Untitled

Strategic and International PR Issues: YouTube: the new PR forum

Tue, 13 Sep 2011 04:18:26 -0400

Strategic and International PR Issues: YouTube: the new PR forum:

YouTube is still growing, so many analysts predicted that it would reach its peak at the end of 2010, and it is being used in so many different ways; education, information, marketing, comedy, revolutions, the applications for YouTube are almost endless. It is because of this endlessness that we, as PR practitioners, need to evolve in the way we use YouTube. There is no use in making an amazing video that informs the public about the new company you work for if nobody watches the video.

The problem with video’s going viral is that you need to get them to that viral stage. How do we do that? Is there an exact formula to make it happen or is it just fate that it occurs?

PR is moving into new waters that we need to tread lightly in. Online media can either make us or break us. I read this post and two things really caught my attention. Firstly I think it is important for PR, Marketing and Advertising companies to not ignore any form of social media that could be utilised in the success of their business. Especially one as successful as Youtube. I’m sure a lot of companies have negative opinions on lots of sites like facebook, twitter etc but they can’t let their personal opinions interfere with the possible success that comes from using that site. Secondly, when you questioned how videos on youtube go viral, I thought that was a fantastic point as I have often wondered that myself. So, I actually researched it and one thing I found was “The secret Strategies behind many ‘viral’ video’s.” Where Dan Ackerman Greenberg, cofounder of viral video marketing company ‘The Common Group and lead TA for the Stanford Facebook Class shares his secrets. It is quite long so I will post Greenberg’s first secret and then add the link to the post. Secret #1: Not all viral videos are what they seem There are tens of thousands of videos uploaded to YouTube each day (I’ve heard estimates between 10-65,000 videos per day). I don’t care how “viral” you think your video is; no one is going to find it and no one is going to watch it. The members of my startup are hired guns – our clients give us videos and we make them go viral. Our rule of thumb is that if we don’t get a video 100,000 views, we don’t charge. So far, we’ve worked on 80-90 videos and we’ve seen overwhelming success. In the past 3 months, we’ve achieved over 20 million views for our clients, with videos ranging from 100,000 views to upwards of 1.5 million views each. In other words, not all videos go viral organically – there is a method to the madness. I can’t reveal our clients’ names and I can’t link to the videos we’ve worked on, because YouTube surely doesn’t like what we’re doing and our clients hate to admit that they need professional help with their “viral” videos. But I can give you a general idea of who we’ve worked with: two top Hollywood movie studios, a major record label, a variety of very well known consumer brands, and a number of different startups, both domestic and international. This summer, we were approached by a Hollywood movie studio and asked to help market a series of viral clips they had created in advance of a blockbuster. The videos were 10-20 seconds each, were shot from what appeared to be a camera phone, and captured a series of unexpected and shocking events that required professional post-production and CGI. Needless to say, the studio had invested a significant amount of money in creating the videos but every time they put them online, they couldn’t get more than a few thousand views. We took six videos and achieved: ■6 million views on YouTube ■~30,000 ratings ■~10,000 favorites ■~10,000 comments ■200+ blog posts linking back to the videos ■All six videos made it into the top 5 Most Viewed of the Day, and the two that went truly viral (1.5 million views each) were #1 and #2 Most Viewed of the Week. The following principles were the secrets to our success http://techcrunch.com/2007/11/22/the-secret-strategies-behind-many-viral-videos/

International and Strategic Public Relations: Watch the Sunrise from Tokyo this week!

Tue, 13 Sep 2011 03:30:28 -0400

louisetreloarpr:

carolineraffanpr:

Sunrise in Tokyo is a great PR move! Seeing a great TV personality Sumo Wrestling, trying eye balls…in Tokyo would definitely make me think twice about heading there for my next vacation. Guess the proof is to see whether Tourism rates actually rise for Japan!
I watched that and thought it was hilarious! Not the type of thing that you would see on a lot of news programs! Grant Denyer is definately one of a kind. Many people would find that a little risque’ or controversial but then they probably aren’t the target audience for sunrise anyway. It was very fun and I did enjoy it and am pretty confident that it would of raised some interest in Japan for tourists.

Delays in Qantas plans

Mon, 12 Sep 2011 06:37:43 -0400

Qantas Airways Ltd’s plans to move into Asia with a new superior brand may be postponed until 2013, as the carrier remains in talks with prospective partners in Singapore and Kuala Lumpur, according to The Australian Financial Review.

According to The Australian Financial Review, while a decision on where the new airline will be established is expected before the end of the year, it may take an additional 12 months for the venture to receive all of the approvals necessary to begin operating.

I think Qantas needs to be careful to not push this situation too far. After the uproar that there has been from the loss of jobs and people’s fear of tainting an iconic Australian brand, they need to be careful that they don’t lose people’s faith in them further with ambiguous plans.

People are resistant to change as it is, they like to be reassured and so with the changes taking place at Qantas people have been opinionated, frantic and defensive from the beginning. One of the things that can help in a situation of huge change is to at least have some certainty of the new direction they are heading into.

However, this is not the case and as well as Investors not being too happy about this delay, an even bigger stakeholder is Qantas customers and the Australian public.
It would be a devastating shame if the country in which Qantas was established and is an icon of, boycotted the brand.

For more information on this, please visit: http://www.businessspectator.com.au/bs.nsf/Article/Qantas-Asian-plans-could-be-delayed-report-pd20110912-LLSTN?OpenDocument&src=hp15

Cancer Council attacks Kellogg's Cartoon Characters!

