On a recent Oprah segment, Chris Rock, while referring to his upcoming “Good Hair” research project on black women’s hair, commented that “Secrets Rot the Soul,” and that essentially women should be honest and open about their hair rituals.

I was reminded of that comment when Google publicly exposed China for their “transgressions” (see my last post/not about Tiger;-), and put out a corporate statement exposing various hacks on Google China, which of course underscores Beijing’s efforts to suppress information…

Again with more transgressions… A few days later, John Edwards admits to fathering a child.

PEOPLE, I don’t care if you are a Fortune 500 CEO, John Edwards, Tiger Woods, or the country of China – at the end of the day, MAN UP in your communications! IF you aren’t telling the truth, in this age of the internet, social media and mass amplification of EVERYTHING, secrets will leak out. If there is an issue, directly address it.

Whether I’m doing media training for investment bankers, CEOs, here are some general “rules of the road” to live by:

• Prepare for EVERY interview
o Always be ready for your “scariest” question(s) — you’ll find if you do advanced prep they seem less scary

• If you don’t know the answer – don’t make it up
o A simple “I’ll get back with you” is always preferred

• Never, Never, Never lie
o Either bridge to an accurate statement or worst case, go with “no comment.” Lying is never the answer!

At the end of the day, honesty=credibility. Without it, you’ll weaken the brand and perception of individuals, corporations and countries.

As a PR geek, I’m always fascinated by how poorly executives, companies and celebrities handle communications during crisis, as well as simple mistakes and missteps. Rather than directly addressing changes or industry shifts with a direct, clean honest approach, they often hide via denial or hideously obvious re-directing (Caribou Barbie, anyone?).

A big thumbs UP to Google for its open and direct communications re: working with China. It’s effective for the following reasons:

• It’s clear and proactive: Google explained the cyber attacks clearly and used nomenclature that all of us could understand. They fully admitted their security breach and outlined the scope of the attack BEFORE it leaked out and someone else – a reporter, blogger, angry x-employee – could leak it out and control their message.

• It’s the RIGHT thing to do: The G-mail accounts of human rights activists were being targeted. Take a moment, to let that absorb. Although pulling out of China blocks them out of tremendous growth opportunities, not to mention impacts their short-term bottom line, they know this might be a path they have to take to ensure the company’s integrity. And, don’t you automatically trust them more? A wise calculated move for a company that’s hoping to land a MUCH larger deal – to be the trusted company securing the US healthcare data…

• It’s Smart: Let’s face it, Google’s stock could have plummeted if they didn’t handle this China communication properly. By communicating its message within the industry landscape, it enlightened the public by reminding us of broader macro issues around doing business in China, and by sharing external resources it further validated their position.

Net-net, I love Google even more.

On a recent trip to visit a new client, Pop, an interactive agency that is doing amazing work with top brands like Target, EA, Microsoft and others, team member Bronwyn Saglimbeni and I were discussing how Reidy Communications is celebrating its 8th anniversary this December and how the world of PR has changed during this timeframe.

It goes back to that adage that so much has changed, yet so much stays the same. I’m a Libra so I could easily argue that the fundamentals of PR haven’t changed much – it’s still based on relationships, being a strong resource for reporters and a good partner/counselor for clients. YET, of course, at the same time, everything has changed.

We started in December 2001, months after 9/11 where here in the US we were still recovering and searching for our “new normal,” and of course here in the Tech epicenter/SF it was our second hit after a dismal post dot.com implosion. Print was the core of most PR programs, online was a “nice to have,” bloggers hadn’t even coined the term “blogosphere,” and the Red Herring, Industry Standard and others had NO idea they’d be shutting their doors in the coming months (and re-launching a few years later).

Fast forward 8 years, online is often the hub of our clients PR programs, newspapers are closing their doors daily, bloggers have a tremendous amount of influence and of course social media is the uber amplifier and at the core of every successful program.

One thing that has stayed consistent is the importance of story-telling or if you are a PR person, messaging and media coaching.

At the core, that’s why I started Reidy Communications. After working at a large PR agency and being spread across seven accounts at one time, I felt that focusing on a few industries and creating deep partnerships with clients (and therefore press) would be a winning combination. And it has. Simply put, a deep understanding of your client’s business PLUS a clear understanding of what the reporter wants/needs continues to be the winning combination.

That’s my opinion, what’s yours?

