Every once in a while, someone stops me to comment on a past blog post that ran on Gregarious. Last week, a friend who once edited my work at Success magazine called and complimented a post written more than a year ago on writing well.
I didn't even remember the post from last June, but then took time to look it up. Not bad, considering it conveys my deep-felt belief on what makes for effective writing. So I thought, what the heck? It still rings true. So let's run it again, edited in parts, as a way to once again share the power and beauty of the written word.
How much would you pay for a ray gun that took over other people's minds? Good writing, in PR and business, does just that.
Last June, I wrote a story about President Obama's speech on the Gulf oil spill and reported how CNN.com quoted a language specialist who claimed the speech failed because it was written at a 9.8 grade level, the highest grade level of any of his speeches, which average a 7.4 grade level.
The analysis was based on the presumption that most written work, especially that done by the media, is written at a sixth-grade level. It's an urban legend that I have also been guilty of repeating, at times suggesting that a news release or executive speech needs to be simplified to a "sixth-grade level."
Showing posts with label Gulf Coast oil spill. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Gulf Coast oil spill. Show all posts
Friday, September 30, 2011
Friday, June 25, 2010
Public affairs in the Gulf Coast
With today's post, we're going to take a break from our usual reporting on PR to share with you a note we received from Ann Marie Gordon, a junior member of the firm, who is also a communications specialist and reservist in the U.S. Coast Guard. Ann Marie is participating in the Coast Guard's response to the Gulf oil spill. Here are her thoughts from ground zero.
Hi everyone!
Thank you so much for the box of Hope's cookies! I got word that I received a package and when I went to go pick it up, there were a bunch of Coasties waiting for me to open it because they saw cookies on the box. They are delicious, as always, and still soft and fresh! I really appreciate the thought, I never realized how comforting it can be to get a package from home.
I still can't believe I'm part of this response. I feel like it's turning into a political mess. One problem just turns into another one. I have been doing public affairs for two parishes (Louisiana is divided into parishes, not counties). They are only 10 minutes apart but they are dealing with completely separate issues. I'm right on the Gulf of Mexico and both places were hit with oil. Grand Isle was hit the hardest. I think it really hit me what was going on when I walked to the state park to watch the sunset over the gulf and I could smell the oil and I saw a dolphin swimming in the sheen that was washing in with the tide.
In Port Fourchon they are dealing with the moratorium the President placed on offshore drilling. If I wasn't here, I wouldn't really understand the effects this moratorium is having on the economy. I'm pretty confident in saying just about every person on this island has a tie to the oil business. Now with this ban, so many people are being put out of work. This just adds to the fisherman and restaurant business that is being affected by this oil spill. The gulf fuels about 18% of America and somewhere around 90% of the oil from offshore drilling is unloaded in Port Fourchon.
As a member of the Coast Guard, I can't get involved with the moratorium, that is just something the local government is dealing with. But when I walk around the community in my uniform, locals flock to me and I can just hear the hurt in their voices.
My primary responsibility down here is getting a Coast Guard presence in the media. I have secured interviews with USA Today, NYT, CNN, AP, CBS News, ABC News, FOX News, PBS, BBC, local New Orleans and Baton Rouge affiliates and foreign media.
I am here to document too. I am working on my first feature story today since the weather has shut down operations for the morning. But I have been taking a lot of pictures. The pictures I release, and any photos released by the Coast Guard or any military branch, are the public's domain. My photos made the covers of some smaller papers, my biggest has been the cover, above the fold, of The Washington Post and CNN and AP slide shows. And I have one picture running with BP ads on commercials and newspapers. I'm not really sure how I feel about that.
I'm starting to shift gears with coverage. I'm realizing now that national news has agendas. In a situation like this, I feel like it's most important to position to those most affected, the people of Louisiana. I have been reaching out to the local affiliates more to invite them to the staging areas to show all the good things the Coast Guard and the local communities are doing. The oil is still leaking, and the relief wells are projected to be completed in August, so I think it's important to show the people of Louisiana the continuous efforts to clean this up.
