Here’s one example, broken down by Troy Anderson, Chief of Police in the City of Chewelah, Washington:

http://www.cityofchewelah.org/police/chiefnotes.aspx

If you don’t want to click the link, this is what he said:

Volunteerism is not only needed but honorable.  This topic is near and dear to me.  From Rx4life to Neighborhood Watch to Community Celebrations to Torch Run and Special Olympics.  You don’t see many folks volunteering for anything much anymore.  This needs to change so why not let it begin here in Chewelah, WA.  Everybody can spare some time dedicated to a special cause they’re fond of.  Volunteer at the food bank or the dunk tank.  Volunteer at long term care or how about volunteer to look after and assist your elderly neighbor with lawn care, grocery shopping or just sit and visit with them.  If you’d like to hear about things like the Great Depression, the Dust Bowl, World War II or even the Cold War, ask them about it.  They won’t be around much longer and soon we’ll only know about these things through books or the web.   

 

If you think this isn’t good for the soul, I don’t know what is.  Donating money to your favorite charity is all well and good but kind of leaves me a little empty.  Volunteer to get involved in your child’s life and activities.  Take them to the museum, the library and the park.  The bonus is, you get to burn a few calories too. 

 

Stay positive, be optimistic and make not only your friends and family proud, but yourself also. 

 

One final note, volunteer yourself to being dedicated to staying off the cell phone while operating a motor vehicle.  You can save that $124 to give to a worthy cause. 

 

Just a note from the Chief

Think about what he just pointed out.  We have people around us, with a wealth of knowledge and personal experience, and we don’t even make time for them?  And as much as I enjoy reading books, I have found I can get far more perspective on a particular event in our history from someone who experienced it.

The next time you don’t feel you have time to volunteer, think about that barbeque party you’re about to have and invite someone in need.  You’d be surprised what you gain from the experience.

Thoughts?

If you read it, you’ll find the typical antagonist (played by Mr. Cohen, I believe) and the reluctant protagonist (Mr. Orsini, a principal).

The article details the facts about a lot of cases throughout the country that play an important role in representing what students experience in today’s elementary and junior high schools.

I am amazed at the amount of reach cyberbullying has in children’s everday lives. 

In an age where parents are suppose to be more protective by nature, safety conscious when it comes to toys, savvy when it comes to social gatherings, and protective when it comes to outside-the-family relationships, somehow parents in the US are all clueless in the most collective way possible.

The article talks about how on Facebook you can report absurd commentary by simplying clicking the “Report This” button associated with each comment.

It’s nice to have options, but as I suggested in the Spring Creek Group blog this morning, why aren’t teachers being proactive by creating their own Facebook profiles, sending friend requests to their students, and then reporting behavior before it even reaches the heights of emotional display that cyberbullying apparently grows?

And why aren’t they banding the students together to report the same commentary en masse so that when Facebook see’s the malicious statement, they will be compelled to remove it? 

Wouldn’t this show a united front to cyberbullying, and that the student body refuses to allow for it? 

My second issue within the article is with Mr. Cohen.  You’ll find the summary of his experience on page four.

To put it into my post, his daughter, apparently upset with a classroom peer, either followed around or happened to find the fellow student and videotaped her while she and a group of friends made disparaging comments, calling her “brat” and the more advanced insult of “slut.”  She then followed this up by posting the video to YouTube for the entire world to watch.

The victim’s parents went to the school administration, which then suspended Cohen’s daughter.  He was outraged that an event that happened off school grounds, outside of school hours could be handled in this manner, so he sued, and as it turns out the judge agreed that the school was outside it’s jurisdiction when it suspended her, and thus found the school liable for the legal expenses of $107,150.80.

He stated he was upset with his daughter despite the courtroom victory, telling her “it wasn’t a nice thing to do.”

But when she offered to take the video down, he stated he wanted it to stay up as an example of “what kids get suspended for in Beverly Hills.”

Well Mr. Cohen, thank you for securing several stereotypical beliefs the rest of the world had about the Los Angeles area.

What I find most disagreeable with Mr. Cohen’s point of view is that his tirade does not hold his child accountable for very poor behavior.  Surprisingly Mr. Cohen is a lawyer, and it’s clear from his comments that he was more concerned with winning a battle over juvenile students rights, versus teaching his daughter the oft-overlook value of respect.