As a PR person and media coach, between Sarah Palin appearing on Oprah and Carrie Prejean on Larry King Live, this week has been RIPE for fodder.

At the core, these ladies were given a gift – to appear center stage and address a national audience. They had an opportunity to inspire, clarify and inform. Did they succeed? Absolutely not!

Here’s a quick analysis:

Let’s start with the Carrie Prejean on Larry King Live –Next time Carrie, please do the following:

• Bridge to relevant messages: Instead of counter-attacking Larry, bridge to messages that have value for viewers
• Remember you are on LIVE TV: Stay focused
• Prepare: Clearly you have a PR person, since you were talking with her during your live segment, but sadly you didn’t prepare. Next time, think about your intention – what do you want to communicate? What do you want viewers to know?

Sarah Palin: Advice for when/if you’re on Oprah again:

• Be Authentic: Clearly you have worked on your communications skills and being less defensive. However, there wasn’t much “there there.” Think substance.
• Be Honest: To quote the Eagles, your “lying eyes…”, heavy breathing and other signals were quite prevalent during your talk with Oprah. Body language tells viewers a lot. And, let’s be honest here. You really thought that talking with Katie Couric was going to be a softball interview?! Are you kidding? Your “truthiness” doesn’t hold up.
• Be Relevant: Outside of blaming all others for your public mishaps, what’s the point of your interview? What value did you provide for Oprah’s audience outside of a rant?

Anytime you’re interviewed you have an opportunity to educate, inform, persuade and inspire. Why not try for all three!

That’s my opinion, what’s yours?

I recently spoke to a group of MBA Students at USF about Social Media and PR. There is no doubt that most PR people are thinking about and implementing social media programs – it’s the “New Black” or oxygen or something in between depending on who your client targets.

PR 2.0 (or is it PR 3.0?) is about leveraging influence to drive amplification. There is no doubt the world of publications shrunk considerably in 2008/2009 and Lord knows what we have in store for 2010. BUT, because of the tremendous momentum behind social media (FaceBook, Twitter, Digg, etc.) PR people have an opportunity to expand their role (versus having it shrink) as long as they focus their efforts influencing influencers, which naturally leads to amplification.

Putting it to Work for Clients
This is all nice, but how does it TRULY work within an agency/client relationship? My friend and PR guru Susan Etlinger posted a blog around “Why Social Media Marketing Fails.” Susan attended a presentation led by Jeremiah Owyang, analyst and Social media thought leader where he outlined how social media breaks down into three primary organizational models:

The Tire: Social media forms at the edges of the company. No clear leader. Upside: appears very authentic. Downside: one side has no idea what the other is doing.

The Tower: Led by corporate communications, by executive mandate. The upside: Lots of resources. The downside? Not authentic, which saps participation and buy-in.

Hub-and-Spoke: Some central focus, but with clear ownership at the edges. Upside: this is the aspirational model because it combines resources and participation. Downside: the most difficult to establish.

I agree that the “Hub-and-Spoke” model is the most effective IF you can get clients to participate. It’s the fall of 2009 and I can honestly say I’ve experienced (and participated) in all of the above models. Net-net, companies need to embrace and commit to a strategy that aligns with their corporate values.

Just like companies (especially public companies) need a company-wide media policy, they should also have a social media policy/process created with amplification in mind – A list of Do’s and Don’ts.

At a minimum, employees should be encouraged to update their Twitter and Facebook status with positive company articles, blog posts, etc. It’s not too hard to implement that and it doesn’t take a ton of bandwidth. That’s my opinion, what’s yours?

3-1/2 years ago, I took a week to volunteer in New Orleans after Katrina. Working with a Notre Dame alumni and student group, we had two groups cleaning, gutting and de-molding (wasn’t but now is a word) houses that were still standing, but unlivable. There’s a great group in New Orleans called Catholic Charities who triaged the owners and homes and assigned us the work where the need was greatest. In five days in the middle of March, our two teams gutted six homes and prepped them for rebuilding.

And that’s when it hit us like a ton of bricks. Looking up and down the streets in these neighborhood you realized the scope of the problem. We had 20-25 people gut six homes in 5 days which was great, but we saw no answer to the question of “When will the rebuilding get done?” And now four years after Katrina, here’s the stat I figured I’d see all along supplied by Catholic Charities: 1,983 houses gutted and only 117 have been rebuilt.

