Showing posts with label The New York Times. Show all posts
Showing posts with label The New York Times. Show all posts

Tuesday, March 9, 2010

Use Twitter to Get Ahead, Not Just Play

A common reason given by those who have yet to try Twitter: "I have nothing to say." The truth is, you don't have to post a message to get the most out of Twitter, you can just join and see what others are saying.

At its best, the social medium is a perpetual, personalized news service about topics of your choosing, whether it be health care reform, tech news or the latest episode of "American Idol," filtered and sent to you by people who care a lot about what you care a lot about.

Even the most prolific users say Twitter has become more useful as a way to tap into the discussions of the day and than can be used to broadcast their own thoughts. They believe that once you get pulled in, you might just find you have something to say after all.

Biz Stone, Twitter's co-founder, suggests that naysayers simply log on to Twitter's home page and search for a topic they are interested in, whether it's their favorite sports team, the name of their company or a topic in the news. Within a minute, they understand the appeal, he said (The New York Times, 3/9/2010).

Twitter users write 50 million messages a day. For those of you who haven't tried Twitter out, here are a few ways to make Twitter work for you:

  • If you don't have anything you feel is important enough to say, you can learn a lot from others on Twitter just by following them. Depending on who you follow, after checking Twitter for a bit each morning by lunch you can know most of the top trend topics of the day, just by reading the feed you see on Twitter.
  • Search what is being said about a specific person, place or thing at that particular time or recent past.
  • You can follow leaders who post about politics, religion, fashion and food. People with shared interests become your editor and Twitter becomes an alternative RSS feed. Find those people by searching Twitter directories, like WeFollow or Just Tweet It, and by following people whom others repeat or mention.
  • Stay up to date on news stories A lot of messages include a link and after awhile a popular news story will bubble up after being retweeted enough.
  • You can create lists of people you follow to keep your interests separate. For example, you can create a list of celebrities you follow, a list of coworkers you follow, a list of friends you can follow and a list of news people you follow. This way their tweets will not be thrown all together on your homepage.
  • Once you're on Twitter, you can post questions when you don't know who to ask. For example, ask about a restaurant you're thinking of trying or how to use an iPhone application and you'll be sure to get answers.
  • Find out what is going on in a certain area. Now you can limit your trending topic tweets to certain cities or countries.

Monday, February 22, 2010

The Art of the Public Apology: Reactions to Wood's Public Statement

Last Friday's public apology from Tiger Woods spurred a wide range of reactions from the audience. I'm always entertained by these types of press conferences and thought that the Woods public statement was about what I expected. The public apology is an art and like always it has it's connoisseurs and critics. In case you missed the 13 minute extravaganza in which Woods apologized for the pain his marital infidelities caused his family, friends and fans (in that order), don't worry, I'm going to cover my PR thoughts as well as a wide range of public opinions on the topic.


(Professional apology expert consensus’s on Woods statement: Too long. Too much stagecraft. But otherwise, not bad.)


However, for all the expertise out there, and despite the fascination and great public demand for it, the art of apology as practiced by the average American person of prominence, whether in politics, sports, religion or business, remains by most accounts pretty unsatisfying.


There was Governor Mark Sanford of South Carolina: "I've spent the last five days of my life crying in Argentina" or Lloyd Blankfein, chief executive of Goldman Sachs, who offered a stinting apology for his firm's role in the financial collapse.


Experts in the field recorded other failed public apologies:


· A "Mark Stanford" is the sort of rambling, confessional apology that leaves you worse off than before.

· A "Mark McGwire" is the self-pitying apology that shows a lack of genuine contrition, and broadcasts your resentment at being caught

· A "John Edwards" is that apology which almost does not matter because you are for the foreseeable future beyond help.

· A "David Letterman" is one that works, but only if you happen to be a professional comedian with a goofy persona and late-night talk show.


Elin was not at the Woods press conference. I almost thought that Tiger’s statement was a, ‘please, please, Elin take me back’ press conference. I thought it was interesting how Woods kept stating that this issue was not Elin's fault, I kept thinking, when was it ever Elin's fault? Also, I thought it was interesting that he kept saying the issue was between him and Elin. We don't even know if there is a 'them' still. However, as Woods said, that is not our business.


In my opinion a good apology has to begin with a real connection between the apologizer and the offended person or audience. However, I'm not sure that most of the people who have risen to the top of their professions are narcissistic individuals and are just not capable of that.


I think the real issue with public apologies from prominent figures is that they don't sound trustworthy. It really hurts social trust when a public figure reveals to be other than who they claim, and then follow up with an apology that betrays them as having an immature personality, unfamiliar with the rigors of honest self-assessment.


Often times the person apologizing doesn't even state what they did wrong or how it's wrong, ask for forgiveness or ask how the offended how to make things right. I think there is not a lot different between a personal and public apology. In both you really should be specific, say what you did, ask the offended person not only for forgiveness, but ask them for what you need to do to make things right.


I like the public apology analysis an author at The New York Times took. He compared it to a cartoon features in The New Yorker last year: The woman stands over her shoulder-drooped husband. "I don't want your apology," she says. "I want you to be sorry."


Reactions to Tiger Woods' statement Friday Courtesy of The Associated Press:


__


Woods' Family


_ "I said, 'I'm so proud of you. Never think you stand alone. Mom will always be there for you and I love you.'" — Kultida Woods.


