these things), when does pointing and yelling raise awareness, and when does it become the business’s use of my ire to play made-you-look?
Businesses and other public entities love publicity. They like getting in the news because people pay attention to them. Most of them prefer positive attention, but a few don’t mind negative attention one bit.
I have to make a decision: do I spread their news for them or do what I can to avoid giving them the clicks they’re seeking? More often than not, I choose the latter. If I see a need to mention it publicly, I usually limit it to an indirect reference. I don’t imagine it has much effect on the world at large, but it’s always been my policy to ignore people who do outrageous things only to get attention. I wonder if I’m alone.
My respect goes to people who speak up loudly when something untoward happens according to public record. These people’s perspectives are bold, well reasoned, and well written as often as they are coarse emotional rants. I’ve read and written both types with gusto. But how much awareness is raised in these cases? By the time I’ve found out about a controversial issue or event involving a business or public figure, it’s usually already a trending topic.
But my gratitude goes to people who research and provide information about the things happening right under our noses that most of us haven’t noticed–the patterns of activity, observations of interactions, and statistical trends that, as it has been famously said–“they” don’t want us to know. That’s more than adding a voice to the crowd of tsk-tskers.
As a PR professional, Jayme is an awareness raiser. I want to know–from her and from you–where the line is.
Is it futile to keep your silence on an issue you feel strongly about but refuse to provide free publicity for?
How would you raise awareness if you decide you should?
What factors do you look at when deciding to give someone or something a spotlight for your crowd to gasp and point at?
And since I have your ear, what do you think of the short-lived “Unhate” campaign?
Shakirah Dawud is the writer and editor behind Deliberate Ink. Based in Maryland with roots in New York, she’s been crafting effective marketing copy as a writer and polishing many forms of prose as an editor since 2002. Clients in many fun sizes, industries, and locations reach her through the Web.
It’s funny… I’ve been thinking a lot about this, particularly in light of some of the heinous pitches I get. If I rant about them – which is easy enough to do – I’m basically just helping them, aren’t I? I’m also feeding the “all PRs are flaks” beast, which is a vicious, circular, one.
However, sometimes I do come across things that just outrage me so much I can’t function unless I write about them. There’s one right now, but I’m going to see how it manifests. For the most part, though, I’m trying to stay away from rants. They’re just not me. There are other people who rant much better than me; they’re welcome to it!
I would suggest ranting is also rather boring after a bit…negative energy is not what I want to be around.
Yes, I have a hard time finding the energy to rant myself. It’s fun to “pretend rant,” though, where I don’t actually name drop. But it’s not productive. Sometimes I’m able to convince myself I’m just warning folks away from an issue, other times I own it: I’m just making their spotlight that much bigger. I do think there are times when it’s worth it to make people notice when there’s something wrong with a picture, though.
Thanks for GP’ing today, Shakirah. You know, when that restaurateur was ranting against PR in the New York Times, none of us wanted to go there and give the guy link love, but we had to to get the facts straight. And, then we jumped in to rant against him and further draw out his negative behavior which made for more comments and link love and blog posts, etc.
It becomes a vicious circle and the comments sections come alive with vitriol. It’s rather exhausting, really. If I’m only being a voyeur and wanting to gossip about an issue, that’s one thing; when my comments add appropriate “flames” to the facts, then I have to hold ground and see it through.
I provided two examples of the situations in previous posts that jump started major discussions here and on others’ blogs.
On a side note, when Gap (also noted above) puts out a horrid logo and gets tons of publicity — that’s just attention-getting IMHO. When is a corporate logo design news? When it’s so bad you can’t help but talk about it…that’s a joke I just made up. Heh.
Re: the restaurateur, that’s exactly what happened, and what needed to happen, if you ask me. But yes, there are other times (like Gap) where it’s so obvious the entity just wanted eyeballs, even if they were hairy ones. And they always, always get them. But not from me.