I usually keep very pointed opinions out of my posts, but I can not see any way around this.  Mr. Cohen has just entitled his entitled daugther to more entitlement.  He’s shown her she can get away with any disparaging comments, so long as she does it outside the classroom.

Mr. Cohen, how about making your daughter apologize in person to the victim?  How about you publicly apologizing and making your daughter stand next to you while you do it.

I’m all for freedom of speech, but it’s been clear in just about every other aspect of that amendment that our forefathers had no intention of promoting unwarranted speech that goes to demean others in public.

The problem here is that our forefathers didn’t write the constitution to include children.  Anyone want to venture to guess why?

Because parents, the ones that are guarunteed rights in this country, are ultimately responsible for their children’s actions.  This means that children are protected by the constitution, by only through their parents, and that anything they do, their parents must answer for.

So maybe the victim’s parents should have gone after Mr. Cohen for not ensuring his child was not misbehaving. 

Mr. Orsini, the prinicipal I refenced earlier, sent and email to parents in response to the ongoing issue of cyberbullying he was spending the bulk of his work week on.  Simply put, he stated there was no reason for a juvenile to have a social networking site.

And he’s so technically correct and virtuitious that he gives me hope for the public education system.

The problem here is that parents want to give their kids choices, so that when they become adults they will know how to act.  Essentially, if mistakes are made now, the idea is that they won’t be made in the future.

And even still, there are parents who don’t care, they think their children are unique and that they can do anything they want.

Mr. Cohen, are you reading this?

Proving a legal point is great, but is it proving the right point to your child?

It’s time to get serious people, simple and plain.

Cyberbullying is like racism, is like sexism, is like ageism, is like facism. 

If you want it to stop, you have to be willing to stand up and say no.  And you have to bring everyone together to say no.

Be it children, or adults, it’s completely unacceptable behavior and no law should be imposed to aid in it’s facilitation.

Parents, hold your kids responsible and stop asking for authorities to step in on your behalf.  Even Mr. Cohen knows his daughter was nothing but wrong, yet he’s more interested in making a name as an alarmist and a half-witted idiot.

Is that a fit parent?  When they are willing to use their child to grandstand in the proliferation of a legal argument?

What has happened to other parents that use their kids this way?  I believe history shows that the same authorities have interjected and removed the kids.  Bing it for yourself if you don’t believe me.

Thoughts?

The presentation made it clear in terms of social media in use by small business.  It’s cheap, it’s effective, it’s results-driven, but it’s also expansive in tools.

And that can be overwhelming for any business.  We’re talking about tools used to market, brand, advertise, and promote your business.  Clearly, you’re going to want to use tools that are free, and can help your business, but not at the cost of skipping on the tasks within your storefront.

So one way to avoid the pitfall is being able to evalute the audiences you want, and researching the audiences social media expose you to.

Facebook is the leader, and I highly doubt this is going change anytime soon.  Facebook started as networking tool for college students to reconnect, and stay in touch with their peers and a hidden idea was so students could find jobs through those peers.

However, since Facebook has skyrocketed in value, so has it’s demographics.  More than ever, the categories of males and females between 40 and 60 rise drastically, month to month, on the social media site.

In large part, parents are trying to keep tabs on their young adult children who are in college, or are in their first jobs away from home, and since my generation is so great at not answering the phone, it’s forced many middle-aged worriers to adapt and play at their children’s level.

What are the chances?

Facebook can get you any number of audience members, and you’ll probably find if you own a small business, this emerging audience segment on ‘FB’ as it’s known will be quicker to engage your dialogue.

Twitter is a great place to connect with savvy customers.  Twitter, like most any social media apps when they are new has created it’s on language, both in terms to describe use, and to shorten words.

This is because on Twitter you have 140 characters to get your message out.

This can be challenging for someone who is not used to being short in their message, especially if your a business describing details of a sale. 

The GREAT news is that if you can invest some time to practice how to keep it concise on Twitter, the rewards are instant.  Once a person finds you on Twitter and follows you, everytime you put something up on your feed, it goes to there’s.

No need to sales pitch or fight for traffic, your audience is right there for you to communicate with.

In terms of demographics, Twitter is best described as healthy mix of ages, but for the sake of crowning a champion, you’ll more than likely find that the leader of the pack is the group aged 25-40 on here.