A few of us spent group dinners pondering that question. We were sure we were helping, and while our six homes were a drop in the proverbial bucket, it was something we could touch and see the difference from beginning to end. Meeting the home owners as we did most of the time just reinforced that. But those meetings also reinforced the lack of a solid plan. These homes were selected based on financial need, and these same owners would have the same problem paying for rebuilding.

At those dinners we made wild guesses about when New Orleans, the neighborhoods and the people would “come back.” The lowest guess was 5 years. 10 years was probably the mean. But the more realistic estimate someone made was “a generation.” Sadly, that’s about right.

So if you were wondering if the need was still there, hell yes it is. New Orleans still needs a ton of help, from credible/competent leadership to volunteers who are willing to take the time to help. And if you wonder if you can make a difference down there, yes you can. You can make an impact and it’s an adventure (physical, spiritual, you name it) that you will never forget.

Last week, Jeremiah Owyang announced his departure from Forrester. ReadWriteWeb published a good analysis of the move: http://tinyurl.com/l8mybk. There are a lot of rumors about where he might go and what he might do, but I’m interested in watching it unfold as it applies to the industry analyst field in general.

What’s interesting to watch for is that Jeremiah is not the first. He’s just the first high profile one in a while. There were some Gartner and Forrester guys a few years ago that left, made some waves but drifted off the radar ever so slowly. It’s scale thing. Analysts that leave the mother ship for a solo venture become business consultants for a limited set of clients and start competing against a bunch of guys that are REALLY smart.

If you don’t have the wide distribution to make calls that influence market moves like at Forrester, than you need to start justifying your value a LOT more. And some guys just aren’t that good at it. And Jeremiah published some great research in his two years at Forrester, but don’t underestimate the value of junior analysts and research staff. It is hard to produce quality research without that staff.

So the bet in many ways is that Jeremiah’s Twitter acct/blog — one of the best in the industry — is as influential as Forrester’s brand name. It might be!

I use Twitter and I like Twitter, but I’m way suspect that it will change all of our lives as some of you know. Here’s an interesting stat that we should be mindful of: Only 40% of new Twitter users are still active one month later. For Facebook and MySpace, that number was 80% still active at this same period in their lifecycle.

(This next part is for my blog so warning that it’s my opinion) So while Ashton and Oprah are driving user numbers to the moon, Twitter isn’t sticky long term. Clearly that could change, but this kind of issue begs for Twitter copycats. MySpace used to be HUGE and now it’s a place most adults wouldn’t admit being on. This puts the onus on marketing departments again on how to monetize social media. I’ve been following that Terminator 4 (is it really 4? I swear I don’t remember 3) Twitter promotion which is the best I’ve seen, but it’s really basic. It’s mostly the Junior Jumble on Twitter.

The pro of this campaign is that it has a reason to hit you several times a day if you’re playing the game so multiple impressions daily to a captive audience. The con is that unless you really have time and care, you aren’t going to spend the time getting involved, and will the promotion actually draw people who weren’t going to see a Terminator sequel already?

The point is that I like Twitter, but the limitations of the platform are obvious. Seeing Biz Stone on Colbert the other day, his recounting of how Twitter started underscores that the platform was never meant for what Twitter is now hyped as. And the most vocal users complain about the speed/access issue leading Twitter to focus on those problems first. Twitters early success is unprecedented, and that’s the problem. If they are going to succeed in 12 months, that will need to be an unprecedented growth strategy in an unprecedented economy. Let’s see how it plays out.

Unlike the Seattle PI that went just digital after today, the Rocky Mountain News was just shut down. Now there’s an effort to get the staffers rehired as part of a new venture called InDenverTimes.com, which would essentially be the RMN but in digital format. The catch to all of this of course is the financials. Unlike the PI which I think is still offering the online version free, IDT will offer some content free and then the rest will be premium for subscribers only. They are offering subscriptions at $5/month. So here’s the trick, can they get 50k subscribers to be profitable? The RMN had 210K subscribers so you convert 1 out of 4 to actually pay for it, and you’ve got a business. Let’s see what happens!

http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/stories/D/DENVER_ONLINE_NEWSPAPER?SITE=MAFAL&SECTION=HOME&TEMPLATE=DEFAULT

One of our star associates, Bronwyn Saglimbeni, was interviewed recently by iMedia Connection on her new joint venture to help executive women learn the skills of power presenting. Read all about it here: http://blogs.imediaconnection.com/blogdetail.aspx?blogid=341.

Congrats Bronwyn!