Wow, what a great post, @twitter-59802772:disqus . One that causes me to stop and think. My inclination is to not give too much attention, but in reality, with posts that I’ve written about Syrian lesbian bloggers who act like Weiners, for example, I’m sure it gave those folks extra attention. 🙂
Sometimes, that’s a casualty of speaking out. Conversely, you don’t always have to speak out to be effective. I’m working with a large regional planning effort now that is getting a LOT of attention from the Tea Party movement, so much so that they bring up errant points and inflame the right-leaning press to the point of shifting attention off our topic and associating it with something called UN Agenda 21 (which is the equivalent of Communism in these parts).
I’ve advised our clients not to write a lot in response to this nonsense, instead address it with one paragraph in our FAQ sheet, and when brought up in public meetings, redirect to what our project is about. In other words, garner so much attention on the project (or the opposite of the negative stuff) that the negative stuff fades away. In parenting, we’re taught to put more attention on the good behavior and less on the bad, thus feeding the positives that we want to see. I inevitably zero in on the negatives (report cards, for example) and forget to highlight the positives. I had to stop myself this last mid-term report and give praise for the grades that were brought up and talk more about that than the grade that went down. Tough balance for sure, but the point is to feed the positive and ignore the negative. What we feed grows.
That’s a sensible way for PR to deal with that kind of thing. I wonder if any corporate attention-thieves recently had that kind of plan in place. You’re right: what we feed grows, and negative attention is food, too. But I agree we also have to speak up in some cases; sometimes it’s just hard (for me) to decide which those are, especially as my brand takes shape.
Wow, what a great post, @twitter-59802772:disqus . One that causes me to stop and think. My inclination is to not give too much attention, but in reality, with posts that I’ve written about Syrian lesbian bloggers who act like Weiners, for example, I’m sure it gave those folks extra attention. 🙂
Sometimes, that’s a casualty of speaking out. Conversely, you don’t always have to speak out to be effective. I’m working with a large regional planning effort now that is getting a LOT of attention from the Tea Party movement, so much so that they bring up errant points and inflame the right-leaning press to the point of shifting attention off our topic and associating it with something called UN Agenda 21 (which is the equivalent of Communism in these parts).
I’ve advised our clients not to write a lot in response to this nonsense, instead address it with one paragraph in our FAQ sheet, and when brought up in public meetings, redirect to what our project is about. In other words, garner so much attention on the project (or the opposite of the negative stuff) that the negative stuff fades away. In parenting, we’re taught to put more attention on the good behavior and less on the bad, thus feeding the positives that we want to see. I inevitably zero in on the negatives (report cards, for example) and forget to highlight the positives. I had to stop myself this last mid-term report and give praise for the grades that were brought up and talk more about that than the grade that went down. Tough balance for sure, but the point is to feed the positive and ignore the negative. What we feed grows.
Well, now I’m very curious who you are talking about!
I see your point, @twitter-59802772:disqus . I certainly don’t want to reward bad behavior by giving them link love. Besides, I think ranting for the sake of getting it out of your system is a disservice to our readers. On the other hand, ranting to make a point or raise awareness about an issue is acceptable, and maybe worth giving some attention to people who don’t deserve it. I guess the best thing is to remember our own blog audience and ask, “Is this post providing important information to my readers?” If the post is just providing entertainment or a chance to commiserate, I’d skip the rant because it will reward the ill-doers.
Thanks for raising the issue!
You’re welcome, Neicole. That’s why I appreciate your posts about current social media issues so much; you really have the intent to inform, not “point and yell.” And you’re very good at it. Thank you.
Well, now I’m very curious who you are talking about!
I see your point, @twitter-59802772:disqus . I certainly don’t want to reward bad behavior by giving them link love. Besides, I think ranting for the sake of getting it out of your system is a disservice to our readers. On the other hand, ranting to make a point or raise awareness about an issue is acceptable, and maybe worth giving some attention to people who don’t deserve it. I guess the best thing is to remember our own blog audience and ask, “Is this post providing important information to my readers?” If the post is just providing entertainment or a chance to commiserate, I’d skip the rant because it will reward the ill-doers.
Thanks for raising the issue!
I always find that silence is a more powerful weapon than screaming and shouting AT someone. Nothing drives them crazier than total silence. “you’ve got to make you’ve Owe kind of musik…” sang mamma cass.
I am always amazed at the global peeps who know more about American pop culture than Americans.