A story that gets consistent use is the idea that whole corporations are using Twitter to communicate their building’s daily schedule from VP’s all the way down to the mailroom.

I’ll stop there for now, and re-visit this topic in a day or so.

Thoughts?

Visit the Main Street blog, there are two new posts about the project and some more examples of innovation, and networking!

http://ellensburgmainstreet2010.blogspot.com/

Have a great weekend!

The poll is to gauge what social media tools are working best to capture a new audience.

I kept it to the three most prominent but as time passes, this poll will be re-submitted with other tools as they present themselves.

Thank you for your input!

Here’s a story about the situation:  http://motherjones.com/riff/2010/03/sting-uzbek-dictator-problem-karimov-boil-alive-torture-concert

To sum it up, Sting who is well known for his humanitarian efforts played a concert for the daugther of the dictator of Uzbekistan.

If that was the only statement to go off of, you might wonder what the problem is.

Well, as Sting is known for his humanitarian efforts, the daughter of the dictator, and most especially the dictator are not known for being humanitarians.

In fact, I’ll go so far as to say that if you were stranded on the side of the road and they came along, they’d be more prone to soaking you in gas and lighting a match than offering you a ride into town.

The Karimov family, who rule Uzbekistan with fire are very well known for their human rights crimes.  They don’t allow for democracy to the point of submerging pro-democracy supporters in the country in boiling water until death.

Islam Karimov’s (who is the dictator) daugther, Gulnara Karimova,  specifically is involved in the child labor crimes being committed.  They use children in their state-owned cotton fields, including kidnapping the children out of schools and neighborhoods.

If that wasn’t enough to influence, Karimov has been siphoning off water from the Aral Sea, which was the 4th largest lake in the world into the fields.  The Aral Sea has lost almost 80% of it’s volume over the last 50 years, and thanks goes to Karimov who has ensured the acceleration of this process.

Now in terms of social media, what is the impact?

Well, here’s something to consider.

The concert Sting played in was in October of last year.  The story broke earlier today.

While it’s easy to see that all news wire services wrote something on this story, the word on this story was spread by the viral links that are all over Twitter right now.

When I do a Google search for “String concert”  there is one news site that comes up in the first page that has information on this story.

So from the casual user’s perspective, it’s social media that is powering the exposure of this story, and not the news coverage.

Is this another win for social media over news outlets?

We’ll have to wait and see, no one can conclude on that accurately right now.

And really, this will end up being a win for Twitter if anything, because as I was looking at Facebook, I didn’t see a group started.  But  I imagine that will be only a matter of time.

Now, to the actual issue.

I think it’s obvious that this is going to become a real hinderance to any ground Sting hopes to gain in the near future.

And what’s worse for him, today (4/14/10) it was announced that he will be performing on May 14th on the Today Show on NBC.

Which is just enough time for this particular story to crystalize in the minds of fans and critics alike.  Will it lead to a negative reaction at the performance?

History tells us no, but there have been situations where a story like this has led to public outrage displayed, well, publicly.

In this situation I could see it happening, and that’s because of two factors.

First, as stated previously, Sting is a huge supporter of humanitarian and environmental causes.  From his countless involvements in stopping child labor, to getting proper access for those in third-world countries to medicine, food, and potable water.

And then there is his environmental cause to stop the destruction of rain forests.

The person who hired him for this concert is directly involved in efforts that go against those ideals, and presumably the ethics that Sting is assumed to have.

Right from this premise, there is a major concern for the damage this will do to his image, but that’s not the worst of it.

The second part of this, is that Sting has already been asked to comment, which he did.  And his comments were along the line that it was counter-productive to NOT offer people in the region a chance to see and experience art.

Ok, that’s all well good, except when we get to the ticket price that was charged for the event he played at, which was over $2,000 per person.  To give you an idea of who in Uzbekistan would be able to afford that ticket, it’s reported that this figure is around 45 times the annual salary of the average Uzbeki.

So his claim about providing access to the people of Uzbekistan to art comes of as not only false, but completely ludicrious as anything resembling a point.

Honestly, if Sting was that interested in playing in Uzbekistan, he should have consulted with a PR firm first and had them ready with responses and press releases to combat the instant bad imagery this was going to create.

Now I’m curious as to why it took this long for the story to break.  Six months is a long time, even if this was a secret concert.