I was sent to the staging areas -- the areas hit with the oil -- and I hit the ground running. My hard work has paid off though because I am the only PA (CG public affairs specialist) that has not been pulled out of a staging area. I still have supervision and I am learning a lot but I am also teaching. The CG focuses a lot on the documenting aspect of the job and I help people at my rank realize the importance to reaching out to the media and getting the story out. I got so much out of this experience I can't express it in an email.
You can check out some of the photos I released here, and just search my name in the top left box.
Again, thank you so much for the cookies, it really means a lot coming from the company I work for. When I tell people I am a reservist the the first thing they ask is how is my full-time job taking this. I tell them I have full support and a great supervisor that really welcomes the experience I am getting from this response.
I hope everyone is doing well and I am looking forward to coming back soon!
Best,
Ann Marie
Hi everyone!
Thank you so much for the box of Hope's cookies! I got word that I received a package and when I went to go pick it up, there were a bunch of Coasties waiting for me to open it because they saw cookies on the box. They are delicious, as always, and still soft and fresh! I really appreciate the thought, I never realized how comforting it can be to get a package from home.
I still can't believe I'm part of this response. I feel like it's turning into a political mess. One problem just turns into another one. I have been doing public affairs for two parishes (Louisiana is divided into parishes, not counties). They are only 10 minutes apart but they are dealing with completely separate issues. I'm right on the Gulf of Mexico and both places were hit with oil. Grand Isle was hit the hardest. I think it really hit me what was going on when I walked to the state park to watch the sunset over the gulf and I could smell the oil and I saw a dolphin swimming in the sheen that was washing in with the tide.
In Port Fourchon they are dealing with the moratorium the President placed on offshore drilling. If I wasn't here, I wouldn't really understand the effects this moratorium is having on the economy. I'm pretty confident in saying just about every person on this island has a tie to the oil business. Now with this ban, so many people are being put out of work. This just adds to the fisherman and restaurant business that is being affected by this oil spill. The gulf fuels about 18% of America and somewhere around 90% of the oil from offshore drilling is unloaded in Port Fourchon.
As a member of the Coast Guard, I can't get involved with the moratorium, that is just something the local government is dealing with. But when I walk around the community in my uniform, locals flock to me and I can just hear the hurt in their voices.
My primary responsibility down here is getting a Coast Guard presence in the media. I have secured interviews with USA Today, NYT, CNN, AP, CBS News, ABC News, FOX News, PBS, BBC, local New Orleans and Baton Rouge affiliates and foreign media.
I am here to document too. I am working on my first feature story today since the weather has shut down operations for the morning. But I have been taking a lot of pictures. The pictures I release, and any photos released by the Coast Guard or any military branch, are the public's domain. My photos made the covers of some smaller papers, my biggest has been the cover, above the fold, of The Washington Post and CNN and AP slide shows. And I have one picture running with BP ads on commercials and newspapers. I'm not really sure how I feel about that.
I'm starting to shift gears with coverage. I'm realizing now that national news has agendas. In a situation like this, I feel like it's most important to position to those most affected, the people of Louisiana. I have been reaching out to the local affiliates more to invite them to the staging areas to show all the good things the Coast Guard and the local communities are doing. The oil is still leaking, and the relief wells are projected to be completed in August, so I think it's important to show the people of Louisiana the continuous efforts to clean this up.
I was sent to the staging areas -- the areas hit with the oil -- and I hit the ground running. My hard work has paid off though because I am the only PA (CG public affairs specialist) that has not been pulled out of a staging area. I still have supervision and I am learning a lot but I am also teaching. The CG focuses a lot on the documenting aspect of the job and I help people at my rank realize the importance to reaching out to the media and getting the story out. I got so much out of this experience I can't express it in an email.
You can check out some of the photos I released here, and just search my name in the top left box.
Again, thank you so much for the cookies, it really means a lot coming from the company I work for. When I tell people I am a reservist the the first thing they ask is how is my full-time job taking this. I tell them I have full support and a great supervisor that really welcomes the experience I am getting from this response.
I hope everyone is doing well and I am looking forward to coming back soon!
Best,
Ann Marie
 |
| Gregory FCA's Ann Marie Gordon in the Gulf Coast |
Thursday, June 17, 2010
On writing well in public relations
CNN.com ran an interesting story this morning that quotes language guru Paul J.J. Payack as suggesting that the reason President Obama’s Tuesday night’s speech about the oil spill failed is that it was written at a 9.8 grade level. It's the highest grade level of any of his speeches, which average a 7.4 grade level.