_ "I watched it but I have nothing to say right now. I have no comments." — Father-in-law Thomas Nordegren, in Sweden.


___


Olympians


_ "It's a bummer, his personal life. He's trying to deal with it and I don't think he knows how to totally express how he feels and I don't wanna say, come clean about everything, but explain what was going on. He's trying to pick his words very carefully and apologize. I respect that." — American gold medal snowboarder Shaun White.


_ "do we think this is coming from the heart or the paper! come on Tiger! give us some reality here .... thanks tiger. sweet hugs to your fam, can't wait to see you back out there!! Good Luck!! — American silver medal skier Julia Mancuso on Twitter.


___


Golf Community


_ "There is anger in some corners, but mainly it is a sense of sadness. He's an American hero, and he's had his issues. At the end of the day, he's a human being. We all make mistakes. We all have made mistakes. And when we're lucky, we learn from those mistakes and we get to be better people." — PGA Tour commissioner Tim Finchem.


_ "Today was a step in the right direction. ... We know what kind of champion he is on and off the golf course but this is a big battle he's fighting right now. He's going to show to the people he can be a champion off the course." — Golfer Mark O'Meara.


_ "It's not about words, it is about actions. It's all down to actions. I personally think if Tiger wants to be a family man, get out and play some golf and bring the whole family out with him. " — Golfer and TV analyst Nick Faldo.


_ "I thought it was an amazing conference. I thought Tiger was very humble. And, you know what? I think we all love him as a golfer and as a family man. And we want to see what's best for him." — Golfer Ben Crane.


___


Marketing/Public Relations


_ "He came off very Tiger-like, in that it was a little too rehearsed and a little too scripted for my liking. The more scripted you are, the more risk you run of not being authentic or sincere." — Bill McGowan, image consultant for Clarity Media Group.


_ "It looked like it was staged. These things should have come from his heart, but he was reading out of a script. I could see he was tearing up, but I don't feel like he was being sincere." — Puntarika Susuntitapong, public relations executive in Bangkok.


_ "What I expected to see today was some humility. What I saw today was arrogance. What I saw was anger. ... It was basically an infomercial." — Public relations executive Rick Cerrone on CNN.


___


Media


_ "One of the most remarkable public apologies ever by a public figure." — ABC's George Stephanopoulos.


_ "I think he was very genuine in his responses and his statement. I think we are entering a whole new era spiritually and emotionally for Tiger Woods." — Debert Cook, publisher of African American Golfer's Digest, on BBC News 24 television in London.


_ "Looked like a deer in the headlights — the kind of expression people have when they're playing with him on the golf course." — NBC Sports' Jimmy Roberts.


_ "I have never seen him appear so vulnerable. ... I was very impressed with what he said." — CBS' David Feherty.


___


Business World


_ "I don't think anyone would want to rush out for someone who, by his own words, says he still needs treatment." — Rick Burton, former chief marketing officer of U.S. Olympic Committee.


_ "It was good to see Tiger address the public today, and we're supportive of his focus toward family and rebuilding his life. He remains one of the greatest athletes in history, and as a long-standing partner, we look forward to seeing Tiger back on the golf course when the time is right for him and his family." — Peter Moore, president of EA Sports.


_ "It was 95 percent about contrition and 5 percent about golf, because the latter will take care of itself. Winning, good behavior and time can be his friends for the long term." — Vada Manager, former public relations official for Nike.


___


Alleged Mistress


"I would be open to a telephone apology from Tiger, but I really feel I deserve to look at him in person, face-to-face, in the eyes, because I did not deserve this. ... I am sorry for my part for any of their pain, but you can't help who you fall in love with." — Veronica Siwik-Daniels, who watched from Los Angeles.

Thursday, January 21, 2010

Will The New York Times' Paywall Help to Avoid Collapse?

It appears The New York Times have found a solution to the 'online news reader only' problem. Last week, The New York Times announced that it would erect a paywall in order to help collect from news readers who only get their news online from their website. Their idea is neat because the paywall will get the frequent readers to pay for The New York Times content, but not the new, visiting readers.

This plan is called a 'metered-model,' will call for people who visit the website (nytimes.com) a undetermined amount of times per month to pay an undetermined fee, excepting those who currently subscribe to the weekly print paper, including those who only get it on Sunday. Not knowing how much The New York Times will charge, I'm curious to know if it will cure the problem newspapers are having.

I say yes. Currently, The New York Times (nytimes.com) has 17 million unique visitors per month which allow them to have high ad prices. Since they are taking their time, and getting this high-tech program to separate new and old visitors they can still keep those good ad sales up, attract new readers and hopefully charge those who want to keep coming back.

The print journalism industry has gone through a tough time in recent years and has needed to make some changes in order to survive. Is this the solution or will this only decrease readership? Now, I'm curious to see how many other newspapers will take on this approach. Further, if it works for The New York Times, how fast it will take over the print newspaper websites. Lastly, as a social media user, I wonder how this will affect linkage to The New York Times page and articles. In another release last week, The New York Times made it clear that they are aware of this reality, stating that its metered model would allow it to still "stay connected to a search-driven Web." It's smart that they are on top of this because this aspect is equally as important to its survival as publication income. In order to stay afloat, the site must continue to be part of the large online conversation.