In terms of image, Sting has really caused himself damage, with consistency being the biggest victim of the elements that make up an image.

It’s certainly recoverable, Tiger Woods and a slew of others have proven that, but the thing of it is, celebrities have to start realizing that at a certain point, they can’t operate in any way they want.

It’d be nice to “break the mold” in every which way imaginable, but the truth is, as a celebrity you become your own brand, and if you intend on maintaining that brand, you’re going to have to say no to not only people, but no to yourself on occasion.

Depending on how much media attention feeds off of the social media reaction right now is going to dictate just how much damage control Sting will have to commit to, but just from the perspective of a PR practitioner, this is arguably the worst move Sting could have made, and I can’t imagine how many people out there would be willing to stick this out as the PR rep for a brand that pretty much participated in the exact opposite of what it stood for.

Thoughts?

It can be found here:  http://ellensburgmainstreet2010.blogspot.com/

It’s a great post that talks a bit about our progress through the week thus far, but also about a very important lesson that a business owner has learned about being in business.

It’s about the differences in leasing a building to owning it.  And it really makes the point about the benefits of ownership.

Take care!

It sounds funny in the most rhetorical sense, but it serves as important truth to how our culture interprets and perceives the function of those that we promote to the fullest.

A story that reaches into the extremes of this concept is that of Tiger Woods.

From his days playing golf for Stanford he was hailed as the next coming, and he delivered on that promise.

Soon after arriving on the PGA Tour, golf as sport flourished in ways it never had.

Even though a great portion of us never bought in, golf did reach many audiences it never had before.  Golf finally had a face, an identity and a positioning statement.

However, in just the last few months we’ve watched as Tiger has been implicated in a rash of extra-marital affairs.  We’ve seen people implicated in affairs before, even former US President Bill Clinton, and while it did damage, it didn’t do as much as damage as it has to Tiger.

The reason why it hit Tiger so hard?  It might be speculation on all our parts, but as most all see it Tiger branded himself as the squeaky clean, wholesome values guy.

He was even selective in what sponsorships he would accept.  He worried about his branding and image about as much as he did his golf game.  Scratch that, he did more work on his branding and image than anything.

I say that because it’s quite obvious that the game of golf flows through Tiger with ease.

As a PR practitioner I respect Tiger for taking the time put thought and effort into his branding as person, and the marketing of him as that brand.

Many clients don’t ever think about that until they hit a wall, or a crisis and then they come to you hoping you can solve their problems overnight.  That’s not how it works.  However, you can produce effective communications that lay the ground work for that change in image, and  new found opinion of the brand.

As Tiger finds that he must reorganize and reinvent where his brand stands, the first piece to that project comes to us in the version of a video advertisement for not only Tiger the reinvented, but Nike.

New Nike Commercial with Tiger Woods:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=nLxOs3tMqhM

Reaction to Tiger’s new commercial:

http://wcco.com/local/tiger.woods.nike.2.1620769.html

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2010/04/08/earlyshow/main6374860.shtml

Of course the media eats this stuff up like fine goat cheese.  All day it’s been nothing but negative reaction after negative reaction.  Which may seemingly not be what Tiger or Nike wants, but as I’m sure we’ll all witness, as time puts more distance between Tiger’s discrepancies and the present we will continue to see the media react poorly to the re-integration of Tiger on the national (actually, international) stage, and at some point we will find that the audience will defiantly say to the media “Quit harassing him!”

And consider this, the reaction to this ad has dominated the morning and afternoon news outlets.  The commercial aired once in the morning.  And because of the media reaction, it’s turning viral on YouTube and elsewhere.

I have to say, right or wrong, I respect that people at some point say enough is enough when it comes to dragging a person through the mud, warranted or not.  People are caring in that example.  It shows that humans still have compassion.

Look at Pete Rose.  Presumably he committed the ultimate of sins in sports, betting against his own team when he was a player and a manager.

And while he probably won’t ever be instated into Baseball’s Hall of Fame, there is a large audience that has forgiven him and wants to see that happen.

Humans forgive those that make mistakes.  But they almost completely forget when a person commits a social crime.

I’ve yet to have a client commit an egregious error while I’ve been managing their PR, but I have inherited clients coming off the brink, or those that still carry a reputation amongst it’s primary audience.