This analysis is based on the presumption that most written work, especially that done by the media, is written at a sixth-grade level. It’s an urban legend that I have also been guilty of repeating, at times suggesting that a news release or executive speech needs to be simplified “to a sixth-grade level.”
But the entire notion of grade level communications is a red herring that fails because it breaks down language into discrete parts and then analyzes it by length of sentence and number of letters in a word. So the shorter the sentence and smaller the word, the lower the grade level and the easier it is to understand. Or at least the theory goes.
The entire notion is flawed. If you performed the same analysis on the music of The Beatles, you would come to a similar conclusion. After all, Paul, John, Ringo, and George used only four chords -- the same chords that any beginner learns in early lessons. Their lyrics? No greater words than you would expect from four boys from Liverpool.
The reality is that like The Beatles, great PR writing doesn't need to rely on an endless palette of multi-syllabic words. Rather, it's the specificity of the words chosen and how they are arranged that give us our power as communicators.
The best lessons of all were shared with me by my book and magazine editors when I was a freelance writer early in my career. Their advice was to get out of the way. Become invisible to the reader. They urged me to take command of readers’ thoughts by not tipping them off that I was controlling and manipulating their consciousness. That meant subordinating my own early tendencies to want to sound smart to the higher calling of imparting the most possible information in the tightest, quickest manner.
This week I met with our firm’s incoming class of interns, 10 young people pulled from the best colleges in America. I asked them, “How much would you pay if I could give you a ray gun that could control other people’s thoughts?” They all laughed and told me it was impossible.
I corrected them, and explained that when you write well, you are taking control of the reader’s thoughts. In essence, a well-written news story, blog post, or news release takes over another person’s consciousness, hijacks their awareness in favor of the ideas, concepts, and thoughts you prefer them to consider at a given time. Pretty powerful stuff. And certainly not the stuff of sixth-grade English class.
Contrary to Paul J.J. Payack’s research, the value of good writing cannot be calculated by simple word and letter counts. Here’s the real way a skilled writer controls the thoughts of a reader:
1. Disguises bias. Great PR writing is opaque in that you can’t see through to the writer’s agenda, opinions, or biases. It reads objectively and news-like in its presentation, when in reality, it quickly instills in the reader’s mind the importance of the facts, news, or story.
2. Appears in a style close to how a journalist might write it. Consider the typical news release with the obligatory corporate descriptors and disclaimers. Would it ever appear in the media in a similar format or style? Never. Whoever wrote the rule that news releases have to start with the company or product name, followed immediately by a tagline or description of the product or company, was a bad writer. Find him. Shoot him. Such notions have failed us in PR, who always champion the easy conveyance of a client’s sentiment or worldview.
3. Succeeds despite optimization. We now have a new restraint of good writing. The need to optimize news releases and blog posts for almighty Google. It’s a necessary evil. But it shouldn’t disrupt the normal flow of language.
4. Uses verbs and facts. Not adjectives. An editor of mine used to demand four facts in every sentence and a fine pruning of all adjectives. He demanded that writing be salted with power verbs (not unlike the word salted). Verbs, not adjectives, propel language. Two sentences can often be reduced to one by combining the facts of each into a single thought.
5. Plays well lyrically. Writing is lyrical. Bad writing is horsey, clunky, and plays poorly to the ear. Good writing is effortless, seemingly dispensable in the moment while lasting a lifetime in intention and meaning. It hits the right notes, clearly articulating all messages.
6. Speaks to the reader. The #1 rule of writing has always been, and will always be, know your audience. Perhaps more than any other principle, this one strikes at the heart of the grade level writing test. A good PR writer knows when to assume the voice of the CEO and speak to an audience of investors or regulators in exacting terms. But that same writer needs to understand when to assume a chatty, more personal style to score meaning with customers and employees. It might not be The Beatles, but it’s certainly not for a sixth-grader.