Mon, 12 Sep 2011 03:22:00 -0400

The Cancer Council is currently in a battle with Big Tobacco over plain packaging and has now aimed its sights on Kellogg’s Cartoon Characters.

Cancer Council NSW has joined powers with the Obesity Policy Coalition and The Parents’ Jury aiming to ban promotional characters such as the Coco Pops monkey and the Paddle Pop lion, according to an article in yesterday’s The Sunday Telegraph.

The Cancer Council’s argument being that Kellogg’s cartoon characters are irresponsible, encouraging children to consume the fatty, sugary cereals.

In their defense Kellogg’s have said:

“Our products that the Cancer Council has chosen to focus on are marketed as treat products. Cereals that parents can choose to provide to kids on fun or special occasions such as school holidays and birthdays.”

This is so pathetic, the fact that it has come down to blaming cartoon characters for Australia’s medical problems and obesity.

What about the parents? Do they have that little say and control over their own children that they cannot educate them on moderation and nutrition?

It is actually an embarrassment to Australian society that such an effort is made to pick on a brand which has more healthy, wholesome cereals than it does indulgent ones rather than exercise that effort by educating children in nutrition.

In primary school there a lots of different classes, Math’s, English, Geography, History, Sport, H.S.I.E and slight additions or variations depending on the state and school.

WHERE IS THE FOOD AND NUTRITION CLASS?

I have been outraged for a long time at this. What is the overall biggest contributor to one’s health that occurs all day every day?????? EATING!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Why then is it so hard to make food and nutrition classes’ compulsory right from preschool that educates children continually about nutrition and moderation.

If programs are put in place to educate children from the beginning about a healthy varied diet then companies such as the cancer council won’t need to pick on brands like Kellogg’s.

Another thing, this isn’t anything new! Kellogg’s have had cartoon characters for years and years. Why now is the cancer council deciding to pick on them?

For the full article please visit: http://mumbrella.com.au/cancer-council-takes-aim-at-cartoon-characters-to-promote-sugary-food-kelloggs-fights-back-57316#more-57316

Government Pursue Malaysia Policy

Wed, 07 Sep 2011 22:56:00 -0400

Assylum Seekers - http://www.adelaidenow.com.au/news/national/swan-says-government-will-pursue-malaysia-policy/story-e6frea8c-1226132008133

The current issue with the Malaysian situation is that if Asylum-Seekers are processed onshore, it could lead to boatloads of approximately 600 people arriving every month.

This is an assumption/anticipation made which has led Australian senior officials to believe that such a mass amount of people overflowing detention centers will lead to civil unrest likened to that of the London riots, threatening Australian society and attitudes towards other cultures.

Why can’t a more appropriate solution be made? Why is it that the Malaysia Solution has the Australian Government upside down? How can a government be so ineffective at meeting the needs of underprivileged people that are fleeing their country in fear, whilst ensuring that Australia does not become victim to civil unrest and riots?

Surely there is a more effective solution to helping Asylum Seekers without causing devastation to the Australian Nation. There seems to be excuses at every turn with this situation. It would be great if someone would just take charge and do something responsible.

Maybe if Australian politicians were more empathetic with understanding the Asylum Seekers and what can be done in their best interests they would be able to administer an effective outcome, without there being any devastating effects for them or Australia as a society!

Australian Government Forsake Responsibilties to Malaysian Refugee Minors

Thu, 18 Aug 2011 20:41:55 -0400

So much for the Australian Federal Government working in the “best interests” of refugees! They are meant to be acting in a Moral and Mature way and sorry but I don’t see it!

The Australian Government appears to be forsaking any responsibilities to act in the refugee minors interests, with the arrival of at least 14 unaccompanied minors since the signing of the Malaysian option. These minors are under the Australian Government’s guardianship and yet they are sending these minors to the fear and unknowns of Malaysian refugee camps.

This controversial decision has been taken to the High Court of Australia to decide if it falls within Australian law.

Below in the video, Lawyer David Manne Talks to the Media after the High court extended an injunction against the government deporting 16 asylum seekers to Malaysia - http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJp0YLaYIFE

The hearing by the High court and the consequential decision made by them is set for Monday 22^nd August.

Regardless of the outcome, it has definitely made me question the Australian Government’s morale fibre. How could they send minors to a country that they are afraid of and are in fear of being mistreated, as explained in the video with David Manne (above).

The Prime Minister has specified that neither the young, sick or old are exempt from the Malaysian option, is this meant to show lack of discrimination or just carelessness on their behalf??

The Governments aim has been to deter people smugglers from bringing the refugees to Australia, particularly minors, as it is claimed that the unaccompanied minors will flood the boats. However, that argument lacks strength considering unaccompanied minors make up a mere 5% of total boat arrivals. I think it is a very poor way to base such an extreme deterrence strategy.

The Australian Government has achieved contradicting themselves entirely, arguing that they do not want any more unaccompanied minors being in a situation of danger by being on leaky boats. Yet the government who is ‘meant’ to be acting in the role of Guardian and in their best interests are prepared to put the minors in further danger by sending them to the unknowns of Malaysian refugee camps.

I think the worst part is the inequality between the protection that is given to all children in Australian under state law and then the contrast between that and how the unaccompanied minors have been neglected. If any child in Australia under state law was treated the same way child protection authorities would be banging down the door in an instant!!!

Reference: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TJp0YLaYIFE

http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=12480