Right or wrong, I represent that client.  Sure, I hold them accountable, I make them admit the error of their ways, I make them embrace the reaction.  But that’s because I represent them, and even in the sight of fire, I want their audience to know they will still be there, they will listen, and that the audience matters.

And most of all, I tell clients to listen to the voices that tell you how to never do it again.

You can say what you want about Tiger, you can say what you want about Nike.  You can even say what you want about this commercial being explotive of the late Mr. Earl Woods.

In the end, this wouldn’t have run without the proper permissions, and the fact is this particular commercial is extremely powerful, and to label it as false is to oversight in the worst way possible.

Thoughts?

Well part of that is the grind that is the academic/athletic schedule.

The other part is the transition from that schedule into the academic/internship/more academic schedule.  But the good news is I’ll have time to dedicate here.

However, I still won’t be getting back to my previous schedule of daily postings.

And that’s because of a very ambitious film project I’ve created.

You can read about it here: http://ellensburgmainstreet2010.blogspot.com/

And additionally, you can catch in the moment updates here (on Facebook): http://www.facebook.com/#!/pages/Ellensburg-Main-Street-Project-2010-PRSSA-EDA/103836249653328?ref=ts

As my project gets rolling along, there should be more content to share, because that’s the ideal of this particular project.

In the mean time, go NPR’s Mapping Main Street site and look at the pictures of Ellensburg, as most of them are from Stefanie Burger, my partner in this project, or myself.  http://www.mappingmainstreet.org/participate/index.php

So stay tuned, I’m keeping busy, that seems to be the speed I operate at.

Take care!

I must have too much time on my hands.

This next bit of information is related to social media but its more the reaction than it is the application.

One of the ideals that fuels innovation in social media is how can the invention be individualized.

Facebook has been made, so no one in the business of social media wants to make another Facebook.

Sometimes its very clear that we are witnessing innovation within social media, and other times the view gets cloudy.

And nothing gets more cloudy than the outlook on the phone app known as Foursquare.

For those who don’t know, Foursquare is an app that allows you to “check-in” at various locations that you provide.

If you’re having dinner at your favorite Italian restaurant, you can add in the location to Foursquare’s database and give a brief review.

And because we’re talking social media and individuality, the powers that be at Foursquare don’t want a review that’s going to make it into Zagat’s.  They want it personalized, along the lines of “OH, this place has the BEST chicken alla cacciatorre around!”

In that regard Foursquare is trying to keep the peace with business owners.  As we’ve seen with the examples of Yelp! and CitySearch, reviews can be compounding in their damage, so Foursquare wants to curb that right off the bat.

People that participate with the Foursquare app end up starting discussions by way of their check-ins.  Because Foursquare feeds your check-ins to your Facebook and Twitter pages.

This means more people are aware of their app, and subsequently more people download it and use it.  It’s great viral marketing.

However, as with anything social media, an audience subsection feels left out and then the wildly creative criticisms and slanted journalism comes forth with really disparaging views.

Hence this article:  http://blogs.forbes.com/velocity/2010/03/31/politician-makes-foursquare-even-more-annoying-than-twitter/

Or this blog: http://gawker.com/5506461/if-you-use-foursquare-you-are-an-annoying-jackass

It amazes me on various levels why any one person would waste their time writing criticism about social media that functions as its intended.  Now, if Facebook starts spurting out bot messages on our profiles, than criticism is well due.  But to be deliberately scathing towards an app just because it works is silly.

I think gangster rappers refer to this as “hate.”

The idea is that every little piece within social media acts as a tool of some sort.

Now, not every tool is for every person or project.  And maybe even some tools are obsolete, and maybe even some are not useful from inception.  But to me, when I read some of these criticisms aimed at Foursquare, and in particular the blog post from Brian Moylan, I start to wonder if the people who are nay-saying actually have a problem with Foursquare, or do they have a problem with people that they interact with.

Brian’s post certainly suggests he’s receiving Foursquare posts from his friends.

If you don’t want the post, change your settings to hide them.  Or ask your friends to change their settings so they don’t send the information to the places you’re receiving it.

To write an entire piece about Foursquare and those that use it are an expletive is really unprofessional, and completely misguided.

For example, if you have a problem with someone, why don’t you just get off your laptop or cell phone and talk to them in person about it?

Thoughts?