Mamma Cass, eh, Jon? Silent music is certainly powerful, and even more so when you have a powerful voice to compliment it.
G’Day Shakirah,
I guess it would be fair to say that I’m one of those people who challenges many conventional wisdoms, especially about people management.”Speaking my mind” is not unknown to me.
But I’m frequently surprised by two things in blogs and blog comments. Firstly, lots of comments are aggressive and personal. The authors seem to have no idea how to disagree without unpleasant and dismissive rejection of others’ opinions.
The second issue I notice is that these sorts of people seem to have little or no appreciation of how their words could be perceived by readers. They claim to be in business but seem to lack even the most fundamental grasp of marketing.
Having said all that I’ll probably be accused of hypocrisy. As I said. speaking my mind isn’t unknown to me.
Make sure you have fun.
Regards
Leon
I have no hypocrites in my community, Dear Leon. #ThatIsAll
G’day, Leon. I’m not much of a mind-speaker myself, but that’s never stopped me from being honest. And the very fact that rants seek to draw crowds from both sides does create the danger of the derailment of intelligent conversation. Knowing that, I have to ask myself these questions when I’m ready to let someone have a precious piece of my mind.
Very thoughtful piece Shakirah. This is actually a topic that I’ve thought a good bit about because of the customer service focus and doing the CS stories series. It would be real easy to engage in bad service bashing, but I don’t want the site to be about that. I want it to be a place that instructs and inspires. We will definitely do negative stories — as you can learn from them. But they will be resigned to “a major credit card company” or “a restaurant in my home town.”
The line that you ask about… for me, you figure it out by asking yourself “why am I writing this?” The trick is being honest with yourself when answering. 🙂 In my case, keeping names anonymous helps me make sure there is no confusion or cross purposes. If it’s anonymous, it inherently has to be about the lessons learned because you’re not able to “call out” anyone (even if you want to). I remember a great post by @Shonali:disqus where she did this on a bad PR pitch. A lot of people said she should have called out the agency, but I thought her point and the piece were much stronger because she didn’t.
I remember that post by Shonali, Adam. When you mention the people who are ranting, unless there is a perfect reason to do so, then it’s best not to, I agree. More professional to call out bad practice than to call out bad people.
Adam I must say bashing is something I’ve thought about for copywriting and editing topics, too. I think it would be even more of a fine line for customer service, since bashing on those grounds could influence people’s business and consumer decisions. I appreciate how you bring up the point about leaving names anonymous. It’s my favorite safeguard, but sometimes the thing can’t be hidden that way because it’s so big and obvious I may as well have put the name out there. That’s one of the times I’m forced to be honest with my intentions!
I wasn’t even interested in knowing who the agency in @Shonali:disqus ‘s post was by the end because I basically forgot about it and followed her point, and I’m sure that was her intent.
Yeah, I should probably qualify what I said with there is definitely a time and a place for calling out. As you point out, sometimes the issue or entity is too big — talking around it becomes ridiculous. A good example was @ginidietrich:twitter ‘s post on the New Yorker / embargo issue. It was the New Yorker, no real way to skirt it. Yet, the post was not a hit piece but a legitimate discussion about something relevant to Gini’s audience and industry.
I’m a big believer in attacking the idea, and not the person (or, in this case, the company). I LOVE The New Yorker. But I don’t love what they did. So I blogged about it. I think there are lessons to be learn both in the success and failings of companies around us. I don’t see the harm in blogging about it, if we’re professional about it.
When teaching a lesson (or creating a teachable moment), I see it as worth it, too. So I think we’ve found it comes down to intent.
One of the things I always ask myself when I blog is, “Is this going to teach our audience something or is it just me ranting?” If it’s the latter, I don’t publish it.
That is the perfect standard Gini. Now, can you set up a members-only blog so we can read the rants that don’t get published! 🙂
Can you imagine? That would actually be really fun.
Fun: “Is this going to teach our audience something or is it just me ranting?” If it’s the former, it’s a go!
Hey Shonali, this is very appreciative content. I first read that useful details whatever you input about guest post. I love to read something creative and funny. Thanks!