So I would hasten CNN not to give gurus like Paul Payack and his company, Global Language Monitor, much credence. Speeches don’t succeed or fail because they were written on a 10th-grade level. They rise or fall by the six points laid bare in this post.
This analysis is based on the presumption that most written work, especially that done by the media, is written at a sixth-grade level. It’s an urban legend that I have also been guilty of repeating, at times suggesting that a news release or executive speech needs to be simplified “to a sixth-grade level.”
But the entire notion of grade level communications is a red herring that fails because it breaks down language into discrete parts and then analyzes it by length of sentence and number of letters in a word. So the shorter the sentence and smaller the word, the lower the grade level and the easier it is to understand. Or at least the theory goes.
The entire notion is flawed. If you performed the same analysis on the music of The Beatles, you would come to a similar conclusion. After all, Paul, John, Ringo, and George used only four chords -- the same chords that any beginner learns in early lessons. Their lyrics? No greater words than you would expect from four boys from Liverpool.
The reality is that like The Beatles, great PR writing doesn't need to rely on an endless palette of multi-syllabic words. Rather, it's the specificity of the words chosen and how they are arranged that give us our power as communicators.
The best lessons of all were shared with me by my book and magazine editors when I was a freelance writer early in my career. Their advice was to get out of the way. Become invisible to the reader. They urged me to take command of readers’ thoughts by not tipping them off that I was controlling and manipulating their consciousness. That meant subordinating my own early tendencies to want to sound smart to the higher calling of imparting the most possible information in the tightest, quickest manner.
This week I met with our firm’s incoming class of interns, 10 young people pulled from the best colleges in America. I asked them, “How much would you pay if I could give you a ray gun that could control other people’s thoughts?” They all laughed and told me it was impossible.
I corrected them, and explained that when you write well, you are taking control of the reader’s thoughts. In essence, a well-written news story, blog post, or news release takes over another person’s consciousness, hijacks their awareness in favor of the ideas, concepts, and thoughts you prefer them to consider at a given time. Pretty powerful stuff. And certainly not the stuff of sixth-grade English class.
Contrary to Paul J.J. Payack’s research, the value of good writing cannot be calculated by simple word and letter counts. Here’s the real way a skilled writer controls the thoughts of a reader:
1. Disguises bias. Great PR writing is opaque in that you can’t see through to the writer’s agenda, opinions, or biases. It reads objectively and news-like in its presentation, when in reality, it quickly instills in the reader’s mind the importance of the facts, news, or story.
2. Appears in a style close to how a journalist might write it. Consider the typical news release with the obligatory corporate descriptors and disclaimers. Would it ever appear in the media in a similar format or style? Never. Whoever wrote the rule that news releases have to start with the company or product name, followed immediately by a tagline or description of the product or company, was a bad writer. Find him. Shoot him. Such notions have failed us in PR, who always champion the easy conveyance of a client’s sentiment or worldview.
3. Succeeds despite optimization. We now have a new restraint of good writing. The need to optimize news releases and blog posts for almighty Google. It’s a necessary evil. But it shouldn’t disrupt the normal flow of language.
4. Uses verbs and facts. Not adjectives. An editor of mine used to demand four facts in every sentence and a fine pruning of all adjectives. He demanded that writing be salted with power verbs (not unlike the word salted). Verbs, not adjectives, propel language. Two sentences can often be reduced to one by combining the facts of each into a single thought.
5. Plays well lyrically. Writing is lyrical. Bad writing is horsey, clunky, and plays poorly to the ear. Good writing is effortless, seemingly dispensable in the moment while lasting a lifetime in intention and meaning. It hits the right notes, clearly articulating all messages.
6. Speaks to the reader. The #1 rule of writing has always been, and will always be, know your audience. Perhaps more than any other principle, this one strikes at the heart of the grade level writing test. A good PR writer knows when to assume the voice of the CEO and speak to an audience of investors or regulators in exacting terms. But that same writer needs to understand when to assume a chatty, more personal style to score meaning with customers and employees. It might not be The Beatles, but it’s certainly not for a sixth-grader.
So I would hasten CNN not to give gurus like Paul Payack and his company, Global Language Monitor, much credence. Speeches don’t succeed or fail because they were written on a 10th-grade level. They rise or fall by the six points laid bare in this post.
Tuesday, June 8, 2010
A public relations game plan for BP
So finally this weekend, we received some good news from the Gulf Coast. BP's containment dome appears to be capturing significant amounts of the oil spill, and BP CEO Tony Hayward told the BBC he expects this latest development could lead to the vast majority of the leak being captured at, or near, the well head.
Even with this news, BP is left in a disastrous PR position, forever tattooed as the perpetrator of the greatest environmental disaster in U.S. history. Can they ever rebound? Exxon did from the Valdez oil spill, even though a recent forensic study revealed open pools of oil still scar the shoals of Prudhoe Bay, 20 years after the catastrophe.
With more than $6 billion in first quarter earnings, BP certainly has the financial wherewithal to weather the storm. But the company has to change its approach to the public, and take real and lasting steps to systemically transform itself into a company that understands the public trust it holds in its hands every time it undertakes the risky endeavor to sink a well. Here's what I would be telling BP:
1. Put up or shut up. Now that progress is being made to capture the leaking oil, it's time for BP to put up a $1 billion remediation fund for the people of Gulf Coast. Use the money to ramp up restoration. Pay off claims. Bail out busted businesses. And clean the shores and wetlands. It's a monumental challenge that takes money. BP has the money and needs to spend it now to reclaim any hope of salvaging its global reputation. It's also in the best interest of BP shareholders. Without strong and quick action, the company faces tremendous risk that can be mitigated through sincere and immediate action.
2. Put up another $200 million to fund oil industry remediation research, centered at Louisiana State University. Since Edwin Drake, the oil industry's technological breakthroughs have focused on getting oil out of the ground. Horizontal drilling. CO2 injection. Tethered platforms. Deep water drilling needs technology to keep oil in the ground or from ever hitting the ground, beaches, and oceans. The unintended consequence of Prudhoe Bay is that the world actually believes steam and paper towels can clean up an oil spill. (They can't and they don't.) Oil industry technology has to go beyond simply drilling deeper and cleaning up the mess after the fact. The industry needs to develop new technologies to contend with the risk of today's deep water drilling, whether here, in the North Sea, or off Norway.
3. Get Tony Hayward off American TV. A recent study conducted by Gregory FCA shows that Hayward's reputation has cratered since BP started airing TV commercials with him serving as spokesperson. The American ideal of a leader isn't someone who looks like Liz Lemon's fall-back love on "30 Rock," Welsey Snipes. (No, not that Wesley Snipes.)
Separated at birth: Tony Hayward ...
Wesley Snipes (not that Wesley Snipes)
Rather, we need to see and hear from a fellow American who has a vested interest in our country, not the whiny Hayward, who recently lamented that he can't wait for the crisis to be over so he can get his life back.
Even with this news, BP is left in a disastrous PR position, forever tattooed as the perpetrator of the greatest environmental disaster in U.S. history. Can they ever rebound? Exxon did from the Valdez oil spill, even though a recent forensic study revealed open pools of oil still scar the shoals of Prudhoe Bay, 20 years after the catastrophe.
With more than $6 billion in first quarter earnings, BP certainly has the financial wherewithal to weather the storm. But the company has to change its approach to the public, and take real and lasting steps to systemically transform itself into a company that understands the public trust it holds in its hands every time it undertakes the risky endeavor to sink a well. Here's what I would be telling BP:
1. Put up or shut up. Now that progress is being made to capture the leaking oil, it's time for BP to put up a $1 billion remediation fund for the people of Gulf Coast. Use the money to ramp up restoration. Pay off claims. Bail out busted businesses. And clean the shores and wetlands. It's a monumental challenge that takes money. BP has the money and needs to spend it now to reclaim any hope of salvaging its global reputation. It's also in the best interest of BP shareholders. Without strong and quick action, the company faces tremendous risk that can be mitigated through sincere and immediate action.
2. Put up another $200 million to fund oil industry remediation research, centered at Louisiana State University. Since Edwin Drake, the oil industry's technological breakthroughs have focused on getting oil out of the ground. Horizontal drilling. CO2 injection. Tethered platforms. Deep water drilling needs technology to keep oil in the ground or from ever hitting the ground, beaches, and oceans. The unintended consequence of Prudhoe Bay is that the world actually believes steam and paper towels can clean up an oil spill. (They can't and they don't.) Oil industry technology has to go beyond simply drilling deeper and cleaning up the mess after the fact. The industry needs to develop new technologies to contend with the risk of today's deep water drilling, whether here, in the North Sea, or off Norway.
3. Get Tony Hayward off American TV. A recent study conducted by Gregory FCA shows that Hayward's reputation has cratered since BP started airing TV commercials with him serving as spokesperson. The American ideal of a leader isn't someone who looks like Liz Lemon's fall-back love on "30 Rock," Welsey Snipes. (No, not that Wesley Snipes.)
Separated at birth: Tony Hayward ...
Wesley Snipes (not that Wesley Snipes)
Rather, we need to see and hear from a fellow American who has a vested interest in our country, not the whiny Hayward, who recently lamented that he can't wait for the crisis to be over so he can get his life back.
Thursday, May 20, 2010
Mommy, why don't companies talk like human beings?
In an industry that prides itself on numbers (I should know, because my first job was working in public relations for an energy company compiling its annual fact book), it's remarkable that BP can't calculate the rate of flow from a well that cost $1 million a day to operate.
BP's unwillingness to share these numbers suggests that the spill is much larger than being estimated. Even more troubling is why our government refuses to force BP to divulge numbers, or even send our own research vessels and scientists to gain insight.
So then you turn to BP's website. Its homepage now opens in big bold letters that read, "Gulf of Mexico Response." There are a lot of links present, some of which are way too self-serving at this point in the crisis. I do give BP credit for linking to actual press interviews, many of which challenge BP managers for answers.
Click on the "TODAY Show" interview where Matt Lauer confronts BP Chief Operating Officer Doug Suttles. Suttles is quick to note BP's success in inserting a four-inch tube into the collapsed underwater pipeline. But Suttles gives no idea how much of an impact the procedure will make, even after Lauer analogizes the process to inserting a straw into a swimming pool.
Now turn to BP's own press releases, and you understand why BP's public response is failing. In written communications, the company turns to engineering jargon to give little real information about the incident. It makes you wonder, why don't companies talk like human beings? In times like these, why wouldn't BP want to impart meaning, instead of confusion?
Take the opening headline of one release. It reads, "Subsea Source Control and Containment." I assume the company is trying to update us on its progress in stemming the flow of crude oil. But that's left to our best guess, when the company refuses to even speak in plain English.
You can debate whether subsea is a word or just a term of art in the oil and gas industry. After all, the sea is water, not the air above it. So the subsea must be something underneath the sea -- maybe mud, maybe bedrock, maybe oil reserves. Who knows? Wouldn't it be nice if BP had just said, "Here's an update on our efforts to contain the spill on the floor of the Gulf of Mexico?" See, I would have understood that. But then the release gets even better:
"Subsea efforts continue to focus on progressing options to stop the flow of oil from the well through interventions via the blow out preventer (BOP), and to collect the flow of oil from the leak points."
"Focus on progressing options?" What is BP trying to say? I presume it wants to say that it is simultaneously pursuing a number of options to stop the underwater oil spill by working on the blow out preventer and collecting leaking oil. But the sentence is so poorly constructed, you don't know what it is saying.
I am sure the language was all twisted and edited by round after round of legal review, as well as the industry's own prescribed methods of responding to problems.
See in da earl bidnis, there is no such thing as a spill. Note that BP calls the spill a flow and a leak point. I can just imagine the powers that be debating the difference between spills, leaks, and flows. "A leak is a drip. A spill is a calamity," they might be saying to one another over a secure teleconference between New Orleans and London.
It's an energy company trick I learned early in my career, when a vice president of public relations explained to me that coal is not black, dark, dusty, or chalky. Rather, it's rich and luminous, and should be characterized as such in all press materials.
All this answers the question, "Why can't companies talk like human beings?" Some of the smartest people in the world work in the energy business, which is precisely why they refuse to talk like human beings. Using clear and compelling language would require BP to answer the prime question, "How much oil is being spilled?" Right now, that's the last thing BP intends to tell us, and it is doing a good job of it.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
